PDA

View Full Version : Earliest ancient DNA for R1b subclades?



TigerMW
01-17-2019, 07:14 PM
I'm trying to create a list to include on the R1b project web pages on the earliest ancient DNA for the main subgroups.

Here is what I have so far. I'm just rounding off the midpoint dates.

M207 22000 BC SE Russia
M173 ?
V88 12000 BC NE Italy (Epigravettian)
P297 6300 BC Latvia (Narva)
M73 3300 BC Kazakhstan (Botai)
M269
L23 S Russia (Yamnaya)
Z2103 S Russia (Yamnaya)
P312 2400 BC NE France (E Beaker)
P312 2400 BC N Holland(Dutch Beaker)
U152 2400 BC SE Germany (E Beaker)
L21 2400 BC SW England(NW Beaker)
DF27 2300 BC C Germany (E Beaker)
U106 2150 BC S Sweden(CW Battle-Axe)

MitchellSince1893
01-17-2019, 07:49 PM
I'm trying to create a list to include on the R1b project web pages on the earliest ancient DNA for the main subgroups.

Here is what I have so far. I'm just rounding off the midpoint dates.

M207 22000 BC SE Russia
M173 ?
V88 12000 BC NE Italy (Epigravettian)
P297 6300 BC Latvia (Narva)
M73 3300 BC Kazakhstan (Botai)
M269
L23 S Russia (Yamnaya)
Z2103 S Russia (Yamnaya)
P312 2400 BC NE France (E Beaker)
P312 2400 BC N Holland(Dutch Beaker)
U152 2400 BC SE Germany (E Beaker)
L21 2400 BC SW England(NW Beaker)
DF27 2300 BC C Germany (E Beaker)
U106 2150 BC S Sweden(CW Battle-Axe)

Oldest U152 is RISE563 at 2572-2512 BC, midpoint 2542 BC
DF27 sample I0806 from Quedlinburg radiocarbon dated to 2431–2150 calBCE .

Dewsloth
01-17-2019, 07:56 PM
DF19 ~300 AD Roman York :(

Somebody, please uncover more...

JoeyP37
01-17-2019, 08:14 PM
Hey, you're lucky. Try being M458 in R1a; origin per YFull 2700 BC, earliest sample from the 1200s...AD!

TigerMW
01-17-2019, 09:45 PM
Oldest U152 is RISE563 at 2572-2512 BC, midpoint 2542 BC
DF27 sample I0806 from Quedlinburg radiocarbon dated to 2431–2150 calBCE .
Thank you, is RISE563 also in eastern Lower Bavaria?

Silesian
01-17-2019, 10:02 PM
Lopatino 1,IO429, 3339-2917 calBCE--2108+
Yamnaya, Lopatino II, I0443, 3300-2700 BC---L23+
PG2001,4336-4047 calBCE--R-V1636:

Michał
01-17-2019, 10:19 PM
Here is what I have so far.
I don't think it is correct to show Mal'ta (in the Irkutsk district west of Baikal) as SE Russia, while at the same time showing Samara and Kalmykia as South Russia.
Also, the earliest U106 sample found in Lilla Bedinge (Sweden) postdates CW/Battle Axe in Scandinavia, so even though it was found in a former Battle Axe cemetery, the burial rite was very different and this sample was marked as "Battle Axe/Nordic LN" rather than "Battle Axe".

MitchellSince1893
01-17-2019, 10:50 PM
Thank you, is RISE563 also in eastern Lower Bavaria?

Yes Osterhofen-Altenmarkt, Bavaria. Near the Danube, close to the Austrian border

TigerMW
01-18-2019, 12:23 AM
I don't think it is correct to show Mal'ta (in the Irkutsk district west of Baikal) as SE Russia, while at the same time showing Samara and Kalmykia as South Russia.
Would you call Samara "South Russia" and Lake Baikal just "Siberia"? or should Samara be "Southwest Russia"?
A lot of folks (in my audience) don't attach much meaning to the oblast naming.


Also, the earliest U106 sample found in Lilla Bedinge (Sweden) postdates CW/Battle Axe in Scandinavia, so even though it was found in a former Battle Axe cemetery, the burial rite was very different and this sample was marked as "Battle Axe/Nordic LN" rather than "Battle Axe".
Would it be better termed as just "Nordic Bronze Age"?

Radboud
01-18-2019, 07:55 AM
Would it be better termed as just "Nordic Bronze Age"?

The most accurate term for the earliest U106 is Nordic Late Neolithic I (around 2350-1950 BC), because it's age falls within the Nordic LN I perfectly (age of the sample 2275-2032 BC, average date is around 2150 BC).

While the Nordic LN II period (1950-1750 BC) has strong overlap with the Nordic Bronze Age, as some Scandinavian archaeologists even group Nordic LN II and the Nordic Bronze Age together, they still seperate Nordic LN I from the Nordic Bronze Age, because this period was relatively stable and it was still related to the preceeding cultures.

Michał
01-18-2019, 11:13 AM
Would you call Samara "South Russia" and Lake Baikal just "Siberia"? or should Samara be "Southwest Russia"?
South Russia (for Samara and Kalmykia) seems ok, as most people will assume that this relates to the southern part of European Russia (rather then to the southern part of Western Siberia).
As for Siberia, this is a huge territory (ranging from Ural to Pacific), so such a very general description does not seem to be specific enough. Therefore, I would suggest "Siberia, Baikal region" (or, optionally, "Baikal region" alone).



Would it be better termed as just "Nordic Bronze Age"?
I agree with Radbout in this respect. Alternatively, you may call it "Battle Axe/Nordic Late Neolithic", just like the authors of that paper did.

Radboud
01-18-2019, 07:00 PM
I agree with Radbout in this respect. Alternatively, you may call it "Battle Axe/Nordic Late Neolithic", just like the authors of that paper did.

Yeah, Battle/Nordic Late Neolithic is also acceptable. There is not much to associate this sample with specific cultures, because his burial and grave are atypical for both CWC and BB, although I remember that you saw some similarities between a subgroup of GAC and this sample, based on the position of the skeleton etc.

Romilius
01-18-2019, 07:28 PM
I'm trying to create a list to include on the R1b project web pages on the earliest ancient DNA for the main subgroups.

Here is what I have so far. I'm just rounding off the midpoint dates.

M207 22000 BC SE Russia
M173 ?
V88 12000 BC NE Italy (Epigravettian)
P297 6300 BC Latvia (Narva)
M73 3300 BC Kazakhstan (Botai)
M269
L23 S Russia (Yamnaya)
Z2103 S Russia (Yamnaya)
P312 2400 BC NE France (E Beaker)
P312 2400 BC N Holland(Dutch Beaker)
U152 2400 BC SE Germany (E Beaker)
L21 2400 BC SW England(NW Beaker)
DF27 2300 BC C Germany (E Beaker)
U106 2150 BC S Sweden(CW Battle-Axe)

... I didn't know that Villabruna sample was V88...

Pribislav
01-18-2019, 08:01 PM
... I didn't know that Villabruna sample was V88...

He wasn't. L754* (xP297,V88)

TigerMW
01-18-2019, 08:27 PM
Thanks, so Villabruna is our earliest L754 xP297,V88. Where is our earliest V88? Where/when is our earliest M269 xL23?

vettor
01-18-2019, 08:34 PM
Thanks, so Villabruna is our earliest L754 xP297,V88. Where is our earliest V88? Where/when is our earliest M269 xL23?

IIRC, for V88 it was northern levant circa 9000BC before it headed to egypt and beyond
there is a paper by angela smith about it

Pribislav
01-18-2019, 08:49 PM
Thanks, so Villabruna is our earliest L754 xP297,V88. Where is our earliest V88? Where/when is our earliest M269 xL23?

Here is a list of all confirmed V88 samples. Some are confirmed V88+ in the paper (Gonzalez-Fortes & Hofmanova), others by Genetiker and/or S. Malishev. There is also a bunch of L754 (xP297) samples, which are almost certainly V88+ as well.

28485

smal
01-18-2019, 10:27 PM
Thanks, so Villabruna is our earliest L754 xP297,V88.

This is not true. Villabruna is L754, but we can't exclude V88 or P297. We can exclude only some SNPs from V88 or P297 levels. And what is more important we can't exclude the oldest SNPs from the V88 branch, FGC21066/Y7789, PF6339, and PF6307, which were positive for I4916, Hajduka Vodenica; I5411, Schela Cladovei; SC1-Meso, Schela Cladovei.

smal
01-18-2019, 10:59 PM
P297 6300 BC Latvia (Narva)


Of course, the following samples from Latvia, I4432, I4434, I4439, Latvia_HG2/I4626, Latvia_HG3/I4628, I4630, I4436, I4627, are R1b-P297. However, they are all also belong to the R1b-P297>M73 branch.

TigerMW
01-19-2019, 01:04 AM
Thank you, Smal. Are there are any L23 xZ2103 older than the Z2103 at Samara?

TigerMW
01-19-2019, 02:08 AM
This gives you an idea of what I'm doing. I'm updating the "tip of the iceberg" view of the R1b descendant tree for the R1b project members. I'm probably trying to jam too much information into one chart but people like it.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/07j243zv81w2dgj/R1b_Descendant_Tree.pdf?dl=0

MitchellSince1893
01-19-2019, 04:37 PM
I'm trying to create a list to include on the R1b project web pages on the earliest ancient DNA for the main subgroups.

Here is what I have so far. I'm just rounding off the midpoint dates.

M207 22000 BC SE Russia
M173 ?
V88 12000 BC NE Italy (Epigravettian)
P297 6300 BC Latvia (Narva)
M73 3300 BC Kazakhstan (Botai)
M269
L23 S Russia (Yamnaya)
Z2103 S Russia (Yamnaya)
P312 2400 BC NE France (E Beaker)
P312 2400 BC N Holland(Dutch Beaker)
U152 2400 BC SE Germany (E Beaker)
L21 2400 BC SW England(NW Beaker)
DF27 2300 BC C Germany (E Beaker)
U106 2150 BC S Sweden(CW Battle-Axe)


Bell Beaker sample I7288 from Radovesice, Czech Republic is Z9+. As you guys know, U106 is a pretty large group under U106 > L48. He is dated to 2500–2200 BCE. YTree has Z9 forming around 2700 BC. There are very few reads in this sample aside from the already published CTS11468 which is at the same level as M269.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13555-R1b-U106-from-%DAn%26%23283%3Btice-Culture-2200%961700-BC&p=368497&viewfull=1#post368497

rms2
01-19-2019, 04:56 PM
As I recall, that result was never confirmed and was thought doubtful by Alex Williamson.



I have taken a look at I7288. It is possible it could belong to Z9, but there isn't much supporting that claim. None of the kits have good coverage. That kit has particularly bad coverage. I checked out about 20,000 SNPs on my tree in haplogroups P312 and U106 and all I found was four SNPs with positive results, one of which was actually mixed ancestral and derived.

R-L21/S145>DF13>DF21/S192>S971>Z3000/S951>Z3006>BY3157 23607561-G-A 1A
R-L21/S145>DF13>DF21/S192>FGC3903/S5201>Z246>DF25>L1402>FGC23105 FGC23115 22437420-G-T 1T
R-M269>U106/S21>Z2265>Z381/S263>Z301/S499>L48>Z9 S268/Z9 6788390-C-T 1T
R-L21/S145>DF13>ZZ10>Z253>Z2534>Z2185>Z2186>L1066>BY411 M2268/Y539/S23267/Z4948 21562790-C-A 1A 1C

My guess is that the Z9 result is likely just deamination, which happens for aDNA, and results in spurious C->T (and G->A in results) mutations. There's really nothing here.


Thus far there has been no solid U106 in Bell Beaker.

Wing Genealogist
01-19-2019, 05:55 PM
Technically, the ancient U106 result is Z2265+. I don't know if you would want to move the info down to the Z2265 level, or leave it at U106. I don't believe we have found ANY ancient DNA samples for the other direct subclade of U106 (A2150).

TigerMW
01-19-2019, 06:24 PM
Technically, the ancient U106 result is Z2265+. I don't know if you would want to move the info down to the Z2265 level, or leave it at U106. I don't believe we have found ANY ancient DNA samples for the other direct subclade of U106 (A2150).
Thank you. I was not aware he was Z2265+. The chart has too much on it already so I will probably just leave that date at the U106 level and not go any more recent than P312, U152, L21, DF27 and U106. It is pretty clear we should expect to find an earlier U106 skeleton some day.

Are the earliest P312 skeletons the U152 people? U152 and DF27 may be so close in age to their P312* ancestors that we may never find earlier P312 that aren't U152 or DF27 too.

Wing Genealogist
01-19-2019, 06:51 PM
...U152 and DF27 may be so close in age to their P312* ancestors that we may never find earlier P312 that aren't U152 or DF27 too.

This is exactly the case with U106 and its top level subclades.

Iain McDonald's Big Y Build 37 age analysis of U106 http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~mcdonald/genetics/table.html Gave U106 an estimated age of 3022 BC and an estimated age for Z381 of 2964 BC. The conversion to Build 38 discovered two clades between U106 and Z381 so the tree now looks like:

U106
Z2265
BY30097
Z381

All this occurred within roughly 60 years.

It is likely the ages of U106 & Z381, and the time span between these two clades will change a bit once the Build 38 age analysis is finalized, but I believe there is a real chance it will still look like:

Mr. Z2265 (the origin of the Z2265 mutation) was actually a son of Mr. U106 (the origin of the U106 mutation).
And Mr. BY30097 was the son of Mr. Z2265.
And Mr. Z381 was the son of Mr. BY30097.

The Ancient Z2265+ individual does not fall under any of the other currently known subclades of Z2265 (ie he is BY30097-, S19589-, and BY95662-). The U106 Project has created a clade from RISE98's singleton SNPs. It is currently believed this is a dead-end clade, with no living descendants (but future testing may discover someone who is positive for some of RISE98's singleton SNPs).

In addition, the DYS392=13 mutation is only found in Z2265 (and not in the other direct subclade of U106: A2150). This STR mutation has been found to occur in all of the currently known subclades of Z2265 with the possible exception of the RISE98 clade (which had no STR results) Given the extremely narrow time-frame of the SNPs between U106 & Z381, we are fairly confident we can state the DYS392=13 STR mutation occurred simultaneously with the Z2265 SNP mutation. Thus we would expect RISE98 to have the DYS392=13 mutation as well.

Wing Genealogist
01-19-2019, 07:00 PM
IF Mr. Z2265 was actually the son of Mr. U106, then we also know Mr. U106 had at least one other son, as we do have a brother clade to Z2265 (A2150). However, Mr. A2150 would not also need to be a son of Mr. U106. There could have been any number of generations between Mr. U106 and Mr. A2150.

The same holds true for the other subclades of Z2265 (S19589, BY95662, & the RISE98 clade FGC36477). Only Mr. BY30097 would need to be a son of Mr. Z2265. The other mutations could easily have happened a number of generations later. But Mr. Z2265 would have had to have had at least two sons (one Mr. BY30097 and one without this mutation).

Radboud
01-21-2019, 06:19 PM
As I recall, that result was never confirmed and was thought doubtful by Alex Williamson.



Thus far there has been no solid U106 in Bell Beaker.

I would like to add I4178, the Hungarian Bell Beaker. Several users on different blogs think that this sample is confirmed as R-U106>Z18, but that's not true. Strongly speaking, this specific sample is of lesser quality than the Czech BB. Williamson is not even sure this sample belongs to R-L51.



I don't have any confidence in calling I4178 as R-U106 > Z18. There's only one read and it is a G > A mutation at the last position. This sort of mutation is typical of damaged aDNA. I can provide you a list of a dozen other calls for this kit that are downstream of L51 that are also supported by just one read and they're all from different branches. As it is, I'm not even sure he belongs to R-L51.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13555-R1b-U106-from-%DAn%26%23283%3Btice-Culture-2200%961700-BC&p=373568&viewfull=1#post373568

TigerMW
01-22-2019, 04:06 PM
Thank you all. Here is what I have:

R1b-M343/L278 ???? don't have ancient* DNA prior to PH155 and L754
R1b-PH155 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-M335 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-L754 12000 BC NE Italy
R1b-V88 ??? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-V1636 4200 BC C Russia
R1b-M73 6300 BC Latvia
R1b-M269 ???? don't have ancient* DNA prior to L23 (Any in the Balkans before L23?)
R1b-L23 3100 BC S Russia (Is the L23 x?Z3103 older than the Samara Z2103?)
R1b-Z2103 3100 BC S. Russia
R1b-PF7562 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-L51 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-L151 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-S1194 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-P312 ???? don't have ancient* DNA (is any older than U152?)
R1b-L21 2200 BC SW England
R1b-U152 2500 BC C Germany
R1b-DF27 2300 BC C Germany
R1b-U106 2150 BC Sweden (actually Z2265)

Is this the best we know?

* minimum Bronze Age

R.Rocca
01-22-2019, 06:50 PM
Thank you all. Here is what I have:

R1b-M343/L278 ???? don't have ancient* DNA prior to PH155 and L754
R1b-PH155 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-M335 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-L754 12000 BC NE Italy
R1b-V88 ??? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-V1636 4200 BC C Russia
R1b-M73 6300 BC Latvia
R1b-M269 ???? don't have ancient* DNA prior to L23 (Any in the Balkans before L23?)
R1b-L23 3100 BC S Russia (Is the L23 x?Z3103 older than the Samara Z2103?)
R1b-Z2103 3100 BC S. Russia
R1b-PF7562 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-L51 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-L151 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-S1194 ???? don't have ancient* DNA
R1b-P312 ???? don't have ancient* DNA (is any older than U152?)
R1b-L21 2200 BC SW England
R1b-U152 2500 BC C Germany
R1b-DF27 2300 BC C Germany
R1b-U106 2150 BC Sweden (actually Z2265)

Is this the best we know?

* minimum Bronze Age

Sample I7043 belonging to Proto-Nagyrev Culture is L11(xP312,U106) and dated to approximately 2500–2200 BC (not radiocarbon dated). Obviously that is not the ancestor of P312 as there are already older P312 samples, but it is a point of reference if you need it.

GoldenHind
01-22-2019, 07:52 PM
This gives you an idea of what I'm doing. I'm updating the "tip of the iceberg" view of the R1b descendant tree for the R1b project members. I'm probably trying to jam too much information into one chart but people like it.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/07j243zv81w2dgj/R1b_Descendant_Tree.pdf?dl=0

A valiant effort, but I do think you have jammed too much into one chart. You haven't included any of the substructure of L238 or DF99. I will let some one else speak to the other P312 subclades. I would suggest a new diagram which is limited to the next level below the major P312 subclades, and then further charts for the levels below that.

TigerMW
01-22-2019, 11:41 PM
A valiant effort, but I do think you have jammed too much into one chart. You haven't included any of the substructure of L238 or DF99. I will let some one else speak to the other P312 subclades. I would suggest a new diagram which is limited to the next level below the major P312 subclades, and then further charts for the levels below that.
I have about ten requests for one more layer for yet another very important subclade. I have given in on some of these, for instance, just added the layer below Z156.

The intent of the chart is not really to show every SNP in a legible format but to present a general feeling on the relative branching between the more significant subclades while showing the backbone and the true early/basal branches before L151. At the same time I wanted to highlight (in yellow) the SNP Packs so people could see what is covered more easily. It's not easy to explain here is R1b-L513 xS5668 xS6365 and here is R1b-S5668 xS5982/L193.

Despite the imperfections, people thirst for views like this.

For the whole ball wax (or the most in one place) I just point them to the FTDNA haplotree. That's the rest of the iceberg.

TigerMW
01-22-2019, 11:43 PM
Sample I7043 belonging to Proto-Nagyrev Culture is L11(xP312,U106) and dated to approximately 25002200 BC (not radiocarbon dated). Obviously that is not the ancestor of P312 as there are already older P312 samples, but it is a point of reference if you need it.

Thank you. I was looking for an L11 xP312 xU106 older than the earliest other P312 (which is U152). Since we don't have that I'll leave the L11 box blank. I am puzzled. I could have swore that one time we had an earlier M269 xL23 or at least L23? prior to 3100 BC. Must be dreaming.

R.Rocca
01-23-2019, 01:49 AM
Thank you. I was looking for an L11 xP312 xU106 older than the earliest other P312 (which is U152). Since we don't have that I'll leave the L11 box blank. I am puzzled. I could have swore that one time we had an earlier M269 xL23 or at least L23? prior to 3100 BC. Must be dreaming.

From Haak.et.al.2015, there is this one L23(xL51,xZ2105).

I0443 (Yamnaya) 3300 BC-2700 BC
This individual could only be assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a (L49.1:2842212T→A,
L23:6753511G→A). It could also be assigned to the upstream haplogroups R1b1a2
(PF6399:2668456C→T, L150.1:10008791C→T, L1353:19179540G→A, PF6509:22190371A→G,
M269:22739367T→C, CTS12478:28590278G→A). The individual was ancestral for haplogroup
R1b1a2a1 (L51/M412:8502236G→A) and, unlike I0231, I0370 and I0438 also for R1b1a2a2
(Z2105:15747432C→A). Thus, it could be designated as R1b1a2a*(xR1b1a2a1, R1b1a2a2).

TigerMW
01-24-2019, 02:00 PM
Thank you, all. I'll try to follow along better in the Ancient DNA category so I keep up as you uncover progress.

Here is the chart that I've gone ahead and posted on the R1b project. It's not a chart I would present from, something I used do in my line of work. It is more of a reference that shows several concepts and is intended to convey an overall feeling of the nature and structure of R1b's tree.

It is amazing how much some people thirst for this and love to use charts like these. What's really amazing, I mean, is the vendors don't provide more content rich overview and summary views of the tree. They would sell more if they did but it is very hard to winnow out data to create proper overviews. It's takes a lot of programming to generate useful and clear summaries.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/07j243zv81w2dgj/R1b_Descendant_Tree.pdf?dl=0

Ric
04-20-2019, 06:00 PM
...Are the earliest P312 skeletons the U152 people? U152 and DF27 may be so close in age to their P312* ancestors that we may never find earlier P312 that aren't U152 or DF27 too.

I understand that in terms of genetic but this is harder in terms of demographics. I mean as you go back in time there are less and less of men of a given haplogroup, down to the 1 last common ancestor. I am not an archeologist but to me it is hard to believe that this last one can be spotted 20ft underground 5000 years later.
And inversely, the fact that archeologists find one df27 or U152 specimen is almost a guaranty that there are a lot more, somewhere, and not even necessarily nearby. And 'a lot more' means 'far back in time', or the time necessary to accumulate to numbers that doesn't make the discovery of their bones an extraordinary coincidence. Unless it is known that each of theses men had 10 sons or more starting from the first ancestor, but this is also hard to believe unless these ancestors were clan chiefs with a lot of women.

So what is it, crazy demography, an ancestor who is much farther back in time than genetic suggests, or incredibly lucky archeologists capable to pinpoint all the remains of an ancient population ?

rms2
04-21-2019, 12:53 PM
Remember, too, that, aside from the luck of the draw, the best preserved skeletons are those of the elites, who could afford the best burials. The guys in the big Yamnaya kurgans were at the top of the food chain.

Elite males are also the ones who had the means to father a lot of children by many different women and to insure those children survived to adulthood themselves.

Ric
08-10-2019, 06:34 PM
I'm trying to create a list to include on the R1b project web pages on the earliest ancient DNA for the main subgroups.

Here is what I have so far. I'm just rounding off the midpoint dates.

M207 22000 BC SE Russia
M173 ?
V88 12000 BC NE Italy (Epigravettian)
P297 6300 BC Latvia (Narva)
M73 3300 BC Kazakhstan (Botai)
M269
L23 S Russia (Yamnaya)
Z2103 S Russia (Yamnaya)
P312 2400 BC NE France (E Beaker)
P312 2400 BC N Holland(Dutch Beaker)
U152 2400 BC SE Germany (E Beaker)
L21 2400 BC SW England(NW Beaker)
DF27 2300 BC C Germany (E Beaker)
U106 2150 BC S Sweden(CW Battle-Axe)

Any news, new samples...?