PDA

View Full Version : Update on U106+ samples at the Niederstotzingen burial site



Bollox79
08-21-2018, 05:17 AM
Update on the graves at Niederstotzingen that appear to be U106+ - this is per Alex Williamson's analysis of the Y-DNA data: It supports a kinship based clan group burial site...

"I've taken a look at a number of the Niederstotzingen men. I think the men in graves 1, 3A, 6, 9, 12B and 12C belong to U106. They may be the only L151 men as well.

The data for some of them is much better than others. They all seem to belong to some branch of R-U106/S21>Z2265>Z381/S263>Z301/S499>L48>Z9>Z347>Z328>FGC10367>Z319. The most downstream branch I can identify for each of them is:

Z319 for graves 12B and 12C
Z319>S1734 for grave 6
Z319>S1734>FGC363>FGC23165 for grave 3A
Z319>S1734>FGC363>FGC23165>FGC23143 for graves 1 and 9



They may all belong to the same haplogroup, but some lack data at the downstream positions to prove it.

On my tree, their position is with the Quartemont men:
https://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=4089

The men in graves 1 and 9 are positive for mutations FGC23143 and A10283 in this block respectively. They are negative for several of the mutations as well and so split the block. I'll likely include them on my tree at some point in the future."

You can also see the graph he attached to the analysis over at the "Two Alamanni in K36 and PCA" thread under the Ancient DNA section. I am putting this here so people who check out the U106 section, but maybe miss the aDNA section, will also see this info/data! I will add these guys to my growing ancient and medieval U106+ sample list (with what archaeological info I can find for the site) to my google doc's list!

And of course I'd like to thank Alex for taking a look along with all the other users who pitched in - Waldemar and Lukasz first brought the info to our attention!

Cheers,
Charlie

Wing Genealogist
08-21-2018, 10:46 AM
It is possible all of these individuals were closely related to one another. According to reports I hear on this site and elsewhere, this cemetery was only in use for a "couple" of generations in the early part of the Seventh Century AD. Grave 9 is said to have been the first burial of this batch, but that does not necessarily mean he was the father/grandfather to the others.

Hopefully an upcoming study (in English) will discuss the relationships between everyone in this cemetery.

Given the fragmented nature of ancient DNA results, it would be interesting to discover the challenges of identifying relationships, and how confident they would be of their findings.