PDA

View Full Version : What are some widespread Y-DNA subclades that have a shallow TMRCA?



Granary
10-06-2020, 05:44 PM
For example E-M183 has a TMRCA of around 2700 BP, according to Y-Full. Despite that it is extremely widespread, but what are other examples of something similar, as in sub-clades that trace back to just the iron age despite being very prevalent?

pmokeefe
10-06-2020, 06:26 PM
Interesting, looking for resources about the TMRCA of E-M183 I found these two:
Whole Y-chromosome sequences reveal an extremely recent origin of the most common North African paternal lineage E-M183 (M81)
(https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-16271-y)
Yfull has E-M81 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-M81/) (age: 4752 ybp) but has the main branch E-CTS4236 more recent at (age: 2709 ybp).
Any other recent independent sources for E-M183?

(Ed.) Sorry, there's already this enormous thread about E-M183:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?16632-On-the-origin-of-E-M183

AbdoNumen
10-06-2020, 06:52 PM
Similarly, J-Y10887/FGC1695 has a TMRCA of just ~3,000ybp and is very prevalent among Arabs. Perhaps some Iron Age dynamics led to power consolidation(?)

Helves
10-06-2020, 07:05 PM
The more intriguing fact about E-M183 is not just that it's so widespread with a relatively recent TMRCA but also that it's widespread among several ethnicities.

Granary
10-06-2020, 07:16 PM
Similarly, J-Y10887/FGC1695 has a TMRCA of just ~3,000ybp and is very prevalent among Arabs. Perhaps some Iron Age dynamics led to power consolidation(?)
Do you have some figures indicating how prevalent it is and in which populations?

The more intruiging fact about E-M183 is not just that it's so widespread with a relatively recent TMRCA but also that it's widespread among several ethnicities.
Well I'd say what we know from written sources explains well how E-M183 spread outside the Maghreb, after all outside Iberia and the Maghreb it doesn't reach frequencies of much above 5% I believe.

Michał
10-06-2020, 07:28 PM
There are many "Slavic" Y-DNA subclades that are relatively young and at the same time very common and quite widely distributed.

For example, the TMRCA age for I2a-Y3120 is only 2100 years (according to YFull), yet there are estimated 25 mln people belonging to this subclade, with most of them living in Eastern Europe (mostly Eastern Slavs), though the highest frequency of nearly 50% is found in Bosnia.
Another example is R1a-L1029 with about 15 mln people and very similar TMRCA age of 2100 years.
Both these subclades have been found in some of the recently published Medieval "Viking" samples from different locations (Denmark, Sweden, Russia and Ukraine) and they were all Slavic-like (or North Slavic-like) autosomally.

Shanck
10-06-2020, 07:40 PM
J1-FGC12 presence is well attested all over in the Arabian peninsula, Yemen, Iraq, Egypt, Sudan, Jordan, Palestine, Iran and Lebanon with a TMRCA of 3,100 years.
Though it obviously doesn't compare with the spread and frequency of E-M183, with little to no historical record to justify the overwhelming spread in north Africa and other places.

Edit: Just found out AbdoNumen has mentioned it before me. My apologies!

pmokeefe
10-06-2020, 07:47 PM
A quick sweep of the literature from major publishers.

C
Phylogeography of the Y‐chromosome haplogroup C in northern Eurasia (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2010.00601.x)

C2*
Whole-sequence analysis indicates that the Y chromosome C2*-Star Cluster traces back to ordinary Mongols, rather than Genghis Khan (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5839053/)

C2a1a1b1a/F3830 and C2b1b/F845
Ancient DNA reveals two paternal lineages C2a1a1b1a/F3830 and C2b1b/F845 in past nomadic peoples distributed on the Mongolian Plateau (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajpa.24076)


C2a‐M86
Paternal origin of Tungusic‐speaking populations: Insights from the updated phylogenetic tree of Y‐chromosome haplogroup C2a‐M86 (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajhb.23462)

C2b-F1067
Phylogenetic analysis of the Y-chromosome haplogroup C2b-F1067, a dominant paternal lineage in Eastern Eurasia (https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-020-0775-1)

C2b1a1b1-F1756
Molecular genealogy of Tusi Lu’s family reveals their paternal relationship with Jochi, Genghis Khan’s eldest son (https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-019-0618-0)

C2b1a3a1-F3796
Y-chromosome evidence confirmed the Kerei-Abakh origin of Aksay Kazakhs (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32313196/)

C2c1a1a1-M407
Whole sequence analysis indicates a recent southern origin of Mongolian Y-chromosome C2c1a1a1-M407 (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00438-017-1403-4)

C3*-F3918
The Y-chromosome haplogroup C3*-F3918, likely attributed to the Mongol Empire, can be traced to a 2500-year-old nomadic group (https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-017-0357-z)

C3b-F1756
Phylogeny of Y-chromosome haplogroup C3b-F1756, an important paternal lineage in Altaic-speaking populations (https://www.nature.com/articles/jhg201760)

C3b1a3a2-F8951
Genetic trail for the early migrations of Aisin Gioro, the imperial house of the Qing dynasty (https://www.nature.com/articles/jhg2016142)

C3b1a3a2-F8951
Relating Clans Ao and Aisin Gioro from northeast China by whole Y-chromosome sequencing (https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-019-0622-4)

C3c1b-F6379
Y-chromosomal analysis of clan structure of Kalmyks, the only European Mongol people, and their relationship to Oirat-Mongols of Inner Asia
(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30976109/)
E-M183
Whole Y-chromosome sequences reveal an extremely recent origin of the most common North African paternal lineage E-M183 (M81)
(https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-16271-y)

G1
Deep phylogenetic analysis of haplogroup G1 provides estimates of SNP and STR mutation rates on the human Y-chromosome and reveals migrations of Iranic speakers (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25849548/)

H1a1a4b2
Sex‑biased patterns shaped the genetic history of Roma (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-71066-y.pdf)

J
A finely resolved phylogeny of Y chromosome Hg J illuminates the processes of Phoenician and Greek colonizations in the Mediterranean (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-25912-9)

O
Paternal gene pool of Malays in Southeast Asia and its applications for the early expansion of Austronesians (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajhb.23486)

O-F492
Inferring the history of surname Ye based on Y chromosome high-resolution genotyping and sequencing data (https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-019-0616-2)

O1b1a1a* [O-M95*] and O2a* [O-M324*]
Contrasting Paternal and Maternal Genetic Histories of Thai and Lao Populations (https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/36/7/1490/5449617)

O3a2b2-N6
Phylogeography of Y-chromosome haplogroup O3a2b2-N6 reveals
patrilineal traces of Austronesian populations on the eastern coastal regions of Asia (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175080#sec005)

Q
Dispersals of the Siberian Y-chromosome haplogroup Q in Eurasia (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00438-017-1363-8)

Q1a1a-M120
Phylogeography of Y-chromosome haplogroup Q1a1a-M120, a paternal lineage
connecting populations in Siberia and East Asia (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03014460.2019.1632930)

R1b-DF27
Analysis of the R1b-DF27 haplogroup shows that a large fraction of Iberian Y-chromosome lineages originated recently in situ (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-07710-x)

R-Z2125
Determination of the phylogenetic origins of the Árpád Dynasty based on Y chromosome sequencing of Béla the Third (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41431-020-0683-z)

Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences (https://www.nature.com/articles/ng.3559)

Bursts of male-lineage expansions (https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg.2016.63)

Large-scale recent expansion of European patrilineages shown by population resequencing (https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8152)

A genetic chronology for the Indian Subcontinent points to heavily sex-biased dispersals (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12862-017-0936-9)

RCO
10-06-2020, 07:48 PM
Widespread Y-DNA subclades that have a shallow TMRCA had a technological, economic, social and political edge or good advantages moving into new frontiers. Now try to find Y-DNA subclades that have a deep TMRCA in old core areas like Eastern Anatolia, Northern Iran or the SE Asian origin for present-day non-African human Y chromosomes where the competition has always been tough.

Helves
10-06-2020, 07:51 PM
J1-FGC12 presence is well attested all over in the Arabian peninsula, Yemen, Iraq, Egypt, Sudan, Jordan, Palestine, Iran and Lebanon with a TMRCA of 3,100 years.
Though it obviously doesn't compare with the spread and frequency of E-M183, with little to no historical record to justify the overwhelming spread in north Africa and other places.

Edit: Just found out AbdoNumen has mentioned it before me. My apologies!

How frequent is J-FGC12 in Iran?

RCO
10-06-2020, 08:07 PM
How frequent is J-FGC12 in Iran?

Because of deep geopolitical sensitivities, they have never published an article about the complete Y-DNA sequencing in Iran, it's a taboo, specially haplogroup J1 that is clearly divided in ancient Iranian branches and others like Arab, Levantine, Caucasian clades.

alchemist223
10-06-2020, 08:11 PM
Don't forget the classic I1-M253, (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I1/) which has a TMRCA of 4,600 ybp despite splitting off from I2 over 27,000 years ago. Very widespread throughout most of Northern Europe, ranging from Finns to Scots. I am still surprised that there have not been any existing I1 men today who do not descend from the major bottleneck. I guess some Bronze Age European guy got extremely lucky.

Shanck
10-06-2020, 08:13 PM
How frequent is J-FGC12 in Iran?

I cannot say for sure but it has been observed especially among Sayyed families, most of them are families that trace back to Medina and Iraq and are supposed to have migrated to Iran sometime between the 11th to 17th century.

BUT, according to Grugni et al. 2012:


J1-M267 does not exceed 10% in the majority of the Iranian samples examined, with higher values only in Fars (11.4%), Zoroastrians from Yazd (11.7%), Gilan (12.5%), Assyrians from Azerbaijan (17.9%) and Khuzestan (33.4%). The proportion of the two sub-lineages, J1-Page08 and J1-M267*, is highly variant, being J1-M267* almost restricted to north-western Iranian groups and J1-Page08 mainly observed in populations living below the Dasht-e Kevir and Dasht-e Lut desert area, (approximately latitude 30°N). It reaches a frequency of 31.6% in the Arab group from Khuzestan at the border with southern Iraq.

So what it seems is that J1-M267* is defined as J1-M267(xP58), so it's J1-Z1828 (ancestral for J1-Z1824 and J1-Z18463), and it's 2.9% of the total population. With that said, J1-P58 is said to be present at a percentage of 6% from a total sample size of 938, and probably a quarter or half of it is likely to be FGC12+, and remember this includes Arabs from Khuzestan. Among Persians from Fars it even reaches 9.1%, and I'm sure a lot of it is related to Mesopotamians.

Helves
10-06-2020, 08:18 PM
I cannot say for sure but it has been observed especially among Sayyed families, most of them are families that trace back to Medina and Iraq and are supposed to have migrated to Iran sometime between the 11th to 17th century.

BUT, according to Grugni et al. 2012:


So what it seems is that J1-M267* is defined as J1-M267(xP58), so it's J1-Z1828 (ancestral for J1-Z1824 and J1-Z18463), and it's 2.9% of the total population. With that said, J1-P58 is said to be present at a percentage of 6% from a total sample size of 938, and probably a quarter or half of it is likely to be FGC12+, and remember this includes Arabs from Khuzestan.
Interesting I always assumed that J-Z1828 was more numerous in Iran.

RCO
10-06-2020, 08:29 PM
J1 branches like FGC6064 and ZS6599 have subclades older than 12000 years and they are undersampled in Iran, they belonged to the Ancient Iranian Peoples and probably they have been there since they were born. Unfortunately no article ever investigated that, just like several other Iranian basal haplogroups. I remember observing the old and extinct SMGF database with STRs and I had a good notion about the importance of Iran in ancient J1 and other basal clades there.

Shanck
10-06-2020, 08:32 PM
J1 branches like FGC6064 and ZS6599 have subclades older than 12000 years and they are undersampled in Iran, they belonged to the Ancient Iranian Peoples and probably they have been there since they were born. Unfortunately no article ever investigated that, just like several other Iranian basal haplogroups. I remember observing the old and extinct SMGF database with STRs and I had a good notion about the importance of Iran in ancient J1 and other clades there.
I suppose so far it's near consensus that the origin of J1 within the Fertile Crescent is Iran. That would include all the ancestral subclades for P58 and Z1828. Some branches of J2 too perhaps, although J2 looks more Copper/Early Bronze age Anatolian-derived.

Granary
10-07-2020, 08:29 AM
There are many "Slavic" Y-DNA subclades that are relatively young and at the same time very common and quite widely distributed.

For example, the TMRCA age for I2a-Y3120 is only 2100 years (according to YFull), yet there are estimated 25 mln people belonging to this subclade, with most of them living in Eastern Europe (mostly Eastern Slavs), though the highest frequency of nearly 50% is found in Bosnia.
Another example is R1a-L1029 with about 15 mln people and very similar TMRCA age of 2100 years.
Both these subclades have been found in some of the recently published Medieval "Viking" samples from different locations (Denmark, Sweden, Russia and Ukraine) and they were all Slavic-like (or North Slavic-like) autosomally.
I wonder how many of those 40 million people live in Europe, if half or all of them do it would mean that about 5-10% of the European male population descends from just 2 men living around the time of the late Rome republic(if the average date is spot on, which I guess it's a big assumption), kinda weird to think that some unknown pair of men left more direct male descendants than virtually all important Roman aristocrats that lived during the same time.

Granary
10-07-2020, 08:34 AM
Don't forget the classic I1-M253, (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I1/) which has a TMRCA of 4,600 ybp despite splitting off from I2 over 27,000 years ago. Very widespread throughout most of Northern Europe, ranging from Finns to Scots. I am still surprised that there have not been any existing I1 men today who do not descend from the major bottleneck. I guess some Bronze Age European guy got extremely lucky.

I1 is more of an example of a extremely strong bottleneck, I wonder though if there some subclades of I1 that have a shallower TMRCA but are still prevalent or did I1 strongly fracture quite early on with no further homogenization events?

Edit: E-V13 is a similar example actually, I have the same question about its subclades as well.

Riverman
10-07-2020, 08:57 AM
I1 is more of an example of a extremely strong bottleneck, I wonder though if there some subclades of I1 that have a shallower TMRCA but are still prevalent or did I1 strongly fracture quite early on with no further homogenization events?

Edit: E-V13 is a similar example actually, I have the same question about its subclades as well.

Concerning E-V13 you just have to look downstream, like E-Z5018 which is about 3.700 BC. Which is also the date for all its subclades to spread. So there was a major event about or some time after 1.600 BC which led to its spread to many regions, whereas it was "rather silent" before. The most obvious candidates would be Urnfield and the Iron Age transition, but it could be something very different...

Going somewhat upstream to E-BY3880 you get an even more complete picture and interestingly there seems to have been a big expansion of E-V13 into the Near East in the Iron Age (E-BY5786), possibly from a Roman era and culture migrant.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-BY3880/

For E-V13 the big stories begin downstream, starting from the original clan which survived, but then diversified on and spreading at different events.

Granary
10-07-2020, 09:05 AM
Concerning E-V13 you just have to look downstream, like E-Z5018 which is about 3.700 BC. Which is also the date for all its subclades to spread. So there was a major event about or some time after 1.600 BC which led to its spread to many regions, whereas it was "rather silent" before. The most obvious candidates would be Urnfield and the Iron Age transition, but it could be something very different...

Going somewhat upstream to E-BY3880 you get an even more complete picture and interestingly there seems to have been a big expansion of E-V13 into the Near East in the Iron Age (E-BY5786), possibly from a Roman era and culture migrant.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-BY3880/

For E-V13 the big stories begin downstream, starting from the original clan which survived, but then diversified on and spreading at different events.

Do you have some data or rough idea for how many people with E-V13 belong to the E-Z5018 specifically? I' don't need for representative studies but YFull trees are hard to read(I have seen people here creating interesting maps about E-V13 but I don't know where the data comes from)

Michał
10-07-2020, 09:10 AM
I wonder how many of those 40 million people live in Europe
I would say the vast majority of them live in Europe, although there are also some I-Y3120 and R-L1029 people among the descendants of migrants to America and those from the the Asian part of the former Russian Empire.

Here are three next subclades of relatively recent "Slavic" origin, each encompassing about 5-8 mln males:
R1a-L260 TMRCA 2600 years but encompassing only two major subclades YP256 (TMRCA 2300 years) and YP1337 (TMRCA 1700 years), with the former one being most common among the Western Slavs.
R1a-Y2902 TMRCA 2000 years (common among the Eastern, Western and South-Western Slavs)
R1a-YP569 TMRCA 1950 years (very common among the Eastern Slavs)

As for the modern population of R1a-L1029, it is actually smaller than 15 mln males (so I was wrong about it), as this estimate includes also a smaller sister clade YP515>YP509 (TMRCA 2200 years) diverging from the ancestors of L1029 about 3100 years ago, so L1029 itself would include about 12 mln males only.

Riverman
10-07-2020, 09:14 AM
Do you have some data or rough idea for how many people with E-V13 belong to the E-Z5018 specifically? I' don't need for representative studies but YFull trees are hard to read(I have seen people here creating interesting maps about E-V13 but I don't know where the data comes from)

I wasn't implying its dominant, just that many of its branches have individual stories, like a LBA-IA spread of E-Z5018 and a Greek to Roman era spread to the Near East with E-BY5786.

Granary
10-07-2020, 09:14 AM
I would say the vast majority of them live in Europe, although there are also some I-Y3120 and R-L1029 people among the descendants of migrants to America and those from the the Asian part of the former Russian Empire.

Here are three next subclades of relatively recent "Slavic" origin, each encompassing about 5-8 mln males:
R1a-L260 TMRCA 2600 years but encompassing only two major subclades YP256 (TMRCA 2300 years) and YP1337 (TMRCA 1700 years), with the former one being most common among the Western Slavs.
R1a-Y2902 TMRCA 2000 years (common among the Eastern, Western and South-Western Slavs)
R1a-YP569 TMRCA 1950 years (very common among the Eastern Slavs)

As for the modern population of R1a-L1029, it is actually smaller than 15 mln males (so I was wrong about it), as this estimate includes also a smaller sister clade YP515>YP509 (TMRCA 2200 years) diverging from the ancestors of L1029 about 3100 years ago, so L1029 itself would include about 12 mln males only.

It would be interesting to see a map that shows the geographical spread of those 5 lineages, how widespread are they among north Slavs in rough terms? Is it like in North Africa where they form around or more than half of Y-DNA lineages among various modern populations?

Edit: I don't mean individually, although at least the I2 in Bosnia is similar to North Africa.

Michał
10-07-2020, 09:41 AM
It would be interesting to see a map that shows the geographical spread of those 5 lineages, how widespread are they among north Slavs in rough terms? Is it like in North Africa where they form around or more than half of Y-DNA lineages among various modern populations?

Edit: I don't mean individually, although at least the I2 in Bosnia is similar to North Africa.
I don't have a map for just those 5 lineages, but I guess the overall picture would be very similar to that for all "Slavic" subclades, as shown on this map from Eupedia :

https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Slavic_Europe.png
https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Slavic_Europe.png


As for I2a-Din (I2a-Y3120), here is a map that should be more or less correct:

http://blog.vayda.pl/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Frequency-of-I2a-Dinaric-map-1024x706.jpg

And this Google map will show you how diversified I2a-Y3120 is in different regions of Europe (it looks like most diversity is found in Ukraine and SE Poland):
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=pl&mid=131mHMXo8l7tgnlMT-bC5JY1iDg0&ll=51.24695430316456%2C39.860474999999994&z=4

Granary
10-07-2020, 10:17 AM
I would say the vast majority of them live in Europe, although there are also some I-Y3120 and R-L1029 people among the descendants of migrants to America and those from the the Asian part of the former Russian Empire.

Here are three next subclades of relatively recent "Slavic" origin, each encompassing about 5-8 mln males:
R1a-L260 TMRCA 2600 years but encompassing only two major subclades YP256 (TMRCA 2300 years) and YP1337 (TMRCA 1700 years), with the former one being most common among the Western Slavs.
R1a-Y2902 TMRCA 2000 years (common among the Eastern, Western and South-Western Slavs)
R1a-YP569 TMRCA 1950 years (very common among the Eastern Slavs)

As for the modern population of R1a-L1029, it is actually smaller than 15 mln males (so I was wrong about it), as this estimate includes also a smaller sister clade YP515>YP509 (TMRCA 2200 years) diverging from the ancestors of L1029 about 3100 years ago, so L1029 itself would include about 12 mln males only.

I also checked whether those 4(+sisters of L1029) R1a lineages had some relatively recent ancestor, but it seems they all trace back to either Z280(4600 BP) or Y2604(4600 BP) both of which are downstreams from Z282(4800 BP). It's interesting how E-V13, I1, R1b-U106 and those 4 R1a lineages all trace to around 3000-2500 BCE, it's not surprising given what we know about the chronology of Indo-European spread, but I wonder how consistent this pattern is going to be when we look at other European lineages.

It's crazy to think that at least 10% of European males(35 million at least, not sure how many people belong to other R1a lineages downstream from Z282) all directly descend from one single man that lived around 4800 BP. A simple calculation says that R1a-Z282 males had on average a 1.1 male replacement rate over the course of around 200 generations since the last common ancestor, obviously a lot of that growth is concentrated around the migration period, high middle ages and last 2 centuries but it is still interesting data.

Michał
10-07-2020, 11:50 AM
It's crazy to think that at least 10% of European males(35 million at least, not sure how many people belong to other R1a lineages downstream from Z282) all directly descend from one single man that lived around 4800 BP.
I would roughly estimate that about 65-70 mln of modern European males are from clade Z282 (and this includes about 1-2 mln people from the "Scandinavian" subclade Z284, mostly in Britain and Norway). However, this is actually much less impressive than the expansion of its close sister clade Z93, originating somewhere in Eastern Europe at about the same time as Z282 but encompassing today about 200-300 mln males, mostly in Asia.

George
10-07-2020, 01:20 PM
I don't have a map for just those 5 lineages, but I guess the overall picture would be very similar to that for all "Slavic" subclades, as shown on this map from Eupedia :

https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Slavic_Europe.png
https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Slavic_Europe.png


As for I2a-Din (I2a-Y3120), here is a map that should be more or less correct:

http://blog.vayda.pl/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Frequency-of-I2a-Dinaric-map-1024x706.jpg

And this Google map will show you how diversified I2a-Y3120 is in different regions of Europe (it looks like most diversity is found in Ukraine and SE Poland):
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=pl&mid=131mHMXo8l7tgnlMT-bC5JY1iDg0&ll=51.24695430316456%2C39.860474999999994&z=4

A map with actual numbers (rather than percentages by reference to widely different state population statistics) would be even more interesting.

Riverman
10-07-2020, 01:26 PM
A basic impression, even if its just from YFull, can always be given by using:
https://phylogeographer.com/scripts/heatmap.php

I usually change the intensity to a higher level, because I don't think the weighting is all too accurate otherwise. Because for some undersampled regions you get high red/heat for just one sample. By regulating it down you just see the samples. On FTDNA you can also count samples easily with thier maps for SNPs.

Edward J
10-07-2020, 04:08 PM
I would say that J-L70 has wide distribution with some shallow TMRCAs:
https://yfull.com/tree/J-L70/

JoeyP37
10-07-2020, 04:31 PM
As one of Daddy L1029's 12 million male-line descendants, I wonder...was he just a regular guy whose descendants got lucky or was he a warrior chieftain, a Khal Drogo of the early Wends, who spread his seed everywhere?

Granary
10-08-2020, 06:25 AM
As one of Daddy L1029's 12 million male-line descendants, I wonder...was he just a regular guy whose descendants got lucky or was he a warrior chieftain, a Khal Drogo of the early Wends, who spread his seed everywhere?

I planned to create to create a small program that simulates how much Y-DMA diversity is lost just to random chance, for example let's say we 4 men that have families, one would have 2 male children surving out of a total of 2, other 2 just 1 son each and the last only has girls. Even at replacement level Y-DNA diversity would be lost, now imagine if replacement levels fluctuated through long times even a bit in various individuals, it should have an effect too.

Coldmountains
10-26-2020, 07:00 PM
Not really that widespread on a global/continental level but with very shallow TMRCA are many major Pashtun-specific subclades. Yfull has now many Pashtun-specifc clades with a TMRCA around 1000-2000 ybp. These clade make around 70-80% of Pashtun Y-DNA.

R-YP413>R-M12280>R-YP1709>R-YP1127>R-YP1123
Most frequent R1a clade among Pashtuns which formed around 2000-3000 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1150 ybp according to yfull. The clade is under R1a-Z94>Z2125 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-YP1123/

R-Y47>YP1532
A frequent Pashtun R1a-Z2123 clade among Pashtuns (around 10% of all Pashtuns carry it).According to Yfull it formed around 3400 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1100 ybp. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-YP1532/

G-M377>G-Y12297>G-M3124>G-M283
A G clade which according to yfull formed around 1600 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1100 ybp. Some Pashtun tribes like Utmankhel and Afridi seems to be dominated by this clade. https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-M3146/

L-Z5920>L-Y12419>L-Y17950>L-FGC40778
Typical for Sadozai and South Pashtuns. Formed 2300 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1750 ybp according to Yfull.https://www.yfull.com/tree/L-Y61970/

Q-YP755>Q-YP754>Q-YP3943
Q clades which seem to be typical for Pashtuns in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and East Afghanistan. It has a TMRCA of 3000 ybp but some subclades have a much younger TMRCA. https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-BZ528/

hartaisarlag
10-26-2020, 08:49 PM
Not really that widespread on a global/continental level but with very shallow TMRCA are many major Pashtun-specific subclades. Yfull has now many Pashtun-specifc clades with a TMRCA around 1000-2000 ybp. These clade make around 70-80% of Pashtun Y-DNA.

R-YP413>R-M12280>R-YP1709>R-YP1127>R-YP1123
Most frequent R1a clade among Pashtuns which formed around 2000-3000 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1150 ybp according to yfull. The clade is under R1a-Z94>Z2125 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-YP1123/

R-Y47>YP1532
A frequent Pashtun R1a-Z2123 clade among Pashtuns (around 10% of all Pashtuns carry it).According to Yfull it formed around 3400 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1100 ybp. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-YP1532/

G-M377>G-Y12297>G-M3124>G-M283
A G clade which according to yfull formed around 1600 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1100 ybp. Some Pashtun tribes like Utmankhel and Afridi seems to be dominated by this clade. https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-M3146/

L-Z5920>L-Y12419>L-Y17950>L-FGC40778
Typical for Sadozai and South Pashtuns. Formed 2300 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1750 ybp according to Yfull.https://www.yfull.com/tree/L-Y61970/

Q-YP755>Q-YP754>Q-YP3943
Q clades which seem to be typical for Pashtuns in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and East Afghanistan. It has a TMRCA of 3000 ybp but some subclades have a much younger TMRCA. https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-BZ528/

This is highly reminiscent of the Ashkenazi situation (except way more concentrated, if the 70-80% figure is really accurate)! I wonder how many other ethnic groups can be understood similarly, Y-wise.

Granary
10-26-2020, 09:21 PM
Not really that widespread on a global/continental level but with very shallow TMRCA are many major Pashtun-specific subclades. Yfull has now many Pashtun-specifc clades with a TMRCA around 1000-2000 ybp. These clade make around 70-80% of Pashtun Y-DNA.

R-YP413>R-M12280>R-YP1709>R-YP1127>R-YP1123
Most frequent R1a clade among Pashtuns which formed around 2000-3000 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1150 ybp according to yfull. The clade is under R1a-Z94>Z2125 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-YP1123/

R-Y47>YP1532
A frequent Pashtun R1a-Z2123 clade among Pashtuns (around 10% of all Pashtuns carry it).According to Yfull it formed around 3400 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1100 ybp. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-YP1532/

G-M377>G-Y12297>G-M3124>G-M283
A G clade which according to yfull formed around 1600 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1100 ybp. Some Pashtun tribes like Utmankhel and Afridi seems to be dominated by this clade. https://www.yfull.com/tree/G-M3146/

L-Z5920>L-Y12419>L-Y17950>L-FGC40778
Typical for Sadozai and South Pashtuns. Formed 2300 ybp and has a TMRCA of 1750 ybp according to Yfull.https://www.yfull.com/tree/L-Y61970/

Q-YP755>Q-YP754>Q-YP3943
Q clades which seem to be typical for Pashtuns in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and East Afghanistan. It has a TMRCA of 3000 ybp but some subclades have a much younger TMRCA. https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-BZ528/
What happened during this period in the region?

Also I welcome more regional cases of recent TMRCAs even in thinly populated regions like Siberia.

Coldmountains
10-26-2020, 09:45 PM
This is highly reminiscent of the Ashkenazi situation (except way more concentrated, if the 70-80% figure is really accurate)! I wonder how many other ethnic groups can be understood similarly, Y-wise.

The domination of few Y-dna clades can be probably explained by Proto-Pashtuns forming just around 1500-2500 ybp in a small area somewhere in Arachosia and than for some time playing only a minor socio-political role in the region. The expansion of Pashtuns probably started during the political vacuum after the Hunnic and Hepthalite incursions into the region but intensified rapidly with the arrival of muslim Persian and Turkic dynasties into Central-South Asia. Similar to the Avar-Slavic socio-political dynamics in the Balkan Pashtuns seemingly expanded behind the lines of Turkic and Persian rulers in the region. This is also the period, where most of these Pashtun specific Y-dna clades have their TMRCA. Also the Mongol conquests radically changed the socio-political dynamics in the region most drastically in the devastated urban and Persian-speaking regions, but the already Pashtun dominated South was also heavily effected by this. It seems that Pashtuns to some extent filled the political and demographic vacuum after the Mongol Conquests.

Granary
10-30-2020, 01:32 PM
I planned to create to create a small program that simulates how much Y-DMA diversity is lost just to random chance, for example let's say we 4 men that have families, one would have 2 male children surving out of a total of 2, other 2 just 1 son each and the last only has girls. Even at replacement level Y-DNA diversity would be lost, now imagine if replacement levels fluctuated through long times even a bit in various individuals, it should have an effect too.

Did the program and I'm getting interesting result, what the program does is basically simulate how the fact that some fathers have only daughters and others 1 son+1 daughter and others only sons, this assumes that every man has a perfect reproductive success and that there is a basic stable population but even then the result are surprising.

You have 1000 different lineages that have just 1 men representing them, I do 1000 attempts and average them out to not have outliers.

Here is my result:

After 1 generation: The largest lineage has 2 males and 25% of lineages went extinct.
After 2 generations: The largest lineage has 4 males and 38.9% of lineages went extinct.
After 3 generations: The largest lineage has 6.5 males and 48.3% of lineages went extinct.
After 4 generations: The largest lineage has 8 males and 55% of lineages went extinct.
After 5 generations: The largest lineage has 10 males and 60.2% of lineages went extinct.

After 10 generations: The largest lineage has 17 males and 74.1% of lineages went extinct.
After 20 generations: The largest lineage has 31 males and 84.6% of lineages went extinct.
After 30 generations: The largest lineage has 40 males and 89.2% of lineages went extinct.
After 40 generations: The largest lineage has 52 males and 91.4% of lineages went extinct.

After 80 generations: The largest lineage has 93 males and 95.3% of lineages went extinct.
After 120 generations: The largest lineage has 116 males and 96.7% of lineages went extinct.
After 160 generations: The largest lineage has 162 males and 97.7% of lineages went extinct.
After 200 generations: The largest lineage has 192 males and 98.1% of lineages went extinct.
After 240 generations: The largest lineage has 198 males and 98.3% of lineages went extinct.

After 800 generations: The largest lineage has 437 males and 99.4% of lineages went extinct.

As you can see by 3-4 generations, which is like a century, half of the males end up having no direct male descendant. Also despite no differing population growth the biggest lineage ends up having a big share of the population after millennia. Also you can see that when you get into the 3 digit generations the % of extinct lineages rises only slowly, that's because the smallest lineages end up having at least multiple males each so are less likely to die out.

The figures for the 3 digit generations seem a bit unbelievable to me but they do not in fact contradict the data we have, for example the result for 200 generations, which is about 5000 years shows that only 20 of the original 1000 men left direct ancestry to the 1000 modern men and that fits, especially when you include the fact that a 100-fold growth happened between then and now which could have allowed some small lineages to survive.

What do you think?

RobertCasey
10-30-2020, 02:54 PM
I am always interested in statistical models like the one you propose. But assuming your reproductive pattern is constant has many issues:

1) As Europeans shifted farmed based economies to industrial economies, the birth rates have fallen from eight children per generation to a little over two children per generation.
2) Choice of geography of our ancestors plays a major role. The Casey surname originated in Ireland around 1000 AD. But only 10 % of the Caseys now live in Ireland. In Ireland,
you had the massive crop failures of the 1740s (loss of 20 % of the population) followed by potato famines of the 1800s. Before that the English conquered Ireland and the native
population did not grow for some time. From a genetic point of view, 40 % of the Caseys today reside in the US and 20 % (FGC5647) are from one line that arrived in South Carolina
around 1750 (vs. the other 20 % that immigrated to the US during the potato famines). Of the 20 % that came during the potato famines - half (10 % of all), are related to one line
R-DC69.
3) Then you have during the surname time frame, huge variability due to local conflicts. Two large Casey clan was part of the Dal gCais clan which produced King Brian Boru. He
conquered the entire island of Ireland and made the Casey surname the 55th most common name in Ireland today. The O'Brien surname is the sixth most common name in Ireland today.
4) Then you have mass extinction type events. The black plague reduced the western European population by 25 %. There is strong evidence now that a more virulent earlier form
of the black plague (found in the archaic remains of a woman from Sweden) could have wipe out 98 % of the western Europeans and were replaced by the Russians who moved into
the newly available land (R1b and R1a spread).

The other issue is that people will imply other factors from this kind of analysis. This is the survivors of each particular line which does daughter out. But the surname tends to
survive if it reaches a critical number. With around 40,000 Casey men being part of my line from the 1750s, it is doubtful that this line will ever die out (and neither will the O'Brien
line which benefited from the advantages of winning wars at the expense of their former neighbors.

Granary
10-30-2020, 07:10 PM
I am always interested in statistical models like the one you propose. But assuming your reproductive pattern is constant has many issues:
Well I was assuming for the sake of isolating this variable, not sure why that's a thing you shouldn't do...


1) As Europeans shifted farmed based economies to industrial economies, the birth rates have fallen from eight children per generation to a little over two children per generation.
Ok but why does it matter when the context is how Y-DNA lineages would end up looking over multiple generations?


2) Choice of geography of our ancestors plays a major role. The Casey surname originated in Ireland around 1000 AD. But only 10 % of the Caseys now live in Ireland. In Ireland,
you had the massive crop failures of the 1740s (loss of 20 % of the population) followed by potato famines of the 1800s. Before that the English conquered Ireland and the native
population did not grow for some time. From a genetic point of view, 40 % of the Caseys today reside in the US and 20 % (FGC5647) are from one line that arrived in South Carolina
around 1750 (vs. the other 20 % that immigrated to the US during the potato famines). Of the 20 % that came during the potato famines - half (10 % of all), are related to one line
R-DC69.
Ok but how would this be simulated easily in a statistical format? It can't, not without abstracting or simplyifing the process to the point it's not even really resembling reality, so it's a moot point. This is something I planned to do, but again it wouldn't look like reality at all.


3) Then you have during the surname time frame, huge variability due to local conflicts. Two large Casey clan was part of the Dal gCais clan which produced King Brian Boru. He
conquered the entire island of Ireland and made the Casey surname the 55th most common name in Ireland today. The O'Brien surname is the sixth most common name in Ireland today.

The other issue is that people will imply other factors from this kind of analysis. This is the survivors of each particular line which does daughter out. But the surname tends to
survive if it reaches a critical number. With around 40,000 Casey men being part of my line from the 1750s, it is doubtful that this line will ever die out (and neither will the O'Brien
line which benefited from the advantages of winning wars at the expense of their former neighbors.
I was not simulating surnames, the model applies to surnames only insofar it's either a consistently patrilineal or matrilineal surname, even small exception would accumulate over time(exceptions would included orphans, a. Also the surnames should be ideally quite exclusive which is also something hard to come by for a lot of places, also obviously you also need all or most of the population to have surnames.

Also the critical number thin is something I did address and in any case it's not part of the scenario, because it's about seeing how much Y-DNA difference is lost just to this one factor even assuming maximum Y-DNA difference at generation 0.

4) Then you have mass extinction type events. The black plague reduced the western European population by 25 %. There is strong evidence now that a more virulent earlier form
of the black plague (found in the archaic remains of a woman from Sweden) could have wipe out 98 % of the western Europeans and were replaced by the Russians who moved into
the newly available land (R1b and R1a spread).

Ok? Again why is this relevant when I was trying to isolate one factor?

RobertCasey
10-31-2020, 03:44 PM
Any mathematical models is only as accurate as the assumptions. Your model will be good for very consistent numbers based on your assumptions. But the assumptions are very flawed and so will be the model. There are several valid models for genetic genealogy that are reliable:

1) TMRCA estimates older than 2500 YBP. These estimates are very accurate unless your part of the haplotree is very sparse.
2) YSNP prediction via YSTR signatures (uses Binary Logistic Regression model - under the right conditions, accuracy is 99 % accurate).
3) Charting with programs like SAPP are pretty accurate (only for predictable haplogroups in the 1500 to 2500 YBP time frame).
4) Surnames can be used as 1000 AD TMRCA estimates (for Irish surnames - 100 to 200 years later for English surnames).

Using these sound mathematical models, you can draw valid conclusions and remove all the statistical variation of your model. It is a lot more work, but
the accuracy will much better by an order of magnitude. However, your model does give some information that particular lines of descent do daughter out.
This is pretty common knowledge for anyone who has done a lot of family history research.

NPE (non paternal events) is another mathematical model that is very similar to your model. It uses around 1 or 2 % NPEs per generation depending on your
sources. During the surname time frame, your can conclude that any genetic cluster will generally have less than 50 % NPE lines (which is much larger
than what most people assume).

By far the most useful mathematical model that works very well (under the right conditions which is 80 % of the time) is YSNP prediction. This allows
you to collect relevant data which is a way to eliminate a lot of bad data and to add a lot of relevant data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AD1HHb0Cwfs&t=12s

Once you have valid data collected, charting (using SAPP or manually) will generate pretty accurate data. From
this data, you can produce some very useful conclusions such as the examples that gave above. These charts
show how wildly the variation exists. Here is a summary of charting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W4pw9yrNRU

I have used this YSNP prediction and charting methodology across 50 haplogroups under haplogroup R. These
models and tools provide a lot of information where you draw conclusions for your part of the tree of mankind.
Here is my chart of R-L226 (around 900 testers) - the link is to my Casey surname cluster:

http://www.rcasey.net/DNA/R_L226/Haplotrees/L226_Home.pdf#Page=50:

You method concludes that maximum number of male descendants sharing a common surname would
be quite small - but my surname cluster several order of magnitudes larger than your model. This line
moved to western South Carolina in the 1750s (or 1740s) and now around 20,000 males with the
surname of Casey (around 25 % of all Caseys descend from one man born around 1700. By 1800, there
were 100 males with the surname in this area of South Carolina - and they continued to have 8 to 10
children almost every generation.

Granary
11-01-2020, 08:08 AM
Using these sound mathematical models, you can draw valid conclusions and remove all the statistical variation of your model. It is a lot more work, but
the accuracy will much better by an order of magnitude.
Do you have concrete criticism? What exactly is bad about in trying to isolate this one factor?


However, your model does give some information that particular lines of descent do daughter out.
This is pretty common knowledge for anyone who has done a lot of family history research.
Like I said, it's about genetics not surnames.


NPE (non paternal events) is another mathematical model that is very similar to your model. It uses around 1 or 2 % NPEs per generation depending on your
sources. During the surname time frame, your can conclude that any genetic cluster will generally have less than 50 % NPE lines (which is much larger
than what most people assume).
It's irrelevant to what I was doing. It's about how much maximum Y-DNA diversity is lost in the most favourable conditions for it to be maintained, that is where all men have the same reproductive success.


You method concludes that maximum number of male descendants sharing a common surname would
be quite small - but my surname cluster several order of magnitudes larger than your model.
Again this is ONE factor, can you at least read what I did instead of mindlessly apply random criticism? I already said I was not factoring in population growth, variable reproductive success and that is NOT about surnames. If you keep repeating irrelevant point and throwing unconcrete remarks, it's not helping me.

RobertCasey
11-02-2020, 10:28 PM
Do you have concrete criticism? What exactly is bad about in trying to isolate this one factor?


First - the model has just too high error rates and will be misleading. Bad models do not promote progress.

Second - This is genetic "genealogy" with at least 90 % of the testers being genealogists.

Third - It will be a distraction from the more accurate models that are available should be used.

Fourth - You can analyze the statistics associated with family history books and get much more accurate conclusions.

This will be my last post - we must just agree to disagree.

Granary
11-03-2020, 10:21 PM
First - the model has just too high error rates and will be misleading. Bad models do not promote progress.

Second - This is genetic "genealogy" with at least 90 % of the testers being genealogists.

Third - It will be a distraction from the more accurate models that are available should be used.

Fourth - You can analyze the statistics associated with family history books and get much more accurate conclusions.

This will be my last post - we must just agree to disagree.
1. What error rates? And how is it misleading? Again no concrete criticism is made here.

2. What?

3. Like I repeatedly said, this is not a model of reality, it's an abstraction.

4. No I can't because in the real world you don't have the premise I had for my model.

ArmandoR1b
11-03-2020, 10:33 PM
For example E-M183 has a TMRCA of around 2700 BP, according to Y-Full. Despite that it is extremely widespread, but what are other examples of something similar, as in sub-clades that trace back to just the iron age despite being very prevalent?

E-M183 is a phylogenetic equivalent of E-M81 according to YFull. YFull shows that E-M81 has a TMRCA of 4700 ybp. Did you mean to write that E-M183 has a TMRCA of around 2700 BC which is close to the same as 4700 ybp?

See https://www.yfull.com/search-snp-in-tree/ and https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-M81/

E-M183 and E-M81 really aren't that young since the TMRCA is from the Bronze Age and and not the Iron Age.

Granary
11-03-2020, 10:38 PM
E-M183 is a phylogenetic equivalent of E-M81 according to YFull. YFull shows that E-M81 has a TMRCA of 4700 ybp. Did you mean to write that E-M183 has a TMRCA of around 2700 BC which is close to the same as 4700 ybp?

See https://www.yfull.com/search-snp-in-tree/ and https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-M81/

E-M183 and E-M81 really aren't that young since the TMRCA is from the Bronze Age and and not the Iron Age.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-16271-y

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_E-M215_(Y-DNA)
"E-M81 is the most common subclade of haplogroup E-L19/V257. It is concentrated in the Maghreb, and is dominated by its E-M183 subclade. E-M183 is believed to have originated in Northwest Africa and has an estimated age of 2284–2984 ybp.[39][40]"

ArmandoR1b
11-03-2020, 10:41 PM
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-16271-y

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_E-M215_(Y-DNA)
"E-M81 is the most common subclade of haplogroup E-L19/V257. It is concentrated in the Maghreb, and is dominated by its E-M183 subclade. E-M183 is believed to have originated in Northwest Africa and has an estimated age of 2284–2984 ybp.[39][40]"

So there was no reason for you to state that YFull has a TMRCA of 2700 BP for E-M183 when in reality that is not the case.

drobbah
11-03-2020, 10:45 PM
E-Y18629 (tmrca 2700 ybp) found in 70-80% of males in the Somali inhabited parts of the Horn.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4a/88/cd/4a88cde94e5466553f08ff03b512bdb4.jpg

Granary
11-03-2020, 10:50 PM
So there was no reason for you to state that YFull has a TMRCA of 2700 BP for E-M183 when in reality that is not the case.
E-M183 is distinct from E-M81 and has a TMRCA in the 1st millennium BCE. You were wrong in saying the 2 are the same.

Granary
11-03-2020, 10:52 PM
E-Y18629 (tmrca 2700 ybp) found in 70-80% of males in the Somali inhabited parts of the Horn.

Interesting, does it correlate with the dating of proto-Somali or some other more upstream node in the East Cushitic branch?

ArmandoR1b
11-03-2020, 10:55 PM
E-M183 is distinct from E-M81 and has a TMRCA in the 1st millennium BCE. You were wrong in saying the 2 are the same.

No, I am not wrong. It can be proven by going to https://www.yfull.com/search-snp-in-tree/ and searching for M183. Is that too hard for you to do? Besides I stated "E-M183 is a phylogenetic equivalent of E-M81 according to YFull." I never stated they are the "same" Do you not know the definition of phylogenetic equivalent?

Granary
11-03-2020, 11:04 PM
No, I am not wrong. It can be proven by going to https://www.yfull.com/search-snp-in-tree/ and searching for M183. Is that too hard for you to do? Besides I stated "E-M183 is a phylogenetic equivalent of E-M81 according to YFull." I never stated they are the "same" Do you not know the definition of phylogenetic equivalent?
I don't care about semantics here, the point remains that 99% of whatever you call that y-dna lineage has TMRCA of 2700 BP and not BCE and you are factually wrong in trying to imply otherwise. If you have problems go and talk to the people behind the study I linked, they call It M183 and I copy them, they distinguish M183 from M81(given M81* exists too) and so do I.

drobbah
11-03-2020, 11:09 PM
Interesting, does it correlate with the dating of proto-Somali or some other more upstream node in the East Cushitic branch?
Probably represents the founding lineage for the proto-Somali (Maxay tidhi speakers).I think upstream E-Z813 in general represents the Somali-Oromo branch of the lowland East Cushites.

40976

Granary
11-03-2020, 11:16 PM
Probably represents the founding lineage for the proto-Somali (Maxay tidhi speakers).I think upstream E-Z813 in general represents the Somali-Oromo branch of the lowland East Cushites.

40976

E-Z813 had already a TMRCA of 4300 BP, there is quite the distance between the Somali-specific TMRCA and the Somali-Oromo branch, I wonder what the implications of that are.

In any case what is general branch that is common to all Eastern Cushites or even all Cushites?

drobbah
11-04-2020, 12:05 AM
E-Z813 had already a TMRCA of 4300 BP, there is quite the distance between the Somali-specific TMRCA and the Somali-Oromo branch, I wonder what the implications of that are.
Well proto-South lowland East Cushitic is estimated to be around 5-6k years old.It makes sense that the proto-maxay (standard Somalis) sub branch of the proto-Somaloid group has a large tmrca gap with the oromo cluster.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7ikPfRGmoIs/T4Br428CuYI/AAAAAAAAAaU/nPyhkNmsL-Y/s1600/Cushitic+stratigraphy.jpg

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=40976&d=1603287327


In any case what is general branch that is common to all Eastern Cushites or even all Cushites?
Common shared haplogroup among us lowland east cushites (Somalis,Oromos) would be E-V32 (specifically E-Z813 ), E-V22 is found in high frequencies among the Saho & E-V6 is found in high frequencies in the Afars. E-V32 I think it's the only haplogroup that you can see among all existing Cushitic descendants in the Horn & Sudan/Egypt.E-FGC14383 branch of E-V32 is probably the Agaw/Habesha-Beja branch of E-V32 imo.The common ancestor of all these Cushitic & the Sahelian branch of E-V32 has a tmrca of 5200ybp (E-CTS2294).

maroco
11-04-2020, 12:06 AM
https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y15222/ TMRCA of 2600 years

Granary
11-04-2020, 12:26 AM
https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y15222/ TMRCA of 2600 years
How widespread is it?

ArmandoR1b
11-04-2020, 12:42 AM
I don't care about semantics here, the point remains that 99% of whatever you call that y-dna lineage has TMRCA of 2700 BP and not BCE and you are factually wrong in trying to imply otherwise. If you have problems go and talk to the people behind the study I linked, they call It M183 and I copy them, they distinguish M183 from M81(given M81* exists too) and so do I.

I am factually correct in the fact that YFull does not show M183 to have a TMRC of 2700 BP. You can go to YFull and see that for yourself. I am not using semantics for this. You are trying to change the subject instead of acknowledging your error.

Granary
11-04-2020, 12:48 AM
I am factually correct in the fact that YFull does not show M183 to have a TMRC of 2700 BP. You can go to YFull and see that for yourself. I am not using semantics for this. You are trying to change the subject instead of acknowledging your error.

There is no error, for some reason Y-Full fails to mention E-m183 under E-m81 while the study does, is the study incorrect? Does y-full have the final say?

ArmandoR1b
11-04-2020, 01:14 AM
There is no error, for some reason Y-Full fails to mention E-m183 under E-m81

You were the person that opened the post stating "E-M183 has a TMRCA of around 2700 BP, according to Y-Full" Now you are saying "Y-Full fails to mention E-m183 under E-m81" You are directly contradicting yourself with those two posts. You are in error with both statements.

YFull shows M183 within the the clade of M81. If you hover over where it says +128 SNPs at https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-M81/ and count 5 or 6 rows down (depending on your browser settings) you will see M183/PAGE33/PAGES00033

Please stop changing the subject away from what YFull shows for the TMRCA

Granary
11-04-2020, 01:33 AM
You were the person that opened the post stating "E-M183 has a TMRCA of around 2700 BP, according to Y-Full" Now you are saying "Y-Full fails to mention E-m183 under E-m81" You are directly contradicting yourself with those two posts. You are in error with both statements.

YFull shows M183 within the the clade of M81. If you hover over where it says +128 SNPs at https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-M81/ and count 5 or 6 rows down (depending on your browser settings) you will see M183/PAGE33/PAGES00033

Please stop changing the subject away from what YFull shows for the TMRCA
What Y-Full calls https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-CTS4236/ seems to be roughly what the study calls E-m183(same TMRCA and also represents most of E-m81), if you are here just to cherrypick and fix pointless distinctions in what other people say, you are not contributing anything useful. It's not my fault that multiple sources use contradicting nomenclature or inconsistent distinctions and me trying make sense of them doesn't fit your nitpicking attitude.

It's not up to me to connect the dots for you and this is not a legal case, use your brain and compare the sources and try to make sen tse of the distinction inhe nomenclature yourself instead of pestering me over nothing.