PDA

View Full Version : M343* has an elevated presence in northern Iran among several Iranian speaking groups



alan
06-09-2013, 02:07 PM
This fairly new paper is interesting in terms of R1b in Iran

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041252

The very rare root R-M343* has a better representation than normal in Iran. It rises to a spectacular 4.3% among the ethnic Pesians of Yazd a little north of centre and and 3.2 among Azeri of Azerbaijan in the north-west. It also shows among the Gilaks of Gilan in the extreme north, the Persians of Khorasan in the north-east and the Kurds of Kurdestan in the north-west in lower numbers. It is absent in the southern half of Iran. Persians, Kurds, Azeri (formerly) and Gilaks are/were Iranian speakers.

However the age that this clade branches from all the rest of the surviving R1b lines is extremely old and Palaeolithic in date.

newtoboard
06-09-2013, 02:11 PM
This fairly new paper is interesting in terms of R1b in Iran

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...l.pone.0041252

The very rare root R-M343* has a better representation than normal in Iran. It rises to a spectacular 4.3% among the ethnic Pesians of Yazd a little north of centre and and 3.2 among Azeri of Azerbaijan in the north-west. It also shows among the Gilaks of Gilan in the extreme north, the Persians of Khorasan in the north-east and the Kurds of Kurdestan in the north-west in lower numbers. It is absent in the southern half of Iran. The ethnicities - Persians, Kurds, Azeri and Gilaks all seem to be Iranian speakers. However the age that this clade diverged from all the rest is extremely old and Palaeolithic in date.


Azeris are Turkic speakers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijani_language

However, they probably derive most of their ancestry from people who spoke this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Azeri_language

alan
06-09-2013, 03:49 PM
Azeris are Turkic speakers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijani_language

However, they probably derive most of their ancestry from people who spoke this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Azeri_language
changed to 'former'

alan
06-09-2013, 04:09 PM
Mods can someone fix the title should be M343!

I realise that the Iranian speaking part is an entirely different period from the extreme age of the branching off of this clade from the other R1b lines., However that, the geography and the age are interesting. The age of the separation of M343* from all the P25 lines must be very ancient given that the age of P25 has been estimate at someting like 15000 years or so. The geography is obviously the entire north of Iran, the present or recent linguistic affliation seems very much Iranian in this area. I wonder though whether it suggests a north Iran refugium or a minority clade brought from somewhere further north by the entry of Iranian speakers into Iran. I suppose it would be very interesting to see the variance or coalecense age of Itanian M343* to see if the age in Iran is anywhere near as old as the likely age of the clade.

MJost
06-09-2013, 06:03 PM
Alan, I pulled the Balanovsky 2011 Haplotypes and here is the Ossets and Circassians R1b* M343(xM269) TMRCA's with a Interclade Modal top age of 7,461 +-1,413 YBP. Sorry No Italian M343 data.

Note: I used ancestral N* & O3 SNP HTs in CladeB from the same study. MJost





YrsPerGen*

Count

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age

Mean Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Mean VAR

SD



30

N=5

Clade A: R1b*

118.8

62.6

3,563.2

1,878.0

5,441.1

3.600

1.897



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

237.1

88.5

7,114.0

2,653.5

9,767.5

7.188

2.681





Diff =

118.4


3,550.8


4,326.4





YrsPerGen*

Count

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age

Modal Gen Age

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Modal FVAR

Modal FSD



30

N=5

Clade A: R1b*

184.8

78.1

5,542.7

2,342.2

7,885.0

5.600

2.366



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

371.2

110.7

11,134.9

3,319.8

14,454.7

11.250

3.354





Diff =

186.4


5,592.2


6,569.8





YrsPerGen*

TRUE MRCA

InterClade GAB

Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

PooledVar

Pooled SD



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

InterClade Coalescence (n-1) Age: N* & O3 for R1b* & N* & O3

318.3

102.5

9,548.2

3,074.2

12,622.4

9.647

3.106



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

Interclade Modal Founder's: N* & O3 for R1b* & N* & O3

248.7

47.1

7,460.8

1,412.8

8,873.6

3.712

1.927





Edit. The Bird q stable STRs used were
390 391 439 458 437 448 GataH4 456 635

newtoboard
06-09-2013, 09:53 PM
Mods can someone fix the title should be M343!

I realise that the Iranian speaking part is an entirely different period from the extreme age of the branching off of this clade from the other R1b lines., However that, the geography and the age are interesting. The age of the separation of M343* from all the P25 lines must be very ancient given that the age of P25 has been estimate at someting like 15000 years or so. The geography is obviously the entire north of Iran, the present or recent linguistic affliation seems very much Iranian in this area. I wonder though whether it suggests a north Iran refugium or a minority clade brought from somewhere further north by the entry of Iranian speakers into Iran. I suppose it would be very interesting to see the variance or coalecense age of Itanian M343* to see if the age in Iran is anywhere near as old as the likely age of the clade.

Seriously? I laughed. Nothing to indicate this existed among Indo-Iranian speakers. If any IE ethnic groups were free of R1b it was and still is Indo-Iranian speakers. Its absence in Central Asia, Afghanistan and South Asia makes it pretty clear this has more to do with Iran being in West Asia.

alan
06-09-2013, 09:55 PM
I fixed the bad link to the paper

rms2
06-09-2013, 09:57 PM
Seriously? I laughed. Nothing to indicate this existed among Indo-Iranian speakers. If any IE ethnic groups were free of R1b it was and still is Indo-Iranian speakers. Its absence in Central Asia, Afghanistan and South Asia makes it pretty clear this has more to do with Iran being in West Asia.

Given this report, it is pretty obvious your statement above is incorrect.

alan
06-10-2013, 04:21 AM
Seriously? I laughed. Nothing to indicate this existed among Indo-Iranian speakers. If any IE ethnic groups were free of R1b it was and still is Indo-Iranian speakers. Its absence in Central Asia, Afghanistan and South Asia makes it pretty clear this has more to do with Iran being in West Asia.

I actually think the idea of a refugia in the Caspian may be more likely but I have to say its utter lunacy to think a displaced population from the steppes who had been wandering there for many centuries before entering iran is going to be mono-clade group. That the sort of stuff Polako comes out with. As far as I can see from later history, steppe mobile groups hoovered up everyone in their paths and became extremely mixed. Its clearly a complete myth the idea of them killing all males in their path. Look at the DNA of Tatars. Probably one of the most mixed up yDNA in Eurasia and only a minority relating to their far eastern roots. Remember too when thinking of ancient DNA that Kurgans probably are the cemeteries of elite mono-lineages not the population in general.

However while I believe that in principle I have tonight finally come to a conclusion about R1b that I think can explain everything. There may have been a very long refugium for R1b in the southern half of the Caspian (as per the subject of this thread). It stated in an area where farming didnt catch on until 4 or 5000BC when M269 and M73 took off- either in the Caucasus or north Iran. The take off of R1b under those clades really started and ended a near complete anticlockwise circle loop around the Black Sea starting with Maykop c. 4000BC in the north Caucasus (which had trade links with Iran and Uruk - is this the source of L23 Assyrians?), then filtering into the steppe and then the Balkans c. 4000-3500BC before a series of moves of later Balkan IEs ended in north-east Anatolia/the south Caucases with the Armenians etc. This completed the circumpontic circle, explains all the dates and agrees with ethnic distrlbutions and ancient historians.

The Maykop people had been bilingual NE Caucasian and IE speakers given their position (and also in contact with Uruk - perhaps the suggested IE Eurphratian element in Sumerian derives from this). Its a bit of an IF but if Maykop derived metalworkers really did make it as far west as Iberia c. 3000BC via Italy c. 3500BC then it is possible that at that stage a vanguard of Maykop derived CMP metalworkers would have moved off when the intrusion and mixing with the true steppes cultures was only just commencing and the Maykop peoples were still speaking a NE Caucasian dialect. A couple of hundred years later and the same lineage would have passed into and through the steppes.

Rathna
06-10-2013, 08:27 AM
The very rare root R-M343* has a better representation than normal in Iran.

Unfortunately my PC is out and I am seeing this only now at my school. But where have you seen all these R-M343*?
“With the exception of five chromosomes belonging to the paragroup R1b-M269* and three chromosomes clustering in the “European” sub-haplogroup R1b-M412, all the M269 Y chromosomes belong to the R1b-L23 clade.”

R.Rocca
06-10-2013, 11:29 AM
Unfortunately my PC is out and I am seeing this only now at my school. But where have you seen all these R-M343*?
“With the exception of five chromosomes belonging to the paragroup R1b-M269* and three chromosomes clustering in the “European” sub-haplogroup R1b-M412, all the M269 Y chromosomes belong to the R1b-L23 clade.”

Their statement is still true because R1b-M343* is above R1b-M269. M343 frequency can be found in Table 1.

alan
06-10-2013, 11:39 AM
Unfortunately my PC is out and I am seeing this only now at my school. But where have you seen all these R-M343*?
“With the exception of five chromosomes belonging to the paragroup R1b-M269* and three chromosomes clustering in the “European” sub-haplogroup R1b-M412, all the M269 Y chromosomes belong to the R1b-L23 clade.”

There is a table that show percentages. It includes R-M343*. They tested for M343, P297, M269, M73, V88 etc. However Your post made we check this. I am not sure if they tested for P25/M415. Is it there under a different name? Its possible that their definition of M343* could include P25* but I am not sure.

DMXX
06-10-2013, 12:18 PM
Is it there under a different name? Its possible that their definition of M343* could included P25* but I am not sure.

No, they did not seem to test for R1b-P25. Any P25 present in Iran (which we know is there) will fall under M343* in Grugni.

alan
06-10-2013, 12:36 PM
No, they did not seem to test for R1b-P25. Any P25 present in Iran (which we know is there) will fall under M343* in Grugni.

Oh well..but it doesnt really change thinga that much whether it is true M343* or P25* (maybe a little less exciting). I think P25 has been calculated (probably on the basis of interclading between P297 lineages and V88) to date back to something like 15000 years ago. So its a very ancient branching nevertheless.

Wiki says of P25*R1b1*, like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey,[3] but most cases, especially in Africa, are now thought to be almost mostly in the more recently discovered sub-clade R-V88 (see below). Most or all examples of R1b therefore fall into subclades R1b1a (R-V88) or R1b1b (R-P297). Cruciani et al. in the large 2010 study found 3 cases amongst 1173 Italians, 1 out of 328 West Asians and 1 out of 156 East Asians.[22] Varzari found 3 cases in the Ukraine, in a study of 322 people from the Dniester-Carpathian region, who were P25 positive, but M269 negative.[23] Cases from older studies are mainly from Africa, the Middle East or Mediterranean, and are discussed below as probable cases of R1b1a (R-V88).

So the couple of Iran examples in the 3-5% range are still many multiples higher than anywhere else and the Dniester-Carpathian c. 1% is certainly the next highest suggested by Wiki. It does put Iran at the peak proven so far by some distance.

Rathna
06-11-2013, 08:10 AM
Their statement is still true because R1b-M343* is above R1b-M269. M343 frequency can be found in Table 1.

What re you saying? M343 is now at the same level of P278 and M415 after the Geno 2.0 of Raza from Varanasi (India) who isn't tested for P25 but lacks YSC224, present in all the L388/L389 samples, ancestors of all our subclades, but also in the V88+. We do know these samples from the "R1b1 FTDNA Project", where they are classified, and you know that my theory is that the European subclades derives from the European R1b1. There are also R1b1* in Middle East and Asia, but probably they are independent haplotypes, which probably have nothing to do with our subclades. The fact that Raza (and probably many others when they are tested) lacks an important SNP of the subclades (YSC224), demonstrates that Asia gets ancient haplotypes which belong to the prehistory of this haplogroup.
It is incredible what also Giugni (and others) writes about also other haoplogroups:

The high variance observed in the Italian Peninsula is probably the result of stratifications of subsequent migrations and/or of the presence of sub-lineages not yet identified.

In addition, the variance distribution of the rare R1b-M269* Y chromosomes, displaying decreasing values from Iran, Anatolia and the western Black Sea coastal region, is also suggestive of a westward diffusion from the Iranian plateau, although more complex scenarios can be still envisioned because of its non-star like structure.

Thus, while the high M67* variance in Central Italy is likely due to a stratification of seaborne migrations of Middle Eastern/Asia Minor peoples, the diversification observed in Iran and the Aegean Islands can be explained by a first Near Eastern, and possibly Anatolian, diffusion of the lineage followed by a Levantine expansion.

This paper was written last year, when there were already many who thought to the Middle Eastern origin of Etruscans, but the last paper about Etruscan DNA, sponsored by the same Caramelli who had sponsored the Brisighelli's paper I enjoyed to break in pieces, has disproved this hypothesis.

R.Rocca
06-11-2013, 11:43 AM
What re you saying? M343 is now at the same level of P278 and M415 after the Geno 2.0 of Raza from Varanasi (India) who isn't tested for P25 but lacks YSC224, present in all the L388/L389 samples, ancestors of all our subclades, but also in the V88+.

So? I said M343 is above M269. Is it not? So, unless I'm missing something, their statement isn't any less true.

Rathna
06-11-2013, 12:22 PM
So? I said M343 is above M269. Is it not? So, unless I'm missing something, their statement isn't any less true.

Yes, M343 is above M269 but the Iranian samples aren't R-M343* but probably R-P25, R1b1-L389 with or without YSC224 etc. and it isn't the same thing. We know those samples from the "R1b1 FTDNA Project" and I have examined them many times and from so long and they don't demonstrate anything of your ideas. If so, let me know.

newtoboard
06-11-2013, 01:05 PM
Given this report, it is pretty obvious your statement above is incorrect.

Yes because 100% of the ancestry of modern Iranian speakers is tied to Iranian speakers from Central Asia. Why stop there? Maybe Y-DNA H was brought to South Asia from Indo-Aryan speakers from the North too?

newtoboard
06-11-2013, 01:13 PM
I actually think the idea of a refugia in the Caspian may be more likely but I have to say its utter lunacy to think a displaced population from the steppes who had been wandering there for many centuries before entering iran is going to be mono-clade group. That the sort of stuff Polako comes out with. As far as I can see from later history, steppe mobile groups hoovered up everyone in their paths and became extremely mixed. Its clearly a complete myth the idea of them killing all males in their path. Look at the DNA of Tatars. Probably one of the most mixed up yDNA in Eurasia and only a minority relating to their far eastern roots. Remember too when thinking of ancient DNA that Kurgans probably are the cemeteries of elite mono-lineages not the population in general.

However while I believe that in principle I have tonight finally come to a conclusion about R1b that I think can explain everything. There may have been a very long refugium for R1b in the southern half of the Caspian (as per the subject of this thread). It stated in an area where farming didnt catch on until 4 or 5000BC when M269 and M73 took off- either in the Caucasus or north Iran. The take off of R1b under those clades really started and ended a near complete anticlockwise circle loop around the Black Sea starting with Maykop c. 4000BC in the north Caucasus (which had trade links with Iran and Uruk - is this the source of L23 Assyrians?), then filtering into the steppe and then the Balkans c. 4000-3500BC before a series of moves of later Balkan IEs ended in north-east Anatolia/the south Caucases with the Armenians etc. This completed the circumpontic circle, explains all the dates and agrees with ethnic distrlbutions and ancient historians.

The Maykop people had been bilingual NE Caucasian and IE speakers given their position (and also in contact with Uruk - perhaps the suggested IE Eurphratian element in Sumerian derives from this). Its a bit of an IF but if Maykop derived metalworkers really did make it as far west as Iberia c. 3000BC via Italy c. 3500BC then it is possible that at that stage a vanguard of Maykop derived CMP metalworkers would have moved off when the intrusion and mixing with the true steppes cultures was only just commencing and the Maykop peoples were still speaking a NE Caucasian dialect. A couple of hundred years later and the same lineage would have passed into and through the steppes.

That is a straw man because I never said that the Iranian speakers entering Iran were composed of nothing but R1a males. Obviously that is wrong. I disagreed that they brought this R1b to Iran given that the Indo-Aryan speakers, Dardic-Nuristani speakers, Central Asian and Afghan Iranian speakers as well as Southern Iranians lack this R1b at any important frequency. They absorbed plenty of other stuff which is likely to be J2a, L, R2a and G but not R1b. Those are the five haplogroups (R1a, R2a, G2a, J2a and L) shared by almost all Indo-Iranian speakers so I exclude pretty much anything else as being brought by Indo-Iranians.

alan
06-11-2013, 10:54 PM
That is a straw man because I never said that the Iranian speakers entering Iran were composed of nothing but R1a males. Obviously that is wrong. I disagreed that they brought this R1b to Iran given that the Indo-Aryan speakers, Dardic-Nuristani speakers, Central Asian and Afghan Iranian speakers as well as Southern Iranians lack this R1b at any important frequency. They absorbed plenty of other stuff which is likely to be J2a, L, R2a and G but not R1b. Those are the five haplogroups (R1a, R2a, G2a, J2a and L) shared by almost all Indo-Iranian speakers so I exclude pretty much anything else as being brought by Indo-Iranians.

I think we have crossed wires a bit. All I was saying is that in Iran today R1b is predominantly northern and in Iranian or Turkic speakers. I didnt mean to project that way back in time to the first Iranian speaking movements into Iran. It looks to me that R1b in the SW Asia-Europe border area has a 'block' of significant presence that runs from Iran then along the northern side of the Caucasus as far as Azov. That is probably a natural movement axis and possibly bi-directional and multi-phase. I was primarily thinking of a pre-Iranian period in Iran. Today this 'block' probably best corresponds with the Caucasian language family including the element in Luristan in the NW corner of Iran. However, as I have commented before, M269 is normally dated several thousand years later than the first Neolithic peoples in this Caucasus-NW Iran area AND M269 is'dotty' within the north Caucasus zone so I am equally unconvinced it is iinked to Neolithic farmers in the Caucasus or Iran speaking Caucasian languages despite the very good fit in terms of distribution. Linguistically I just am not sure of its identity.

alan
06-11-2013, 11:02 PM
That is a straw man because I never said that the Iranian speakers entering Iran were composed of nothing but R1a males. Obviously that is wrong. I disagreed that they brought this R1b to Iran given that the Indo-Aryan speakers, Dardic-Nuristani speakers, Central Asian and Afghan Iranian speakers as well as Southern Iranians lack this R1b at any important frequency. They absorbed plenty of other stuff which is likely to be J2a, L, R2a and G but not R1b. Those are the five haplogroups (R1a, R2a, G2a, J2a and L) shared by almost all Indo-Iranian speakers so I exclude pretty much anything else as being brought by Indo-Iranians.

I do agree too with the general principle that the pattern of R1b in Asia among various groups is telling us something about its former position or chronology of its spread. I have never given up the possibility that R1b was simply an early particularly western steppe group that (like so many steppe groups) moved or was pushed out south and west. L23's distribution can be made sense of it it was pushed out in two directions from the Ukraine steppes area (south through the Caucasus to Iran and SW Asia and west into the Balkans and later Anatolia/Armenia. It cannot be ruled out and the modern population largely only occupied the old Ukraine steppes lands of the Tatar Khanate 3 centuries ago.

Michał
06-12-2013, 12:29 PM
The Maykop people had been bilingual NE Caucasian and IE speakers given their position
This seems very unlikely considering that we don't see any significant number of borrowings from NEC to PIE or vice versa.
Your anticlockwise movement of R1b/IE people is indeed something that I would consider very likely, only that I would rather assume that it started east (or maybe even south-east) of the Caspian Sea.

alan
06-12-2013, 02:10 PM
This seems very unlikely considering that we don't see any significant number of borrowings from NEC to PIE or vice versa.
Your anticlockwise movement of R1b/IE people is indeed something that I would consider very likely, only that I would rather assume that it started east (or maybe even south-east) of the Caspian Sea.



An explanation might be that the contact point with the steppe was strongest in the NW Caucasus around around the Kuban/sea of Azov area where navigation using a network of rivers into the steppes commenced. The Maykop chief is somewhere near the Kuban River which is the only navigable river in the north Caucasus and which leads to Azov.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maykop_culture-en.svg

From Azov there is incredibly possibilities for navigating through the entire western steppes.

Contacts from the NW Caucasus to and from the south-east and the Caspian on the other hand would have involved land journeys (which may have been only feasible once the wheel appeared). The Maykop culture seems to have created links from Iran to the Ukraine steppes in particular, using the SE-NW axis that is the shape of the culture and is essentially also echoing the line of the Great Caucasus barrier. That it did not simply spread north into the open steppes of south Russia from there but had an axis spreading essentially from Iran to the Ukraine must have been a choice or neccessity of some sort. Perhaps they preferred the safety of using rivers in the steppe. Or perhaps (as the focus of their steppes trading in metals suggests) the main role was to trade with the Ukraine steppe groups. They were more advanced and had also recently lost their Balko-Carpathian metal supply in the centuries around 4000BC. Maykop appeared at the right time and was located on exactly the quickest root for an Iranian and Caucasus metal supply to reach them. Interestingly in terms of their apparent lesser impact on the north Caspian/Ural area, that area quickly established its own non-Caucasian metal supply in Kargaly. Although Kargaly too was probably commenced using Maykop knowledge and at least a small human element it does seem that the local steppic Yamnaya culture arose partly on locals controlling the distribution of the Kargaly copper source. That pure copper source seems to have supplied the eastern part of the western steppes but not the Maykop-supplied area in the south Ukraine steppes which were a very short step away from the Maykop zone (either sail Azov or a very short crossing to Crimea). It all makes sense when you look at the geography and chronology.

In fact a combination of wheels and boats would really have been required to fully exploit the trading and contact activities shown in terms of influence in and out of the Maykop area in the archaeological record. There

Michał
06-12-2013, 02:48 PM
An explanation might be that [...]
Sorry, but nothing that you wrote seems to explain the absence of linguistic borrowings in case the Maykop culture was indeed bilingual (IE and NWC).

alan
06-12-2013, 03:04 PM
Interestingly as well Azov as formerly being incredibly good fishing and used for maritime trading the Kuban river that flows into it through the Maykop area is apparently famous for its vines. This page has a discussion of PIE and wine

http://anthrocivitas.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10689

alan
06-12-2013, 03:42 PM
Sorry, but nothing that you wrote seems to explain the absence of linguistic borrowings in case the Maykop culture was indeed bilingual (IE and NWC).

I wont claim to be an expert on it although Wiki states:

It has been conjectured[6][7] that the North-West Caucasian languages may be genetically related to the Indo-European family, at a time depth of perhaps 12,000 years before the present. This hypothesised proto-language is called Proto-Pontic, but is not widely accepted.

There does at least appear to have been extensive contact between the two proto-languages, and the resemblances may be due to this influence.

It is interesting if the two proto-languages were in 'extensive contact'. I am not claiming to have any idea about who spoke what in the period. All I know is that Maykop was in a major contact zone with Iran on the south-east and the Ukraine steppes in the north-west. There were also probably lesser contacts north to the Ural-Volga area and to the south to the east of Anatolia/north Mesopotamia. Maykop appears to be all about trading (especially the SE to NW axis through the Russian Caucsasus/Kuban area). It is clear they had to have been able to converse in some way with a number of potential languages - the north Caucasus, the western steppes, NE Iran and possible northern Mesopotamia. That could have comprised Caucasian, IE and a couple of other language groups.

I would not rule out the Maykop chieftons speaking PIE. There was no barrier to the steppe (in contrast with to the south, east and west) and there were steppe groups within Maykop territory at the same period. The linguist Whittaker has suggested there is an IE Anatolian-like linguistic influence on Sumerian (he calls it Euphratic) and can even be seen in their writing system. He seems to have backtracked a little from substrate to adstrate. However, the period in question of these borrowings would nicely overlap with the suggested connection of Maykop with late Uruk people. Add that to the fact that Assyrians (who claim descent from Sumerians) share L23* with the Caucasus, north Iran (as well as eastern Europe) and there is a possibility that L23* trickled into Mesopotamia from the north. It is a lot less likely that R1b moved from Mesopotamia to the north because R1b has variance dates and phylogeny that suggests it was not in an advanced farming area and was doing very little before 4 or 5 thousand BC.

alan
06-12-2013, 03:53 PM
This seems very unlikely considering that we don't see any significant number of borrowings from NEC to PIE or vice versa.
Your anticlockwise movement of R1b/IE people is indeed something that I would consider very likely, only that I would rather assume that it started east (or maybe even south-east) of the Caspian Sea.

There is certainly an arguement that R1b was north and/or east of the early farming zone. Its structure suggests it was very peripheral and in a non-developed farming area until perhaps 4000BC or a little before. So essentially areas which had any sort of flourising farming in 8000, 7000, even 6000BC are pretty well out of the question. That is possibly the problem with looking to northern Iran as it did have farming very early. These kind of considerations might imply that R1b was actually native to the north Caucasus-steppe interface but found itself in a superb position on Azov as a middleman in the Maykop trail between Iran and the Azov (which would surely have seen non-R1b geneflow too and two way flow too), particularly in terms of the metal trade. It is possible that the R1b element in the north Caucasus is the native steppe element such as Novotitorovka culture

Wiki says:
Novotitorovka culture, 3300–2700 BC, a Bronze Age archaeological culture of the North Caucasus immediately to the north of and largely overlapping portions of the Maykop culture facing the Sea of Azov, running from the Kerch Strait eastwards, almost to the Caspian, roughly coterminous with the modern Krasnodar Krai region of Russia.

It is distinguished by its burials, particularly by the presence of wagons in them and its own distinct pottery, as well as a richer collection of metal objects than those found in adjacent cultures, as is to be expected considering its relationship to the Maykop culture.

It is grouped with the larger Indo-European Yamna culture complex, and in common with it, the economy was semi-nomadic pastoralism mixed with some agriculture.




Another thing that cannot be emphasised enough is the historically recent displacement of the steppe population in southern Ukraine (Crimea Khanate) as well as a whole mess of movement in the millenia between 4000BC and then. It is posssible (I would say very probable indeed) that L23 had a strong presence in the north shore of the Black Sea (Crimea etc) and the 'gap' in the circumpontic distribution in the Ukraine is an illusion. If that was the case it is not impossible L23 spilled in two directions from the south-Ukraine/steep part of the Russian Caucasus both south and west into Europe. That cannot be ruled out. Only ancient DNA of the various culture of the area c. 4000-3000BC will prove anything.

MJost
06-12-2013, 10:40 PM
I did some addition runs using Maliclavelli's set of Italian M343 Hts he posted over on FW, and and present the data similar to the previous post #5. Not sure what I am seeing

Here is the results. MJost




R1b*

M343(xM269) Balanovsky 2011










YrsPerGen*

Count

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age

Mean Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Mean VAR

SD



30

N=5

Clade A: R1b* East

118.8

62.6

3,563.2

1,878.0

5,441.1

3.600

1.897



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

237.1

88.5

7,114.0

2,653.5

9,767.5

7.188

2.681





Diff =

118.4


3,550.8


4,326.4





YrsPerGen*

Count

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age

Modal Gen Age

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Modal FVAR

Modal FSD



30

N=5

Clade A: R1b* East

184.8

78.1

5,542.7

2,342.2

7,885.0

5.600

2.366



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

371.2

110.7

11,134.9

3,319.8

14,454.7

11.250

3.354





Diff =

186.4


5,592.2


6,569.8





YrsPerGen*

TRUE MRCA

InterClade GAB

Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

PooledVar

Pooled SD



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

InterClade Coalescence (n-1) Age: N* & O3 for R1b* East & N* & O3

318.3

102.5

9,548.2

3,074.2

12,622.4

9.647

3.106



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

Interclade Modal Founder's: N* & O3 for R1b* East & N* & O3

248.7

47.1

7,460.8

1,412.8

8,873.6

3.712

1.927




























R1b*

M343(xM269) Italy










YrsPerGen*

Count

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age

Mean Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Mean VAR

SD



30

N=4

Clade A: R1b* Italy

223.2

85.8

6,694.7

2,574.1

9,268.9

6.764

2.601



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

237.1

88.5

7,114.0

2,653.5

9,767.5

7.188

2.681





Diff =

14.0


419.3


498.7





YrsPerGen*

Count

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age

Modal Gen Age

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Modal FVAR

Modal FSD



30

N=4

Clade A: R1b* Italy

390.4

113.5

11,712.3

3,404.8

15,117.1

11.833

3.440



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

371.2

110.7

11,134.9

3,319.8

14,454.7

11.250

3.354





Diff =

19.2


577.4


662.3





YrsPerGen*

TRUE MRCA

InterClade GAB

Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

PooledVar

Pooled SD



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

InterClade Coalescence (n-1) Age: N* & O3 for R1b* Italy & N* & O3

293.2

98.4

8,796.9

2,950.7

11,747.6

8.888

2.981



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

Interclade Modal Founder's: N* & O3 for R1b* Italy & N* & O3

322.9

66.3

9,686.9

1,988.9

11,675.9

2.046

1.430
















R1b*

M343(xM269) Balanovsky 2011 & Italy










YrsPerGen*

Count

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age

Mean Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Mean VAR

SD



30

N=9

Clade A: R1b* East & Italy

304.4

100.2

9,132.3

3,006.5

12,138.8

9.227

3.038



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

237.1

88.5

7,114.0

2,653.5

9,767.5

7.188

2.681





Diff =

67.3


2,018.3


2,371.2





YrsPerGen*

Count

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age

Modal Gen Age

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Modal FVAR

Modal FSD



30

N=9

Clade A: R1b* East & Italy

412.9

116.7

12,385.9

3,501.3

15,887.2

12.514

3.537



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

371.2

110.7

11,134.9

3,319.8

14,454.7

11.250

3.354





Diff =

41.7


1,251.0


1,432.5





YrsPerGen*

TRUE MRCA

InterClade GAB

Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

PooledVar

Pooled SD



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

InterClade Coalescence (n-1) Age: N* & O3 for R1b* East & Italy & N* & O3

347.3

107.0

10,418.9

3,211.3

13,630.2

10.527

3.244



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

Interclade Modal Founder's: N* & O3 for R1b* East & Italy & N* & O3

332.2

65.1

9,966.5

1,953.8

11,920.3

2.444

1.563

Rathna
06-13-2013, 03:14 AM
I thank you for your work I shall study when I have time after work, school etc. You say that you aren't sure about what you are seeing... probably that without taking in consideration my three golden principles (mutations happened around the modal, there is a convergence to the modal as time passes, sometime a mutation goes for the tangent) every calculation doesn't carry us to the truth, that will be that of the aDNA, and as aDNA of hg. G and E in Europe has disproved every previous calculation (I said that the time should have been multiplied for 2.5) probably next aDNA will disprove this.
How is it possible that the interclade from N and O3 is the same of the R-M343 if not that these lines are only some lines survived by chance and many mutations are hidden? The markers taken in consideration haven't always a very low mutation rate and Boattini et al. took in consideration for their calculation only the 8 slowest mutating ones.
I said that these 5 Italian R-M343 demonstrated their very ancient presence in Italy by comparing their haplotypes with those present in the R1b1 FTDNA project: if you look at the Jewish ones, they presuppose an unique recent ancestor, whereas the Italian ones are one different from the others and diffused in all the Italian territory. So far we had only Demao e Toniolo (I put on ySearch from SMGF) but with data still uncomplete, plus another partial from the Marche. But you should calculate the intraclade between Mangino (name withhold but the last but one in the "ht 35 FTDNA Project") and the other R-M269: he is M269* but his markers values are close to the other R1b1-s.

MJost
06-13-2013, 04:19 AM
I would agree that the Italian's are old based on their haplotypes as compared to the Ossets and Circassians and the Modal variance appears to be higher for the Italians. But looking at the Caucasus or Italy InterClade Coalescence and Interclade Modal Founder's Mean, Modal Founder and the Pooled Variances results, I would have to say that the Balanovsky 2011 study HTs are overall older and the Italian guys have less variance. It is consistently higher for the Caucasian's overall.

But then again we need more HTs even though I used Bird's stable STRs only for older clades - using only 390 391 439 458 437 448 H4 456 635

MJost

Rathna
06-13-2013, 06:17 AM
I would agree that the Italian's are old based on their haplotypes as compared to the Ossets and Circassians and the Modal variance appears to be higher for the Italians. But looking at the Caucasus or Italy InterClade Coalescence and Interclade Modal Founder's Mean, Modal Founder and the Pooled Variances results, I would have to say that the Balanovsky 2011 study HTs are overall older and the Italian guys have less variance. It is consistently higher for the Caucasian's overall.

But then again we need more HTs even though I used Bird's stable STRs only for older clades - using only 390 391 439 458 437 448 H4 456 635

MJost


It is possible and likely that Caucasian R1b1-s are more ancient than the Italian ones and that R1b came from Asia, but my theory was another:
1) that R1b1 is in Italy and Western Europe from very ancient times
2) that there has been an Italian Refugium at the Younger Dryas time (and your calculation of R1b1 brings us to that time)
3) that the subclades were born in Italy or Western Europe, certainly from R-L51
4) this disproves all the current theories of a recent immigration from East
5) exam Mangino (Mancini from Tuscany) who is the first haplotype R-M269* with the values very close to R1b1
6) the recent paper posted by Dienekes and I have spoken about in my thread about the Assessment of R1b1 demonstrates that Tuscans are very ancient and at the origin of all European and Asian haplotypes (they are a branch and the others another one)
7) about the Caucasian and Asian R1b1 we shall see which of them are original and which are an introgression from Western Europe linked to Indo-Europeans. The case of Raza from India (R1b1 but which lacks YSC224) merits to be deepen, i.e it is possible that Asia gets ancient haplotypes which aren't the ancestors of our European subclades.

MJost
06-13-2013, 01:28 PM
Ok, you can chew on this Modal data. The underlined STRs are Bird's stable. MJost




390

19

391

426

388

439

392

389ii-i

458

437

448

GataH4

456

438

635



Clade A: R1b* East

19

14

11

12

12

13

13

16

17

15

19

11

15

10

24



Clade B: N* & O3

23

14

10

11

12

10

14

16

17

14

19

12

15

10

24




Diff


Diff

Diff


Diff

Diff



Diff


Diff






Combined Modal

23

14

10

11

12

10

14

16

17

14

19

11

15

10

24








































390

19

391

426

388

439

392

389ii-i

458

437

448

GataH4

456

438

635



Clade A: R1b* Italy

23

15

11

12

12

12

13

17

14

15

18

12

16

12

23



Clade B: N* & O3

23

14

10

11

12

10

14

16

17

14

19

12

15

10

24





Diff

Diff

Diff


Diff

Diff

Diff

Diff

Diff

Diff


Diff

Diff

Diff



Combined Modal

23

14

10

11

12

10

14

16

17

14

18

12

15

11

24








































390

19

391

426

388

439

392

389ii-i

458

437

448

GataH4

456

438

635



Clade A: R1b* East & Italy

23

14

11

12

12

13

13

16

17

15

19

11

15

10

23



Clade B: N* & O3

23

14

10

11

12

10

14

16

17

14

19

12

15

10

24






Diff

Diff


Diff

Diff



Diff


Diff



Diff



Combined Modal

23

14

10

12

12

10

13

16

17

14

19

11

15

10

24

Rathna
06-13-2013, 02:09 PM
Ok, you can chew on this Modal data. The underlined STRs are Bird's stable. MJost

[TABLE="width: 477"]

Clade A: R1b* East

19

14

11

12

12

13

13

16

17

15

19

11

15

10

24

[/TR]
[TR]

I am at my school. On hurry. This haplotype seems a R-M73 and not R1b1*. DYS390=19 is a multistep mutation of Eastern R-M73.

MJost
06-13-2013, 03:37 PM
Now thats an interesting fact of those with 19 possibly being M73 but Balanovsky only states that they all are R1b* M343(xM269). If removed, I can't test your hypothesis that the Italians are older due to not enough Caucasian R-M73 HTs. What is really interesting, is when I remove the three '19's" and just use the Ossets and Italy guys, the overall age drops. MJost




YrsPerGen*

Count

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age

Mean Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Mean VAR

SD



30

N=6

Clade A: R1b* East xDYS390=19 & Italy

218.3

84.9

6,547.9

2,545.8

9,093.7

6.616

2.572



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

237.1

88.5

7,114.0

2,653.5

9,767.5

7.188

2.681





Diff =

18.9


566.1


673.9





YrsPerGen*

Count

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age

Modal Gen Age

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

Modal FVAR

Modal FSD



30

N=6

Clade A: R1b* East xDYS390=19 & Italy

250.7

91.0

7,522.3

2,728.6

10,250.9

7.600

2.757



30

N=8

Clade B: N* & O3

371.2

110.7

11,134.9

3,319.8

14,454.7

11.250

3.354





Diff =

120.4


3,612.7


4,203.9





YrsPerGen*

TRUE MRCA

InterClade GAB

Generations

StdDevInGen

YBP

+OR-YBP

Max-YBP

PooledVar

Pooled SD



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

InterClade Coalescence (n-1) Age: N* & O3 for R1b* East xDYS390=19 & Italy & N* & O3

300.4

99.6

9,013.1

2,986.8

11,999.8

9.106

3.018



30

Pooled SD Clades A & B

Interclade Modal Founder's: N* & O3 for R1b* East xDYS390=19 & Italy & N* & O3

307.7

64.9

9,230.4

1,946.8

11,177.2

1.924

1.387

Rathna
06-13-2013, 04:39 PM
Now thats an interesting fact of those with 19 possibly being M73 but Balanovsky only states that they all are R1b* M343(xM269). If removed, I can't test your hypothesis that the Italians are older due to not enough Caucasian R-M73 HTs. What is really interesting, is when I remove the three '19's" and just use the Ossets and Italy guys, the overall age drops. MJost


These data are more reliable as to the interclade N/O3 compared with R1b1, but if we should multiply these 7,000 years for 2.5 we would have 17,500 YBP, i.e. after the LGM.
You perhaps know I haven't ever given any importance to this calculation and all my objections are always valid. We have the STRs values of many Y-hg. AOO, and if you apply to those your calculation you will be able to see how it doesn't fit.

TigerMW
06-14-2013, 02:05 AM
These data are more reliable as to the interclade N/O3 compared with R1b1, but if we should multiply these 7,000 years for 2.5 we would have 17,500 YBP, i.e. after the LGM.
You perhaps know I haven't ever given any importance to this calculation and all my objections are always valid. We have the STRs values of many Y-hg. AOO, and if you apply to those your calculation you will be able to see how it doesn't fit.

The data set concerns in particular and the methodology concerns are legitimate but I want to be sure that we stay on track with the theme/topic of this thread. The additional posts which starting going on tangents about hg's G and R1a, general STR and SNP issues are more applicable to the "STR Wars..." thread so I moved them over there.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?828-STR-Wars-GDs-TMRCA-estimates-Variance-Mutation-Rates-amp-SNP-counting

newtoboard
06-14-2013, 03:46 PM
It is possible and likely that Caucasian R1b1-s are more ancient than the Italian ones and that R1b came from Asia, but my theory was another:
1) that R1b1 is in Italy and Western Europe from very ancient times
2) that there has been an Italian Refugium at the Younger Dryas time (and your calculation of R1b1 brings us to that time)
3) that the subclades were born in Italy or Western Europe, certainly from R-L51
4) this disproves all the current theories of a recent immigration from East
5) exam Mangino (Mancini from Tuscany) who is the first haplotype R-M269* with the values very close to R1b1
6) the recent paper posted by Dienekes and I have spoken about in my thread about the Assessment of R1b1 demonstrates that Tuscans are very ancient and at the origin of all European and Asian haplotypes (they are a branch and the others another one)
7) about the Caucasian and Asian R1b1 we shall see which of them are original and which are an introgression from Western Europe linked to Indo-Europeans. The case of Raza from India (R1b1 but which lacks YSC224) merits to be deepen, i.e it is possible that Asia gets ancient haplotypes which aren't the ancestors of our European subclades.

Indo-Europeans do not come from Western Europe so the last point is makes no sense. The Indo-European homeland is more likely the Russian forest steepe than the Ukranian steepe so it is more eastern than previously thought. The area around the Samara bend is likely the IE homeland.

alan
06-15-2013, 07:53 PM
Back on topic (cant we have a single thread for the from Italy theory) one thing that may be significant is that the M343*/P25* could be deep ancestral to the P297 clades - M269 and M73. A lot of the supposed P25* further south turned out to be negative to P297 and positive for V88.

V88 is bordering on irrelevant to M269 and M73 (the two P297 clades with a shared ancestor in the early Neolithic) because the common ancestor of V88 and P297 is P25, a marked that dates back to the Upper Palaeolithic - an enormous seperation of time. Any lineage that has been doing its own thing for maybe 15000 years really tells us nothing. It clearly has its own (very interesting) story.

My question is if this is a mix of M343* and P25* is this still the high count it seems? I would guess it is but I am not sure.

Rathna
06-15-2013, 09:17 PM
Back on topic (cant we have a single thread for the from Italy theory) one thing that may be significant is that the M343*/P25* could be deep ancestral to the P297 clades - M269 and M73. A lot of the supposed P25* further south turned out to be negative to P297 and positive for V88.

V88 is bordering on irrelevant to M269 and M73 (the two P297 clades with a shared ancestor in the early Neolithic) because the common ancestor of V88 and P297 is P25, a marked that dates back to the Upper Palaeolithic - an enormous seperation of time. Any lineage that has been doing its own thing for maybe 15000 years really tells us nothing. It clearly has its own (very interesting) story.

My question is if this is a mix of M343* and P25* is this still the high count it seems? I would guess it is but I am not sure.

Who did say that between R-M343* and R-P297* there is all this separation?
1) We now know that M343, L278 and M415 are on the same plane (we haven't yet found a sample disjointed for these SNPs)
2) after we have P25, ancestor of V88+ and L388/L389
3) we don't know so far where YSC224 shall be put
4) after L388/L389 we have P297, but so far no sample R-P297* has been found
5) after R-P297 we have R-M73 and R-M269
6) there isn't so long from R-P25 and R-M269* if the Tuscan Mangino/Mancini is R-M269* but with markers values still so close to those of R-L389 and there aren't PF SNPs between R-M269 and the subclades, but there is a cluster (the Jewish/Balkan one) with 3 PF SNPs and the only R-M343/L278/M415 we know (Raza) has a very low variation as to the other close subclades
7) all your theories are only aimed by prejudice. No Genetics. No knowledge. No data. For this they will be defeated. I think that they already are.

alan
06-15-2013, 10:11 PM
Who did say that between R-M343* and R-P297* there is all this separation?
1) We now know that M343, L278 and M415 are on the same plane (we haven't yet found a sample disjointed for these SNPs)
2) after we have P25, ancestor of V88+ and L388/L389
3) we don't know so far where YSC224 shall be put
4) after L388/L389 we have P297, but so far no sample R-P297* has been found
5) after R-P297 we have R-M73 and R-M269
6) there isn't so long from R-P25 and R-M269* if the Tuscan Mangino/Mancini is R-M269* but with markers values still so close to those of R-L389 and there aren't PF SNPs between R-M269 and the subclades, but there is a cluster (the Jewish/Balkan one) with 3 PF SNPs and the only R-M343/L278/M415 we know (Raza) has a very low variation as to the other close subclades
7) all your theories are only aimed by prejudice. No Genetics. No knowledge. No data. For this they will be defeated. I think that they already are.

I understood from several posted variance calculations and Klyosov's work that M269 and M73 were 6 or 7000 years old, P297 was about 10000 years old while P25 (interclade between V88 and others) was something like 14000 years old.

alan
06-15-2013, 10:34 PM
Who did say that between R-M343* and R-P297* there is all this separation?
1) We now know that M343, L278 and M415 are on the same plane (we haven't yet found a sample disjointed for these SNPs)
2) after we have P25, ancestor of V88+ and L388/L389
3) we don't know so far where YSC224 shall be put
4) after L388/L389 we have P297, but so far no sample R-P297* has been found
5) after R-P297 we have R-M73 and R-M269
6) there isn't so long from R-P25 and R-M269* if the Tuscan Mangino/Mancini is R-M269* but with markers values still so close to those of R-L389 and there aren't PF SNPs between R-M269 and the subclades, but there is a cluster (the Jewish/Balkan one) with 3 PF SNPs and the only R-M343/L278/M415 we know (Raza) has a very low variation as to the other close subclades
7) all your theories are only aimed by prejudice. No Genetics. No knowledge. No data. For this they will be defeated. I think that they already are.

What predudice? I have been posting mainly about Iran, the Caucasus etc. Hardly national preduce for me living 3000 miles to the north-west and with no links whatsoever with those areas. Disagree with me but dont call me biased. I have nothing against the lovely county and people of Italy. I just cannot see any evidence for an out of Italy theory. I know you believe n it and I admire your tenacity and your detailed knowledge of the latest SNPs etc but I cannot see a basis for an out of Italy theory. However, I do think Italy and Austria were the first arrival points in western Europe for L51. I only said that I did not think your theory of Italian origin of European R1b further upstream needs repeated in threads about Iran etc.

Rathna
06-16-2013, 05:03 AM
What predudice? I have been posting mainly about Iran, the Caucasus etc. Hardly national preduce for me living 3000 miles to the north-west and with no links whatsoever with those areas. Disagree with me but dont call me biased. I have nothing against the lovely county and people of Italy. I just cannot see any evidence for an out of Italy theory. I know you believe n it and I admire your tenacity and your detailed knowledge of the latest SNPs etc but I cannot see a basis for an out of Italy theory. However, I do think Italy and Austria were the first arrival points in western Europe for L51. I only said that I did not think your theory of Italian origin of European R1b further upstream needs repeated in threads about Iran etc.

I apologize, Alan. You are a kind person. I don't like your novels, but everyone is free to read them or not, but Genetics, History, Archaeology etc are sciences and need above all data, and I am discussing about them. When you bring some data to the discussion I am glad to exam them.

alan
06-16-2013, 11:51 AM
I apologize, Alan. You are a kind person. I don't like your novels, but everyone is free to read them or not, but Genetics, History, Archaeology etc are sciences and need above all data, and I am discussing about them. When you bring some data to the discussion I am glad to exam them.

Thank you. Your a gentleman. I am not very mathematical so it would not be of any value for me to discuss the details of STRs, SNPS etc and I can only try to contribute of through my archaeological knowledge. So I stick to my strengths and concentrate on looking for correlates with archaeology and just draw on others for the dna evidence, variance etc. Looking into the archaeology of far flung areas beyond my normal area of knowledge is very time consuming and I would not have the time to also dabble in the DNA data nor would I be any good at it.

Although I dont share your model, I still see Italy as very important in the R1b story. I think there were two streams of R1b west and both made their western European landfall first in or bordering Italy -a northern one L51 that first reached the Alps (Remedello etc) and L23* in south-east Italy. I feel they are most likely to have arrived up the Danube (L51 or its immediate ancestor) and via the Balkans (L23*).

alan
07-13-2013, 11:03 AM
Alan, I pulled the Balanovsky 2011 Haplotypes and here is the Ossets and Circassians R1b* M343(xM269) TMRCA's with a Interclade Modal top age of 7,461 +-1,413 YBP. Sorry No Italian M343 data.

Note: I used ancestral N* & O3 SNP HTs in CladeB from the same study. MJost



Edit. The Bird q stable STRs used were

Your results look interesting but you lost me with N* and O3. I dont understand what they are.

DMXX
07-15-2013, 11:00 AM
Your results look interesting but you lost me with N* and O3. I dont understand what they are.

I believe MJost may have been referring to any Y-DNA Haplogroup N and O3 that was found in Balanovsky's paper.

MJost
07-15-2013, 01:54 PM
I used N* and O3 for interclade calculalations to produce the high end age for R1b* M343(xM269). But I have slept several times since then though.

Balanovsky 2011 Haplotypes with the Ossets and Circassians R1b* M343(xM269) TMRCA's with a Interclade Modal top age of 7,461 +-1,413 YBP

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1005-M343*-has-an-elevated-presence-in-northern-Iran-among-several-Iranian-speaking-groups&p=7616&viewfull=1#post7616

MJost

alan
11-01-2013, 10:28 PM
The Hindu Kush paper confirms the northern distribution of this or P25* within Iran and shows a similar northern border position within the whole length of Afghanistan's northern boundary. It doesnt appear at all further south in central Asia and as such closely echoes the overwhelming pattern for L23 and M73 too in south central Asia. So, it really looks like there is a southern boundary for above-noise R1b in central Asia that runs along the northern boundary areas of Iran and Afghanistan.

alan
11-02-2013, 01:21 PM
Although the samples are very small there are percentages for populations in the Hindu Kush paper of around 3-5% in this zone in north Iran and along the northern boundary of Afghanistan.

alan
11-02-2013, 01:52 PM
Ethnically the P343*/p25*was found among local populations of Iranian/Persians in north Iran and n Afghanistan among both Persian Uzbeks as well as Turkic Tajiks. The clade appears at around the 3-5% rate which is very high for this rare clade and similar to the levels noted in the recent Iran study among some northern Iranian groups. In this zone the associations of this clade, rather like R1b in general is largely Iranian but with a Turkic element too. However it is very much a patchy minority. I think it has been absorbed by these groups at some point in history.

alan
11-02-2013, 08:14 PM
Wiki notes

The only population yet recorded with a definite significant proportion of R1b* are the Kurds of southeastern Kazakhstan with 13%.[6] However, more recently, a large study of Y-chromosome variation in Iran, revealed R1b* as high as 4.3% among Persian sub-populations.[17]

Kurds are of course Iranian speakers with a dialect of the NW Iranian branch not far from Persian. Of course its hard to know whether place or people is most important in these things.

The place is certainly very far to the east, not far from China. What jumps out for me about that location is that one of the great lakes of central Asia -Balkash - is in this area. Could this have been a stepping west stone for R1b? P343* may date to the end of the LGM, a time when Lakes like this became massively expanded.

On the other hand its also close to the Dzungarian Gate, the only pass through the mountains into SE Asia between Manchuria and Afghanistan.

alan
11-02-2013, 09:03 PM
I found this on Lake Balkhash which seems to have had a major expansion during the late phase of the glacial period much as the inland seas like the Caspian etc did

http://www.lgakz.org/Texts/LiveTexts/Deom,%20Aubekerov%20et%20alt%20%202012_Quaternary% 20history%20nature-man%20IBB_%20RHIN.pdf

alan
11-02-2013, 11:03 PM
The distribution of R1b*/P343*/P25* is interesting. It should be recalled that these were the lines that did not take part in the great expansion of later times but IMO they could have been scattered and left along trails.

The distribution of this line today, ignoring ethnic groups, is distinctive running as it does from the SE or Kazakhstan and along the northern edge of Afghanistan and across northern Iran. In the LGM that distribution looks like it reflects the southern edge of the deserts of central Asia. The desertification of that zone during the LGM seems to have resulted in abandonment of this area.

I have previously mentioned Altai as one potential refuge for those at Mal'ta but some other R* people may have commenced their retreat from points further west - R* seems to have existed for 5000 years or so before and may have originated somewhat further west. Also, once retreat south had happened there is nothing to say that they wouldnt have moved west along the new latitude they found themselves driven to.

One way or another the early R1b*/R1b1* does have a distribution that seems to follow the southern edge of the central Asian deserts. That cannot be explained away in the same way that L23 might be explained away as a later copper age movement. It is fairly striking to me and could be suggestive of a trail taken around this time.

The exact time is open to question. Michal's recent calculations seemed to push back the dates a few millenia and suggests that early R1b itself may have come into existence during the later phases of the LGM. If it did then its distribution matches that well the impossibility of settlement in central Asia at this time. It also is suggestive that the trail went all the way along this latitude from a little west of Mongolia/China to northern Iran. Movement north would have been unlikely during the LGM anywhere across the span of central Asia.

This book p54-9 is very interesting in that it describes a number of epipalaeolithic 'Caspian' groups of similar type across a zone that bears some resemblance to the distribution to the P343/P25* groups noted in the Hindu Kush paper and the previous Iran paper oplaced along northern Iran, the eastern Caspian area and the northern boundary of Afghanistan

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=n0V-xi2wAwUC&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=epipalaeolithic+kazakhstan&source=bl&ots=I2DaFrXDIs&sig=Db4HyEE1FMF6zfCElL_14-FJ_Kg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qn11UsmNFfOZ0AXGhICADA&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=epipalaeolithic%20kazakhstan&f=false

If R* retreated south rather than west and R1b* occurred at the end of the LGM and modern remnants of the very upstream clades of R1b are representative then these cultures would be the most likely location of R1b during the immediate post-LGM era.

alan
11-03-2013, 02:36 PM
I think again this LGM ecozone map is worth considering in the light of the apparent R* boy at Mal'ta.

http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/NEW_MAPS/eurasia1.gif

The Mal'ta boy was present c. 22000BC when we were into the LGM and it was shortly after reaching its absolute peak period. The devil will always be in the detail but this LGM map shows that the Mal'ta boy's band had got themselves into a bit of a pickle by remaining in that area and by then the area was becoming polar desert with a huge band of temperate desert and Montane deserts to the south. The Mal'ta boy's hunting bad were in a very bad spot with few escape options other than west along the steppe tundra belt which although harsh was productive and well used by hunters. At the very worst of the LGM there was probably a retreat to the southern parts of the steppe tundra just north of the desert.

Anyway, here is a possible theory of what may have happened.

1. The Mal'ta boys family may well have perished IMO. I have read he was in a bad way and IMO they would have had to make a considerable journey to the north-west to the steppe tundra or made it south-west to the fefugia in Altai (I have also suggested Lake Bakhash a little further west might have been a refuge),

2. It is entirely possible that R* and extremely early R1* people (if Michal's post pushing it back to c. 20000BC is in the right ballpark) moved different directions. However, it does seem unlikely that we can push back R1 and therefore the separation of the R1a and b lines before 20000BC. By that stage anyone around Mal'ta had to be long gone as the very worst of the LGM conditions were present and the map. So, it looks likely that the ancestors of R1a and b had a unified story still when the conditions on the map above had applied for some time and they were gone from the Mal'ta area either directly west or somehow southwards. So, at this stage we cannot contemplate the origins of the future division in geography of R1a and b. They were a new R1 line as the LGM reached and passed its peak.

3. So that really means that the particular R* line ancestral to R1* had to have made it choice as the LGM conditions peaked shortly after the Mal'ta boy lived. Of course there could have been many R* lines and the Mal'ta boy may have just been from one particular line who hung around to the bitter end in that part of Siberia. Only one of the R* lines led to R1*.

4. IMO R2 or its immediate R* ancestor exited Siberia early - a sensible move to make if it was done about 24000BC or before when conditions started to roll into LGM mode and a route south was still possible.

5. My best guess based on the earliest branches of R1b* and a* is that some of the Mal'ta boy's R* cousins made it south too, albeit not into India. The distribution of the oldest R1b along what was the southern edge of the desert in the LGM could be evidence of this. However it is also possible that this was a result of hunters invading this area during the Bolling-Allerod warmer wet phase 13,000 to 11000BC before the Younger Dyas returned very arid conditions and drove people out again.

6. I am fairly convinced that any migration west or south must have reached the interesting reguge and communication areas around the Altai/Lake Balkhash/Dsungarei pass area. Altai is believed to have had a small favourable refuge while http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DzungarianGate is apparently the only good pass south from north central Asia/Siberia from the entire area between Manchuria and Afghanistan. However this pass essentially leads from the Altai kind of area passing west to east between the Gobi Desert to the north and the Tiek Shan mountains , Himalayas to the south, which strikes me as a more likely route to coastal eastern Asia such as Q might have taken in the LGM than a route to India for R2 (although this later Magyar route map does suggest NW India could theoretically be reached in a torturous way using this route) http://www.michelangelo.cn/download/02_Honfoglalas/magyar%20migrations.jpg

On balance, it seem to me that R1 and its immediate ancestral subset of the R* line did not take that route through those passes or hang about in Alatai. It seems much more likely based on early R1b distribution that R1 spread along the southern edge of the central Asian LGM desert, possibly slowly pushed to that latitude by the LGM. The current distribution might suggest R1* occuring around Tadjikastan and R1b (and therefore presumably R1a) existing by the time the retreating people were moving along the northern edges of Alfghanistan and Iran on the edge of the huge desert to the north.

7. I cannot see any real way given current understanding of dates and ecological zones how there could have been any split in the R1 family until the end of the LGM when new opportunities for expansion into north central Asia briefly opened up and when the Caspian went through an incredible period of expansion followed by contraction towards modern levels. The cold snap of the Younger Dryas would have restored the terrible aridity of north central Asia and scattered anyone who had moved into the area between the end of the LGM and YD. That IMO would be the first logical date for a geographical separation into different ecological zones for the two R1 branches. It must have been a huge upheaval almost without parallel in that zone and does create a possibel scenario for the first major split in R1. That doesnt mean it happened of course.

alan
11-03-2013, 11:26 PM
I dont think its recieved comment but the paper on Altai last year is of interest. Apart from a high amount of M73 only found among among the Kumandin of north Altai (a Turkic group who conquered far to the west and finally moved from western Siberia and returned to Altai in the 16th century) there appears to be nothing of the very upstream R1b forms that we seen further west in the northern fringe of Afghanistan, northern Iran etc. This suggest that R1b's earliest form are unknown that far east and that the Altai LGM refugia and the nearby pass that leads into China and east Asia was not used by R* or early R1 groups in the LGM. It suggests to me that the alternative of striking further west and south was taken by R1* as early R1b forms seem to exists from the SE corner of Kazakhstan through northern Alfghanistan and north Iran but apparently not in Altai which may have been an important refuge for Q.