PDA

View Full Version : Mesolithic R1b in the Danube Gorge: R1b-V88?



rms2
07-01-2017, 01:38 PM
Apparently two of the Mesolithic foragers from the Iron Gates region of the Danube Gorge, SC1 and Vlasa37, are R1b-V88. See this (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?97-Genetic-Genealogy-and-Ancient-DNA-in-the-News&p=254069&viewfull=1#post254069) and this (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-sc1/), and all of them are negative (ancestral) for M269.

Since M269 is supposed to be 20,000 or more years old, they all could have been M269, but, of course, none of them was.

The mrca of V88 and M269 is L754. The two lineages are separated by thousands of years, with M269 descending from L389 and his "son" P297 under L754.

So what does this news say about V88 and R1b in general?

rms2
07-01-2017, 05:52 PM
Okay, since no one has responded, I'll comment.

There was a minor celebration when R1b turned up among Mesolithic foragers in the Iron Gates region in the papers that appeared in May. Those celebrating appeared to be mainly those who want R1b to be native to Europe, especially western Europe (not that the Iron Gates region is very western), and those who want the kurgan hypothesis to be wrong, at least where R1b is concerned.

It looks like the celebration may have been a trifle premature.

Even if those Mesolithic Iron Gates foragers had not been V88, R1b of any kind appears to be gone from the Balkans by the Neolithic, when it turns up in Ukraine in the Sredny Stog culture. This made me think that maybe R1b spent the LGM or the Younger Dryas in the Balkans, but now it looks like it may have been R1b-V88 that was there, while the line leading to L389>P297>M269 was farther east, probably in Ukraine.

jdean
07-01-2017, 06:11 PM
Okay, since no one has responded, I'll comment.

There was a minor celebration when R1b turned up among Mesolithic foragers in the Iron Gates region in the papers that appeared in May. Those celebrating appeared to be mainly those who want R1b to be native to Europe, especially western Europe (not that the Iron Gates region is very western), and those who want the kurgan hypothesis to be wrong, at least where R1b is concerned.

It looks like the celebration may have been a trifle premature.

Even if those Mesolithic Iron Gates foragers had not been V88, R1b of any kind appears to be gone from the Balkans by the Neolithic, when it turns up in Ukraine in the Sredny Stog culture. This made me think that maybe R1b spent the LGM or the Younger Dryas in the Balkans, but now it looks like it may have been R1b-V88 that was there, while the line leading to L389>P297>M269 was farther east, probably in Ukraine.

Presumably these V88 folk were WHG ?

Anybody know how much, if any, WHG turns up in the areas of Africa we find V88 today ?

rms2
07-01-2017, 06:14 PM
Presumably these V88 folk were WHG ?

Anybody know how much, if any, WHG turns up in the areas of Africa we find V88 today ?

Yeah, they were WHGs. Good question about the WHG in African V88.

Looks to me like V88 was the most westerly form of R1b, probably camped out in the Balkans for the Younger Dryas and then moved west, crossing over into Africa probably at Gibraltar, eventually.

GailT
07-03-2017, 01:26 AM
There was a minor celebration when R1b turned up among Mesolithic foragers in the Iron Gates region in the papers that appeared in May. Those celebrating appeared to be mainly those who want R1b to be native to Europe, especially western Europe (not that the Iron Gates region is very western), and those who want the kurgan hypothesis to be wrong, at least where R1b is concerned.

It looks like the celebration may have been a trifle premature.

It's not only that the celebration was premature - there was also a failure to put the new findings into the context of the debate of the last 10 years thay began at the old DNA forums. It is possible that R was present across Paleolithic western and eastern European hunter gatherers, but it is not possible that R-P312 was Paleolithic European because P312 did not exist until about 6000 years ago. We've known this for at least several years, and the new findings do not in any way vindicate the people who were wrong about the origins of P312.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-03-2017, 01:32 AM
R1b wasn't gone from the Balkans by the neolithic because it was present in one of the Varna individuals and one copper age Romanians, although were not sure which subclades they were

Gravetto-Danubian
07-03-2017, 01:33 AM
It's not only that the celebration was premature - there was also a failure to put the new findings into the context of the debate of the last 10 years thay began at the old DNA forums. It is possible that R was present across Paleolithic western and eastern European hunter gatherers, but it is not possible that R-P312 was Paleolithic European because P312 did not exist until about 6000 years ago. We've known this for at least several years, and the new findings do not in any way vindicate the people who were wrong about the origins of P312.

We can also discard the idea that R1b came with pointed pottery from Siberia, which some people were still clinging to even after the finding of Villabruna

Pribislav
07-03-2017, 02:21 AM
R1b wasn't gone from the Balkans by the neolithic because it was present in one of the Varna individuals and one copper age Romanians, although were not sure which subclades they were

Which sample is this CA Romanian, and from which paper, I must've missed it?

Gravetto-Danubian
07-03-2017, 03:00 AM
Which sample is this CA Romanian, and from which paper, I must've missed it?

Err I meant Bulgaria (Smyadovo 4500 bC).

rms2
07-03-2017, 01:19 PM
R1b wasn't gone from the Balkans by the neolithic because it was present in one of the Varna individuals and one copper age Romanians, although were not sure which subclades they were

Okay, right, but those two instances are near the Black Sea coast (Varna is right on the Black Sea shore) and could represent the western edge of a Pontic refuge or movement from a Ukrainian refuge. Besides, wasn't that result from Varna R1 rather than R1b?

In the Balkan hinterlands, where there have been quite a number of Neolithic farmer y-dna test results, R1b is conspicuous by its absence. That could change, but it does not look like there was any kind of R1b continuity there from the Younger Dryas through the Neolithic period.

The R1b1a from Smyadovo is L754, and, given the Iron Gates results, could be V88.

R.Rocca
07-03-2017, 01:22 PM
We can also discard the idea that R1b came with pointed pottery from Siberia, which some people were still clinging to even after the finding of Villabruna

I haven't heard that one. Either way, it looks like the migration of Villabruna and V88 are linked and have nothing to do with the R1b that remained on the steppe for thousands of years longer.

Romilius
07-03-2017, 01:28 PM
I haven't heard that one. Either way, it looks like the migration of Villabruna and V88 are linked and have nothing to do with the R1b that remained on the steppe for thousands of years longer.

But Villabruna isn't V88... or do I miss something?

R.Rocca
07-03-2017, 01:33 PM
But Villabruna isn't V88... or do I miss something?

No, but it doesn't need to be to be related to the same migratory event.... which is opposite to the non-event of the eventual M269 branch that stayed and formed on the steppe.

rms2
07-03-2017, 01:52 PM
But Villabruna isn't V88... or do I miss something?

You know, it strikes me that the name Villabruna is becoming a kind of shibboleth. He was a forager who lived about 14,000 years ago, when hunter-gatherers like him ranged across Europe and Asia. He was R1b1a-L754.

Romilius
07-03-2017, 02:04 PM
You know, it strikes me that the name Villabruna is becoming a kind of shibboleth. He was a forager who lived about 14,000 years ago, when hunter-gatherers like him ranged across Europe and Asia. He was R1b1a-L754 and not M269 at a time when M269 was already supposed to be about 6,000 or more years old. Pretty obviously he was not on the line leading to most modern European R1b men.

Yes, I know... It was only to have a picture of what happened 14,000 years ago. Probably, perhaps I'm making a mistake, that Villabruna man developed different mutations than V88 and P297, with no descendants.

Romilius
07-03-2017, 02:08 PM
And I'm really curious to know if those 27 more samples from Olalde are also from Michelsberg culture... If so, it would be wonderful!

rms2
07-03-2017, 02:09 PM
It's not only that the celebration was premature - there was also a failure to put the new findings into the context of the debate of the last 10 years thay began at the old DNA forums. It is possible that R was present across Paleolithic western and eastern European hunter gatherers, but it is not possible that R-P312 was Paleolithic European because P312 did not exist until about 6000 years ago. We've known this for at least several years, and the new findings do not in any way vindicate the people who were wrong about the origins of P312.

Good point. As I am sure you recall, following the demise of the R1b/FC Ice Age Refuge, and once R1b-P312 began to show up in Bell Beaker, hope for an Iberian origin was revived, since it was alleged that Bell Beaker originated in Iberia. The idea was that Bell Beaker emerged eastbound from Iberia carrying R1b-P312, encountered Corded Ware about halfway across Europe, took on Corded Ware wives and with them steppe dna and Indo-European folkways.

The recent Olalde et al paper has pretty much eliminated that scenario.

I was glancing back through David Anthony's book, The Horse The Wheel and Language, when I came across this, which put me in mind of the Corded Ware brides hypothesis (page 153):



But Warren DeBoer has shown that wives who marry into a foreign tribe among tribal societies often feel so exposed and insecure that they become hyper-correct imitators of their new cultural mores rather than a source of innovation.

parasar
07-03-2017, 02:38 PM
You know, it strikes me that the name Villabruna is becoming a kind of shibboleth. He was a forager who lived about 14,000 years ago, when hunter-gatherers like him ranged across Europe and Asia. He was R1b1a-L754 and not M269 at a time when M269 was already supposed to be about 6,000 or more years old. Pretty obviously he was not on the line leading to most modern European R1b men.

Are you saying that M269 is 20000 years old?
I have seen no evidence that M269 is older than Villabruna.

Edit: Please disregard query and comment above.

lgmayka
07-03-2017, 02:52 PM
You know, it strikes me that the name Villabruna is becoming a kind of shibboleth. He was a forager who lived about 14,000 years ago, when hunter-gatherers like him ranged across Europe and Asia. He was R1b1a-L754 and not M269 at a time when M269 was already supposed to be about 6,000 or more years old. Pretty obviously he was not on the line leading to most modern European R1b men.
YFull estimates that R-M269 (https://yfull.com/tree/R-M269/) began to diverge from its peers about 13,300 years ago; but all modern R-M269 men patrilineally descend from someone who lived only 6300 years ago.

Here are the upper levels of the R1b sequence:

R-M343 (https://yfull.com/tree/R1b/) : formed 22,800 ybp, TMRCA 20,400 ybp
R-L278 : formed 20,400 ybp, TMRCA 18,900 ybp
R-L754 : formed 18,900 ybp, TMRCA 17,100 ybp
R-L389 : formed 17,100 ybp, TMRCA 16,800 ybp
R-P297 : formed 16,800 ybp, TMRCA 13,300 ybp

rms2
07-03-2017, 03:16 PM
Are you saying that M269 is 20000 years old?
I have seen no evidence that M269 is older than Villabruna.

That was an error on my part. I'll fix it. I was going from what I thought I remembered about the age of M269, but I guess it must have been an old, outdated memory, or just a mistake (I make those now and then, though I am sure no one else does).

rms2
07-03-2017, 03:25 PM
Apparently two of the Mesolithic foragers from the Iron Gates region of the Danube Gorge, SC1 and Vlasa37, are R1b-V88. See this (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?97-Genetic-Genealogy-and-Ancient-DNA-in-the-News&p=254069&viewfull=1#post254069) and this (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-sc1/), and all of them are negative (ancestral) for M269.

Since M269 is supposed to be 20,000 or more years old, they all could have been M269, but, of course, none of them was.

The mrca of V88 and M269 is L754. The two lineages are separated by thousands of years, with M269 descending from L389 and his "son" P297 under L754.

So what does this news say about V88 and R1b in general?

The age I attributed to M269 in my initial post was incorrect, an error of memory on my part.

The rest of the post is correct, however.

Rethel
07-03-2017, 08:43 PM
But Warren DeBoer has shown that wives who marry into a foreign tribe among tribal societies often feel so exposed and insecure that they become hyper-correct imitators of their new cultural mores rather than a source of innovation.

They are not insecure, but are social, and have adaptable nature. This is why such
thing as matrishit never existed, and always existed patriness, becasue women are
by nature willing to get alone with people around, and adapt new identity. This is
why women are absorbed to the family of the husband, bear his name and moe to
his area and culture - because they are created for that.

IT IS NOT INSECURENESS BUT THEIR VERY NATURE - and good for them.

BUT this is also one of the reason, why - if they get to the rudder - they will ruin
society, and they do this right now on the West, getting along with everybody,
wanting to please everybody, even enemies of their own homelands.

This is also, why they never created any culture, becasue they are created
to adapt, not to created or rule - and this should be understood corectly, to
not make them a victims or something, becasue theis is not their fault. This is
very necessary thing for society to prosper - but on the other hand, men have
to provide the subject to adopt - becasue they need it. If there will be not Y to
adopt, they will embrace what strangers will demend from them - for example Z.

rms2
07-03-2017, 08:45 PM
I think DeBoer is right, that women in a foreign environment will adapt to that environment, and that is true of people in general.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-03-2017, 10:57 PM
Okay, right, but those two instances are near the Black Sea coast (Varna is right on the Black Sea shore) and could represent the western edge of a Pontic refuge or movement from a Ukrainian refuge. Besides, wasn't that result from Varna R1 rather than R1b?

In the Balkan hinterlands, where there have been quite a number of Neolithic farmer y-dna test results, R1b is conspicuous by its absence. That could change, but it does not look like there was any kind of R1b continuity there from the Younger Dryas through the Neolithic period.

The R1b1a from Smyadovo is L754, and, given the Iron Gates results, could be V88.

Im in agreement, I was merely pointing out that these 'relict' R1b clades persisted beyond the Neolithic and into the Copper Age. Even the Iron Gates, foragers continued on as late as 4000 BC. The big shift came subsequent to this, when newer lineages from central & east-central Europe arrived into the Balkans.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-03-2017, 11:00 PM
You know, it strikes me that the name Villabruna is becoming a kind of shibboleth. He was a forager who lived about 14,000 years ago, when hunter-gatherers like him ranged across Europe and Asia. He was R1b1a-L754.

The extent of territory was still somewhat limited c. 12, 000 BC. So it seems that the pre-P297 foragers expanded north & east from Ukraine (to the Baltic and Caspian, resp) whilst their V88 'cousins' expanded west along southern Europe (from Balkans to Italy).

ADW_1981
07-04-2017, 12:41 AM
This study, possibly outdated links the common European variant of LP between central Europe and central Balkans. The same variant is found in quite a few central African tribes where V88 is also found. Ironically 7500 years is also the age of the split between the Sardinian V88 and the one in Africa.
https://phys.org/news/2009-08-years-central-europe.html

It wouldn't surprise me if this was the staging region for most of the R1b movements, including V88 which moved into Africa, possibly from the Balkans, to the Near East, to Africa. I suspect it was also this region where R1b moved east and formed Yamnaya and absorbed the CHG admixture.

These men need not have been EEF originally, but rather WHG/EHG and absorbed EEF as they moved south. Mesolithic Ukraine seems to be the split between WHG-EHG.

rms2
07-04-2017, 06:33 PM
I get the impression now that the R1b-L754 line leading to L389, P297, M269 and L23 was east of the Balkans and the Vistula/Dniester line, in the area north of the Black Sea. Look at the P297 among those Mesolithic Baltic foragers, for example. It looks like the line from L754 to V88 was in the Balkans, west of the L389 line.

Naturally, I'm just guessing.

GailT
07-05-2017, 10:14 PM
We can also discard the idea that R1b came with pointed pottery from Siberia, which some people were still clinging to even after the finding of Villabruna

Of course, we know that R1b is approximately 20,000 years old and that it could not possibly have originated with pointed pottery in Siberia. We are long past the point where it is useful to talk about generic R1b. We need to identify specific subclades and dates and associate them with specific cultures.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-05-2017, 11:14 PM
Of course, we know that R1b is approximately 20,000 years old and that it could not possibly have originated with pointed pottery in Siberia. We are long past the point where it is useful to talk about generic R1b. We need to identify specific subclades and dates and associate them with specific cultures.

Indeed, everything L754 and below seems to have already been west of the Ural by the LGM.

alan
07-05-2017, 11:24 PM
Yes it seems that R1b in the late Palaeolithic was in the late east gravettian culture. That is a big surprise because the gravettian was the last great pan European wave into a Europe before the farmers and starkly contrasting y groups in the hunters in the west and the east was not expected given the common cultural root in gravettian . Now it looks likely that R1b was harboured in the east gravettian. It seems likely that before expansion north towards the Baltic happened that P297 was in Ukraine. Villabruna c12000BC makes it likely P297 negative R1b was in the north Balkan area. All in all it looks like the main R1b zone by at least 12000BC stretches from the north Balkans to Ukraine in that period 12000-9000BC although the exact position within that was probably fluid and dynamic. As others have said it's likely that the P297 negative section lay more at the west side of this area, probably the Balkans while P297 lay in the more eastern part -probably Ukraine. How long before 12000BC that R1b was located in the carpathian/ Ukraine zone is unknown.AFAIK that east gravettian group in that zone ezpanded and contracted through the LGM, Dryas events etc

alan
07-06-2017, 09:48 AM
YFull estimates that R-M269 (https://yfull.com/tree/R-M269/) began to diverge from its peers about 13,300 years ago; but all modern R-M269 men patrilineally descend from someone who lived only 6300 years ago.

Here are the upper levels of the R1b sequence:

R-M343 (https://yfull.com/tree/R1b/) : formed 22,800 ybp, TMRCA 20,400 ybp
R-L278 : formed 20,400 ybp, TMRCA 18,900 ybp
R-L754 : formed 18,900 ybp, TMRCA 17,100 ybp
R-L389 : formed 17,100 ybp, TMRCA 16,800 ybp
R-P297 : formed 16,800 ybp, TMRCA 13,300 ybp
Those dates do raise important questions. The big pan European phase of the Gravettiqn was around 31000-22000BC and R1 in any form didn't even exist for the great bulk of that period. We also have an R* at Mal'ta at the opposite end of the mammoth steppe c 22000BC in the early LGM in a very different culture from Gravettian. The other big factor to bear in mind is the LGM and it's division of Europe into eastern and western refugia and also refuges on the southern fringes of central Siberia. My read of all this is R (it would have been R* at best at that time) was not part of the Gravettian wave that entered Europe c31000BC a few thousand years before the LGM. However villabruna forces us to accept it was present in the Balkans before 12000BC. It seems very like to me that Mal'ta does likely indicate the general location and culture where R* arose from P*. That culture (middle upper Palaeolithic of south-central Siberia) existed roughly 31000-22000BC (but gone by 24000BC with the single exception of Mal'ta boy 22000BC. So chronologically it is very much a counterpart of Gravettian in Europe at the other end of the mammoth steppe but technologically they are v different. It seems likely to me that sine R* or very early R1 guys escaped the LGM death zone that Mal'ta boy was a very late lingered in by 22000BC. The fact he is the youngest date for his culture by 2000 years suggests that around 24000BC others had fled the onset of the LGM for pastures new presumably to the south or west. This has always felt like a good scenario but it's archaeologically invisible

alan
07-06-2017, 05:43 PM
What is the current dating of R1?

rms2
07-06-2017, 05:50 PM
According to YFull, sometime between 28,200 and 22,800 years ago.

parasar
07-06-2017, 07:16 PM
Those dates do raise important questions. The big pan European phase of the Gravettiqn was around 31000-22000BC and R1 in any form didn't even exist for the great bulk of that period. We also have an R* at Mal'ta at the opposite end of the mammoth steppe c 22000BC in the early LGM in a very different culture from Gravettian. The other big factor to bear in mind is the LGM and it's division of Europe into eastern and western refugia and also refuges on the southern fringes of central Siberia. My read of all this is R (it would have been R* at best at that time) was not part of the Gravettian wave that entered Europe c31000BC a few thousand years before the LGM. However villabruna forces us to accept it was present in the Balkans before 12000BC. It seems very like to me that Mal'ta does likely indicate the general location and culture where R* arose from P*. That culture (middle upper Palaeolithic of south-central Siberia) existed roughly 31000-22000BC (but gone by 24000BC with the single exception of Mal'ta boy 22000BC. So chronologically it is very much a counterpart of Gravettian in Europe at the other end of the mammoth steppe but technologically they are v different. It seems likely to me that sine R* or very early R1 guys escaped the LGM death zone that Mal'ta boy was a very late lingered in by 22000BC. The fact he is the youngest date for his culture by 2000 years suggests that around 24000BC others had fled the onset of the LGM for pastures new presumably to the south or west. This has always felt like a good scenario but it's archaeologically invisible

1. Villabruna brings in something new - an element which is now present in the middle east - but did not come in from the near east as every sample from the near east (Anatolia/Greece, Levant, Caucasus, Iran) has good chunks of Basal that is missing in Villabruna.

2. Villabruna itself is missing an East Asian affinity which is present in some other WHG members of the Villabruna cluster further north. Subsequently the element that is now present in the middle east expands but not the East Asian element. Which means the Villabruna part of the Villabruna cluster gained ascendancy over other elements of the Villabruna cluster and other WHG.

Therefore the following is possible:
Villabruna's ancestors were already in Europe pre-LGM, and later expanded into the Near East and Europe - i.e. the new element introduced in Europe and the Near East is the unique nature of Villabruna itself - an isolated WHG group different from other WHGs. We know that different varieties of WHGs survived in Europe post-LGM (eg El Miron vs La Brana).

alan
07-06-2017, 11:29 PM
According to YFull, sometime between 28,200 and 22,800 years ago.

A migration of R1 or an immediate ancestor into eastern n Europe around 24000BC would coincide with the sudden decrease to near invisibility of the middle upper palaeolithic culture of south central Siberia which also marked the start of the LGM in that area. No archaeological trace though