PDA

View Full Version : R1b U152 Updates/News



Pages : 1 [2]

MitchellSince1893
05-07-2016, 06:50 PM
Some stats from the FTDNA U152 project, 1000 genome project and Government of Netherlands data on U152...


Associated maps

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8d/26/d5/8d26d56d39f7c2187ae3b0a3370d0488.png

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/78/96/38/78963815b6d0c01f23af389ced2bbcaf.png

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/45/ce/40/45ce40b57e0b22a2f7190b2a31b763d8.png

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/22/bb/c2/22bbc212c150a710ef4c7561844a9e25.png

L2 and Z36 appear to be mirror images of each other. Also of note is how Poland differs from Germany on every map

Britain and low countries are similar as well as Italy and Spain.

While France is usually close to the middle/average. If you broke it down further Northern France would probably group with Britain and Southern France with Italy and Spain

Sinclar
05-22-2016, 10:30 AM
And where is the islands my ancestors come from? Shetland. :)

R.Rocca
05-22-2016, 11:22 AM
Associated maps

L2 and Z36 appear to be mirror images of each other. Also of note is how Poland differs from Germany on every map

Britain and low countries are similar as well as Italy and Spain.

While France is usually close to the middle/average. If you broke it down further Northern France would probably group with Britain and Southern France with Italy and Spain

Excellent visuals. Regionally, Italy also differs quite a bit. The north-east is much higher in L2 and the northwest in Z36. The center is very heavy with PF6658 and Z56. In Sardinia, PF6658 is more frequent than all other U152 combined by a lot. The Italy/Spain/S.France commonality is interesting as is the Isles/Low Countries commonality.

MitchellSince1893
05-22-2016, 03:23 PM
And where is the islands my ancestors come from? Shetland. :)

Grouped with Scotland...sorry but coloring all those tiny European islands was a pita so I just removed them :)
.

mbreedlove49
05-28-2016, 10:02 PM
I have been classed as R-U152 - Z56 - S47, hence Italo-Gaulish (FamilyTree) ... and am trying to probe the expanding knowledge base on these subclades. I already belong to the appropriate forums on FamilyTee.

My line (surname Breedlove) appears in Virginia ca 1708. The 'Old' geneologists (when they actually had to visit the courthouse) have established that 'all' Breedloves are related (some irregular birth or adoption exceptions) but they have all been stymied by 'the Pond'. FamilyTree matches show a small group of apparently related surnames that share a set of genetic marker values that seem to point to a common ancestor within historic time frames. These names include Newton, Hoskins, Johnson and Fraser. The later two do not seem to match well to their own name groups. All of us have rare marker values that separate us from the standard, slow-mutating U152 marker norms, specifically dys391=10, dys392=15, dys454=12 and dys455=10. There is also a mysterious Morris, who seems to test closest of all, but has a 'tough' privacy wall. Obviously, these surnames are from the British Isles. So, while we may test Italo-Gaulish, some of these 'boys' found their way up north. I have read David Faux's papers on the Cimbris and Angles that seem to show a U152 component, which may have transferred to England in the Angle-Saxon waves. Others have suggested movement via Roman legionaries. There appear to be some Breedlove references pre-1700 in England via Ancestry records, but few and far between. If we could match our unique markers to some individuals whose families never left the Old World, we might get a little farther.

Our progenitor shows up in Essex County, VA as a witness on a document in 1708. He SIGNS his name (educated - unusual outside the gentry of the day). He marries well ... a Parr, whose father left her a Manor Plantation, but never owned any land in his own name. Also unusual given marriage as a social class contract. One of the 'Old Ones' has a pet theory of Huguenot. Perhaps, but we have those genetic connections to 'other' English surnames.

Anyway, I'm extremely interested in this topic and any information or comments are appreciated.

Sinclar
05-28-2016, 11:50 PM
It use to be an old joke that Shetland always got left off the BBC weather forecast. :)

wombatofthenorth
06-10-2016, 07:03 AM
Interesting maps. My dad makes up two (since his two Geno tests transferred separately) of the "10 or less known samples" for Latvia! From what I'd seen before only one other person from Latvia reported R-L20!

The interesting thing is now that I just found out today that Geno 2.0 NG put us negative for BY2171 sub-branch (it had been confusing since the RAW data had appeared to have be positive, but it turns out that is a strand reversed position and the RAW from FTDNA is not corrected for all of strand reversed positions, so there is no way to know how to interpret some locations on your own without asking at this point until they slowly finish going through and changing all the RAW reports for the ones that need that) and between the results from the earlier Geno 2.0 (which actually tested some sub-branches the new one does not! although at the same time it didn't test the new BY2171) it seems we are negative for all the known major sub-branches of R-L20 (all the ones listed on the FTDNA Y-tree).

The question is, is that just nothing much and just an artifact that not enough R-L20 have tested anywhere yet or it is some clue that there is something unusual about our R-L20. We do know that R-L20 is found only very rarely in our main country of ancestry as already stated (and shown on the maps). So might this hint that R-L20 maybe could go way back in the Baltics and that there could be some unique, old, very rare branch there from way back when and it's not something that snuck in from some other region more recently? I thought I saw some rumors of thoughts that maybe R1b had been in some areas maybe way early on and before Indoeuropean arrival and not just N1 type stuff.

wombatofthenorth
06-10-2016, 07:04 AM
...........

Romilius
06-10-2016, 08:54 AM
Associated maps

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8d/26/d5/8d26d56d39f7c2187ae3b0a3370d0488.png

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/78/96/38/78963815b6d0c01f23af389ced2bbcaf.png

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/45/ce/40/45ce40b57e0b22a2f7190b2a31b763d8.png

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/22/bb/c2/22bbc212c150a710ef4c7561844a9e25.png

L2 and Z36 appear to be mirror images of each other. Also of note is how Poland differs from Germany on every map

Britain and low countries are similar as well as Italy and Spain.

While France is usually close to the middle/average. If you broke it down further Northern France would probably group with Britain and Southern France with Italy and Spain

Thanks for maps... but I need help: I'm daltonian...

wisconsinwalter
06-15-2016, 11:08 PM
I did a L2 pack on FTDNA and was classed Z49, I can't find much info. Is there some info I need to present for you gurus to help a bit?

Kit=135765. Yates is presumptive surname

MitchellSince1893
06-16-2016, 12:53 AM
There's supposed to be a Z49 pack coming out soon

Isidro
06-16-2016, 01:16 AM
Forgive my ignorance about U152, but isn't archaelogically connected to Urnfield settlements and the kind of Urnfield practices origins?. It is obvious that U152 is a fountain of expansion , but beyond that and apart of being Bell Beaker with limited analysis to a % of European expansion points we know cilch beyond speculation and good will, or shall we say questionable will?. Italian seems to be an expansion point but for some reason that is an issue worth talking about...

MitchellSince1893
10-04-2016, 11:47 AM
Update U152/S28 heat map from Maciamo at Eupedia.

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif


I have updated the R1b-S28 (U152) map based especially on the data from Valverde et al. (2016), and Lucotte et al (2015). The biggest changes are the higher levels in Galicia, Portugal, Andalusia and along the Mediterranean coast of France. This haplogroup looks increasingly associated with the Romans rather than the Celts/Gauls. I think it's not an either/or question. It is almost certain that Hallstatt and La Tène Celts carried U152, and so did the Romans and all Italic tribes. But the high incidence of U152 in southern France, eastern and southern Iberia can only be explained by the Roman colonisation.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26702-New-map-of-R1b-S28-(U152)/page7?p=490985&viewfull=1#post490985

I disagree with the bold above. There are many other possible explanations...most of them pre Roman. To me, from the late 3rd to the 1st millennium BC, multiple waves of people flowed from north of the Alps into Northern Italy and into southern France via the Rhone River Valley seem more likely.

Also I think the British pattern is a little off. Based on my own study of FTDNA project, Northwest England (not a hot spot on the map) and East Anglia (which is a hotspot on the map) are the two areas with the highest modern day percentages for U152. As I've said before, I presently think U152 in East Anglia is primarily an Iron Age influx, while along Hadrian's wall in Northern England, Roman auxiliaries from Gaul and present day Low Countries may have made a significant contribution to this historically sparsely populated area.

Kwheaton
10-04-2016, 01:05 PM
Hi Mitchell,

Of course I agree with you. Diaspora does not an origin make. Our little cluster of U152: FGC22501 has a pattern so far that Follows the West side of the Rhine. In England we find pockets up in NW England and in the area around Bristol England and across the channel in Wales.These may be associated with Roman or Iron age influx. Neither would mean they were Roman as they could easily be conscripts or as you say or auxiliaries.

anglesqueville
10-04-2016, 01:18 PM
One only has to look on the maps of the different clades of U152 on ftdna to understand that this "U152=Roman" is nothing but an italian masquerade.

MitchellSince1893
10-04-2016, 04:49 PM
One only has to look on the maps of the different clades of U152 on ftdna to understand that this "U152=Roman" is nothing but an italian masquerade.
Links to the L2, Z36, Z56 distribution maps and my thoughts that of the three, Z56 may be more Italic. However, all 3 have good representation in both Continental Celtic and Italic areas.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2842-Roman-DNA-Project&p=189342&viewfull=1#post189342

razyn
10-04-2016, 06:27 PM
There's also a new (or revised-after-three-years) Eupedia map for DF27, largely based on [new data from] the same two papers. Since that's a brother of U152 (below ZZ11), and neither originated where the present-day hotspot is on one of Maciamo's heat maps, I just mention it. If you want to compare the U152 map with that of your brother clade DF27, there is a link with very little discussion (so far) here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?827-Where-did-DF27-originate-and-when-and-how-did-it-expand&p=190601&viewfull=1#post190601

MitchellSince1893
10-04-2016, 09:54 PM
There's also a new (or revised-after-three-years) Eupedia map for DF27, largely based on [new data from] the same two papers. Since that's a brother of U152 (below ZZ11), and neither originated where the present-day hotspot is on one of Maciamo's heat maps, I just mention it. If you want to compare the U152 map with that of your brother clade DF27, there is a link with very little discussion (so far) here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?827-Where-did-DF27-originate-and-when-and-how-did-it-expand&p=190601&viewfull=1#post190601

Your post on the updated DF27 map was what spurred me to see if there was also an updated U152 map. I think he updated many other maps too.

MitchellSince1893
03-11-2017, 05:21 AM
EDIT: Just noticed I have some data that isn't showing up. Thus I have removed the maps.

Map of U152 in Europe I made; primarily taken from FTDNA U152 project map (red dots), other FTDNA projects (orange dots), and other studies e.g. 1000 genome project (yellow dots)



Maybe it's just a FTDNA testing bias, but there appears to be some clustering effect of the samples...especially along the Rhine River as well as some voids were there are few U152 samples. The scarcity of U152 in Wales is quite noticeable and to a lesser degree in Sussex and Hampshire.

While the void from North Central France may just be due to a general lack of samples from that region.

DillonResearcher
03-11-2017, 10:14 AM
Thanks for putting that together, when I made my L2 map I considered doing a U152 one but was put off by the size so well done! I did try and use the weighting figures you gave me to try and sort out the database bias for L2 but to do that you have to manually enter a weighting figure for every single tester and I'm quite bogged down with work at the moment so haven't had a chance to finish it.

If you like you could save that Google Earth layer as a .KMZ file and I'll put it into a heat map for you?

Il Papà
03-11-2017, 01:11 PM
Map of U152 in Europe I made; primarily taken from FTDNA U152 project map (red dots), other FTDNA projects (orange dots), and other studies e.g. 1000 genome project (yellow dots)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/82/7f/bc/827fbc00973352ccd634973e61b37eab.png



Maybe it's just a FTDNA testing bias, but there appears to be some clustering effect of the samples...especially along the Rhine River as well as some voids were there are few U152 samples. The scarcity of U152 in Wales is quite noticeable and to a lesser degree in Sussex and Hampshire.

While the void from North Central France may just be due to a general lack of samples from that region.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8b/ee/0b/8bee0b7375e402ec7997214d20fbd7cf.png

I don't appear on the map :'(. How's that ? I'm in the U152 project at Ftdna and I put the coordinates of my paternal line. But anyway Nice map ! :)

MitchellSince1893
03-11-2017, 02:45 PM
EDIT: Just noticed I have some data that isn't showing up. Thus I have removed the maps.

Map of U152 in Europe I made; primarily taken from FTDNA U152 project map (red dots), other FTDNA projects (orange dots), and other studies e.g. 1000 genome project (yellow dots)



Maybe it's just a FTDNA testing bias, but there appears to be some clustering effect of the samples...especially along the Rhine River as well as some voids were there are few U152 samples. The scarcity of U152 in Wales is quite noticeable and to a lesser degree in Sussex and Hampshire.

While the void from North Central France may just be due to a general lack of samples from that region.

Sorry guys, I just realized that I'm missing a lot of data so I took maps down. I only had U152 project L2 known points displayed along with the data I manually entered. When I get a chance I will post updated maps.

MitchellSince1893
03-11-2017, 02:48 PM
Thanks for putting that together, when I made my L2 map I considered doing a U152 one but was put off by the size so well done! I did try and use the weighting figures you gave me to try and sort out the database bias for L2 but to do that you have to manually enter a weighting figure for every single tester and I'm quite bogged down with work at the moment so haven't had a chance to finish it.

If you like you could save that Google Earth layer as a .KMZ file and I'll put it into a heat map for you?

I played with this but when I save it as a .kml file to look at it in excel, none of the manually entered data is showing up.

But here is link to U152 FTDNA data which can be saved as .kmz https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=11jPlVx9x6om_eoFPR7kHpq9-WCQ&ll=50.73586752274143%2C4.309092607777757&z=4

DillonResearcher
03-11-2017, 02:54 PM
I played with this but when I save it as a .kml file to look at it in excel, none of the manually entered data is showing up.

That may well be because the manually entered data is in a different folder in the left hand window of Google Earth. I suspect that the FTDNA data is in one folder and the manually entered data is in one file, if this is the case export both folders as separate .KMZ files and then I could convert both files to .CSV format and then merge them together. Rather long-winded!

MitchellSince1893
03-11-2017, 03:41 PM
That may well be because the manually entered data is in a different folder in the left hand window of Google Earth. I suspect that the FTDNA data is in one folder and the manually entered data is in one file, if this is the case export both folders as separate .KMZ files and then I could convert both files to .CSV format and then merge them together. Rather long-winded!

I need to experiment with this data a little for various reasons...including a way to do it smarter with less manual entries.

DillonResearcher
03-11-2017, 03:49 PM
I need to experiment with this data a little for various reasons...including a way to do it smarter with less manual entries.

Less manual work would definitely be an improvement, good luck!

ArmandoR1b
03-11-2017, 04:41 PM
EDIT: Just noticed I have some data that isn't showing up. Thus I have removed the maps.

Maybe it's just a FTDNA testing bias, but there appears to be some clustering effect of the samples...

While the void from North Central France may just be due to a general lack of samples from that region.

There is no question that there is a testing bias with the FTDNA data

When I calculate the average of U152 for France, Italy, Spain, and British Isles of the Busby et al. 2012 spreadsheet (http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/highwire/filestream/46176/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/rspb20111044supp2.xls) I get the following -

France 14%
Italy 18%
Spain 4%
British Isles 5%

As you can see U152 is low in the British Isles and only slightly higher than Spain. France is almost 3x the amount of British Isles and Italy is more than 3x the amount of the British Isles.

Now let's compare the total population of each of those with a Google search -

France 66.03 million
Italy 59.83 million
Spain 46.77 million
British Isles 67.5 million

Multiplying each population by it's rate of U152 we get the following -

France 9.24 million
Italy 10.76 million
Spain 1.87 million
British Isles 3.37 million

So even in that situation France is almost 3x the amount of British Isles and Italy is more than 3x the amount of the British Isles. The main change is the difference between British Isles and Spain but that isn't much compared to how much more U152 exists in Italy and France. Any map of U152 in Europe should reflect the numbers above.

MitchellSince1893
03-11-2017, 05:03 PM
There is no question that there is a testing bias with the FTDNA data

When I calculate the average of U152 for France, Italy, Spain, and British Isles of the Busby et al. 2012 spreadsheet (http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/highwire/filestream/46176/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/rspb20111044supp2.xls) I get the following -

France 14%
Italy 18%
Spain 4%
British Isles 5%

As you can see U152 is low in the British Isles and only slightly higher than Spain. France is almost 3x the amount of British Isles and Italy is more than 3x the amount of the British Isles.

Now let's compare the total population of each of those with a Google search -

France 66.03 million
Italy 59.83 million
Spain 46.77 million
British Isles 67.5 million

Multiplying each population by it's rate of U152 we get the following -

France 9.24 million
Italy 10.76 million
Spain 1.87 million
British Isles 3.37 million

So even in that situation France is almost 3x the amount of British Isles and Italy is more than 3x the amount of the British Isles. The main change is the difference between British Isles and Spain but that isn't much compared to how much more U152 exists in Italy and France. Any map of U152 in Europe should reflect the numbers above.

That's a given but my question is the clustering/voids of the samples a real world characteristic (e.g. they really do cluster in these areas or is it solely due to who has tested at ftdna) I don't currently have an answer.

DillonResearcher
03-11-2017, 06:51 PM
That's a given but my question is the clustering/voids of the samples a real world characteristic (e.g. they really do cluster in these areas or is it solely due to who has tested at ftdna) I don't currently have an answer.

Would it be useful perhaps to see if other subclades of P312 cluster at the same points? i.e. are clusters at these areas limited to just U152

MitchellSince1893
03-12-2017, 02:24 AM
I was unable to find a way to edit the points in excel and import them with the correct symbology. So, I did it the old fashion manual way.

BY3550 (purple dots)
A517 (Orange dots)
FGC43778 (Teal dots)
PF6658 (Blue dots)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/f5/ce/c9/f5cec9c7416e825bd017ac0b8e9b1192.png

Z56 (Green dots)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/be/4c/59/be4c59696fd09baf0ad33f8f1d13f0e1.png

ZZ45 (Yellow dots)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/45/76/12/457612dff296380597b0ab5330588cde.png

L2 (Red dots)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/9c/d7/3a/9cd73a510838a8c6d66de695dcddff28.png

U152-All (White dots are generic U152)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/02/88/dc/0288dc446c6773522f8976a0fc26d2e2.png

Zoomed into UK & Ireland
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/72/c0/40/72c040c4200397457e51fbe4cd122d9a.png

Zoomed into West Central Europe
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/59/5d/15/595d15d23ecb462d48fa93ec3bfe163d.png

MitchellSince1893
03-12-2017, 04:22 AM
A little historic trivia:

Although sort lived (843-855), the Kingdom of Middle Francia (aka the Kingdom of Lothar) would have contained many of the present day highest concentrations of U152 in Continental Europe (Rhine River areas of the Low Countries and Germany, Western Switzerland, Eastern France, and Northern Italy). See U152 maps on previous page for reference.

http://www.sevenparallel.com/Francia.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/Middle_Francia_843.svg/500px-Middle_Francia_843.svg.png

That and 50 cents will get you a senior coffee at McDonalds. :)

ArmandoR1b
03-12-2017, 06:05 AM
That's a given but my question is the clustering/voids of the samples a real world characteristic (e.g. they really do cluster in these areas or is it solely due to who has tested at ftdna) I don't currently have an answer.
It's definitely not a real world characteristic and that is why using FTDNA databases can be extremely misleading if misinterpreted and the academic papers need to be looked up as a reference for real world frequencies. There simply haven't been enough people with ancestry from France that have tested with FTDNA. The Busby spreadsheet I had given you a link to previously shows U152 to exist in every region in France that they tested and the lowest was Northwest France at 6.1%. The spreadsheet included the Lat-Long coordinates which is partly why I included the link to the spreadsheet.

Here is a screenshot of the data from France in Busby et al. (S28 is a synonym for U152)

14497

DillonResearcher
03-12-2017, 11:06 AM
It's definitely not a real world characteristic and that is why using FTDNA databases can be extremely misleading if misinterpreted and the academic papers need to be looked up as a reference for real world frequencies. There simply haven't been enough people with ancestry from France that have tested with FTDNA. The Busby spreadsheet I had given you a link to previously shows U152 to exist in every region in France that they tested and the lowest was Northwest France at 6.1%. The spreadsheet included the Lat-Long coordinates which is partly why I included the link to the spreadsheet.

Here is a screenshot of the data from France in Busby et al. (S28 is a synonym for U152)

14497

Could you give me a link to the data (if possible) from the Busby study? I found the paper online but couldn't see any of the data like the French extract you attached.

MitchellSince1893
03-12-2017, 06:39 PM
Could you give me a link to the data (if possible) from the Busby study? I found the paper online but couldn't see any of the data like the French extract you attached.

Click on this link http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/279/1730/884.figures-only

look at bottom for Busby table

rms2
03-12-2017, 06:45 PM
Could you give me a link to the data (if possible) from the Busby study? I found the paper online but couldn't see any of the data like the French extract you attached.

You can also look at this Busby map (https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1u3HiZaxS4POE_md3HsgncxZgkWY&ll=48.245191314807435%2C16.468200000000024&z=4) I made, which might be helpful.

Just click on the map pins for the stats.

MitchellSince1893
03-12-2017, 07:04 PM
Click on this link http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/279/1730/884.figures-only

look at bottom for Busby tableI've already found a mistake in that Busby spreadsheet. The North Albanian pt is south of his South Albania point. The source is Ferri et al. 2010. Maybe just transposed the coordinates

rms2
03-12-2017, 07:18 PM
I've already found a mistake in that Busby spreadsheet. The North Albanian pt is south of his South Albania point. The source is Ferri et al. 2010. Maybe just transposed the coordinates

Yeah. I just put the points on my map as the Busby spreadsheet has them listed. North Albania they have at 41.15333 north latitude, while they have South Albania listed as 41.33165 north latitude. Obviously the latter is north of the former, despite the names.

Besides, both of them are really in central Albania.

DillonResearcher
03-12-2017, 07:46 PM
You can also look at this Busby map (https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1u3HiZaxS4POE_md3HsgncxZgkWY&ll=48.245191314807435%2C16.468200000000024&z=4) I made, which might be helpful.

Just click on the map pins for the stats.

Thanks, that data is really interesting, particularly just how prevalent U152 is in Spain and it really demonstrates just how biased the FTDNA data is. On a personal note looking at the Irish data it makes me realise just how unusual U152 is in Ireland, let alone my own sub-clade of L2 which is pretty unusual.

rms2
03-12-2017, 07:52 PM
Thanks, that data is really interesting, particularly just how prevalent U152 is in Spain and it really demonstrates just how biased the FTDNA data is. On a personal note looking at the Irish data it makes me realise just how unusual U152 is in Ireland, let alone my own sub-clade of L2 which is pretty unusual.

Of course, Busby's big weakness is that it is a study of modern distribution, that and it left out DF27.

We used to get really excited about such studies back when they were all we had. Now they are real yawners. Give me ancient y-dna anytime.

DillonResearcher
03-12-2017, 07:56 PM
Yeah. I just put the points on my map as the Busby spreadsheet has them listed. North Albania they have at 41.15333 north latitude, while they have South Albania listed as 41.33165 north latitude. Obviously the latter is north of the former, despite the names.

Besides, both of them are really in central Albania.

This is the South Irish dataset, am I right in thinking that the 7.9% includes P312, L21 and U152 whereas the 1.1% is just U152?
N = 89
U106 = 3.4%
P312xL21,U152 = 7.9%
L21 = 74.2%
U152 = 1.1%

I think that I'm just being slow but just want to check.

rms2
03-12-2017, 08:09 PM
This is the South Irish dataset, am I right in thinking that the 7.9% includes P312, L21 and U152 whereas the 1.1% is just U152?
N = 89
U106 = 3.4%
P312xL21,U152 = 7.9%
L21 = 74.2%
U152 = 1.1%

I think that I'm just being slow but just want to check.

No, the little "x" there means "not". In other words, that is the P312+ stuff that was not L21 or U152.

MitchellSince1893
03-12-2017, 09:19 PM
Another issue is the Ukraine East UKR-E Myres et al 2011, point is 75 miles West of the Ukrainian border inside Slovakia near the Polish border.

And the Ukraine West UKR-W Myres et al 2011, point is to the east of the Ukrainian border in Russia.

Even if you move the UKR-W data to UKR-E, neither one is actually in the Ukraine.

Bashkirs South (Bashkortostan, Russia) SBA Myres et al 2011 point, is located in Tartarstan 55 miles west of Bahskortostan border.

DillonResearcher
03-12-2017, 09:20 PM
The percentage of U152 in the East of Ireland is considerably higher than that in the North, South and West. Perhaps this could be attributed to the Norman invasion of Ireland when Norman influence was concentrated in the East of Ireland around Dublin (the region known as "The Pale").

DillonResearcher
03-12-2017, 09:28 PM
The percentage of U152 in the East of Ireland is considerably higher than that in the North, South and West. Perhaps this could be attributed to the Norman invasion of Ireland when Norman influence was concentrated in the East of Ireland around Dublin (the region known as "The Pale").

Then again, I've just read that some Vikings established a settlement in Dublin a couple of hundred years prior to the Norman invasion (which the Normans and Irish seem to have taken over) which I suppose goes to show just how many different scenarios there are for a SNP migrating to an area.

MitchellSince1893
03-12-2017, 10:19 PM
The percentage of U152 in the East of Ireland is considerably higher than that in the North, South and West. Perhaps this could be attributed to the Norman invasion of Ireland when Norman influence was concentrated in the East of Ireland around Dublin (the region known as "The Pale").

Keep in mind that a lot of these are statistically pretty small sample sizes and just 1 extra/fewer U152 sample can make a significant difference in the percentage.

For example Myres got 1 sample (6.3%) U152 for West Ireland off 16 samples, Busby got 1 U152 sample (1.5%) off 67 samples. These two points are 25 miles apart. If you combine the two (83 samples of which 2 are U152) and pick a point in between, you would get 2.4% for Western Ireland.

In South Ireland Myres had 24 samples with 1 being U152 (4.2%), with Busby also getting 1 U152 sample (1.1%) out of 89 samples. These two points are about 40 miles apart. Combined they would be 113 samples of which 2 were U152 (1.8%).

In North Ireland Myres had 21 samples with 0 U152, with Busby getting 1 U152 out of 72 samples (1.4%)

Overall there were 476 samples in Ireland as a whole of which 11 were U152 (2.3%).

Although the Busby and Myres data don't agree, based on history, I would think Northern Ireland should have the highest percentage of U152 on the island, as the Scottish/English Borders have above average U152 percentages compared to average for Great Britain as a whole, and this area had significant immigration to Northern Ireland.

ArmandoR1b
10-02-2017, 02:48 PM
I don't want to create extra work for you but if you already have it available could you post similar U152 numbers here?
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?36-R1b-U152-Updates-News/page30

Thanks

Sure. Just to clarify for readers in this thread the data is from YFull and the haplogroups included in the total kits are R1b, R1a, I1, I2, N, Q, E, G, J1, J2, C, and T.



Region
Total Kits
Total R1b
Total U152
% U152


Italy
378
126
58
15.34


France
73
37
10
13.70


Switzerland
33
8
4
12.12


U.K.
427
189
48
11.24


Czech R
37
9
4
10.81


Belgium
23
10
2
8.70


Netherlands
53
19
4
7.55


England
402
193
30
7.46


Spain
109
67
7
6.42


Latin America
245
98
13
5.31


Poland
220
31
9
4.09


Scotland
292
163
11
3.77


Germany
242
80
9
3.72


Ireland
345
239
11
3.19


Portugal
96
63
3
3.13


Denmark
32
10
1
3.13


Belarus
48
11
1
2.08


Sweden
580
106
7
1.21


Norway
196
32
2
1.02


Finland
469
31
4
0.85


Russia
306
16
1
0.33


Croatia
10
0
0
0


Hungary
25
2
0
0


Slovakia
22
2
0
0


Slovenia
3
0
0
0


Ukraine
85
16
0
0


Wales
23
14
0
0


Luxembourg
1
0
0
0

MitchellSince1893
10-02-2017, 02:52 PM
ArmandoR1b, Most helpful. Thank you

Pylsteen
10-02-2017, 07:23 PM
Interesting to see. Almost wanted to ask where was Switzerland, but I saw you added it.
Waiting for my Big Y.. I expected it today, but it says it is delayed now with two weeks... I know they had a rough time in Houston, so it's ok. That's one thing you learn with this, being patient :).

Radboud
10-02-2017, 07:54 PM
Interesting to see. Almost wanted to ask where was Switzerland, but I saw you added it.
Waiting for my Big Y.. I expected it today, but it says it is delayed now with two weeks... I know they had a rough time in Houston, so it's ok. That's one thing you learn with this, being patient :).

My Big Y results are also delayed today. :P

wombatofthenorth
10-30-2017, 08:34 PM
Sure. Just to clarify for readers in this thread the data is from YFull and the haplogroups included in the total kits are R1b, R1a, I1, I2, N, Q, E, G, J1, J2, C, and T.



Region
Total Kits
Total R1b
Total U152
% U152


Italy
378
126
58
15.34


France
73
37
10
13.70


Switzerland
33
8
4
12.12


U.K.
427
189
48
11.24


Czech R
37
9
4
10.81


Belgium
23
10
2
8.70


Netherlands
53
19
4
7.55


England
402
193
30
7.46


Spain
109
67
7
6.42


Latin America
245
98
13
5.31


Poland
220
31
9
4.09


Scotland
292
163
11
3.77


Germany
242
80
9
3.72


Ireland
345
239
11
3.19


Portugal
96
63
3
3.13


Denmark
32
10
1
3.13


Belarus
48
11
1
2.08


Sweden
580
106
7
1.21


Norway
196
32
2
1.02


Finland
469
31
4
0.85


Russia
306
16
1
0.33


Croatia
10
0
0
0


Hungary
25
2
0
0


Slovakia
22
2
0
0


Slovenia
3
0
0
0


Ukraine
85
16
0
0


Wales
23
14
0
0


Luxembourg
1
0
0
0






I know of some non-BigY U152 (R-L20 actually) results from Slovakia.

ArmandoR1b
10-31-2017, 02:15 AM
I know of some non-BigY U152 (R-L20 actually) results from Slovakia.

The report has it's limitations due to the source and wasn't meant to be used literally and it is why I included the kit count for each country. It should give a general idea of the countries with the largest percentage of U152. All of the countries with less than several hundred kits need a lot more for a more accurate percentage. I am hoping to one day see at least 500 kits per country for the smaller countries and a lot more for the more populated countries. We are several years away from that happening. All of the countries have non-BigY kits that are U152+ that aren't counted. It would be way too much work to find all kits, regardless of haplogroup, from each of those countries that have had SNP pack or individual SNP tests. The YFull customers provide the country of origin and since BigY tests allow us to know which R1b-M269 customers are U152+ and which definitely are not it is a simple way to get the frequency out of the haplogroups that I mentioned.

That said, if a country has almost two dozen kits in BigY but has 0% U152 there isn't a good chance that the country has a large percentage of U152. For instance Belgium has 23 kits but has two 152 which shows that it is likely to have a larger percentage of U152 when both Slovakia and Belgium have several hundred kits tested.

If you want to see what the rate for Slovakia is more likely to have there is a Slovakia FTDNA project has 108 people grouped. 4 are M269 that haven't had an SNP pack. Based on the other R1b people only about 28% of them are likely to be U152+ which is 1. Using that assumption the ratio of U152 3:108 is 2.77%. If we add the 5 ungrouped people and assume 1 of the M269 people is U152 then the ratio is 4:113 which is 3.5%.

The Busby et al. 2011 table (http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/highwire/filestream/46176/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/rspb20111044supp2.xls) has 276 kits from Slovakia that are from Myres e al. that were tested for P312, L21, and U152. Only 0.4% were positive for U152.

So the true percent probably isn't more than the 3.5% from the Slovakia FTDNA project and it is probably slightly less. It still doesn't put them into the top 10 results but does possibly put them on par with some of the other countries that also have a low percent of U152.

MitchellSince1893
12-05-2017, 05:38 AM
Some stats from the FTDNA U152 project.

Of the 1512 members with STR data (found in the classic and colored STR charts) that are assigned to a U152 subclade
78.37% (1185) are the L2 subclade
13.23% are (200) are in the ZZ45 subclade
6.75% (102) are in the PF6658 subclade
1.65% (25) are in other subclades

Within U152>L2: Of the 949 samples assigned to known or unknown subclades
44.89% (426) are Z41150 subclade
31.61% (300) are in the Z258,Z367,Z384 subclade
8.11% (77) are DF103 subclade
6.22% (59) are ZZ48
2.95% (28) are in DF110 subclade
2.11% (20) are in BY3508 subclade
4.11% (39) are in other subclades

Within U152>L2>Z41150: Of the 426 samples assigned to subclades
69.01% (294) are Z49

Within U152>L2>Z41150>Z49: Of the 244 samples assigned to Z49 subclades
70.49% (172) are in Z142 subclade
22.95% (56) are in rs200511657 subclade

It's interesting that there are more members in U152>L2>Z41150>Z49 (244) than there are in the 2nd largest U152 subclade, U152>ZZ45 (200). U152>L2>Z41150>Z49>Z142 may eventually become larger as well.
This may in part be due to the L2, Z49 and Z142 all being more common in the British Isles; and FTDNA has more testers from UK & Ireland and their descendants compared to areas where other U152 subclades are more prevalent. For example, compared to U152 as a whole, Z36 (largest subclade of ZZ45) and Z56 have below average percentages in the British Isles, while L2 is above the U152 average.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?36-R1b-U152-Updates-News&p=155764&viewfull=1#post155764

emmental
12-06-2017, 03:46 PM
[QUOTE=MitchellSince1893;320728]Some stats from the FTDNA U152 project.

Of the 1512 members with STR data (found in the classic and colored STR charts) that are assigned to a U152 subclade
78.37% (1185) are the L2 subclade
13.23% are (200) are in the ZZ45 subclade
6.75% (102) are in the PF6658 subclade
1.65% (25) are in other subclades

Where is Z56 in this summation?

MitchellSince1893
12-07-2017, 12:24 AM
Where is Z56 in this summation?

Corrected


Some stats from the FTDNA U152 project.

Of the 1678 members with STR data (found in the classic and colored STR charts) that are assigned to a U152 subclade
70.62% (1185) are the L2 subclade
11.92% are (200) are in the ZZ45 subclade
9.89% (166) are in the Z56 subclade
6.08% (102) are in the PF6658 subclade
1.49% (25) are in other subclades

Within U152>L2: Of the 949 samples assigned to known or unknown subclades
44.89% (426) are Z41150 subclade
31.61% (300) are in the Z258,Z367,Z384 subclade
8.11% (77) are DF103 subclade
6.22% (59) are ZZ48
2.95% (28) are in DF110 subclade
2.11% (20) are in BY3508 subclade
4.11% (39) are in other subclades

Within U152>L2>Z41150: Of the 426 samples assigned to subclades
69.01% (294) are Z49

Within U152>L2>Z41150>Z49: Of the 244 samples assigned to Z49 subclades
70.49% (172) are in Z142 subclade
22.95% (56) are in rs200511657 subclade

It's interesting that there are more members in U152>L2>Z41150>Z49 (244) than there are in the 2nd largest U152 subclade, U152>ZZ45 (200). U152>L2>Z41150>Z49>Z142 may eventually become larger as well.
This may in part be due to the L2, Z49 and Z142 all being more common in the British Isles; and FTDNA has more testers from UK & Ireland and their descendants compared to areas where other U152 subclades are more prevalent. For example, compared to U152 as a whole, Z36 (largest subclade of ZZ45) and Z56 have below average percentages in the British Isles, while L2 is above the U152 average.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthre...l=1#post155764

lgmayka
12-07-2017, 12:38 AM
22.95% (56) are in rs200511657 subclade
FTDNA doesn't recognize this subclade. Has FTDNA definitively rejected it, or has no one submitted it?

MitchellSince1893
12-07-2017, 12:42 AM
FTDNA doesn't recognize this subclade. Has FTDNA definitively rejected it, or has no one submitted it?

They don't use rs #s on their tree.

Just like they don't use R-Z40481, R-ZZ11

Here it is http://ybrowse.org/gb2/gbrowse/chrY/? Maybe it too close to the centromere? :noidea:

Petr
12-07-2017, 11:48 AM
I have discussed this topic here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9860-What-is-rs200511657

rs200511657 is definitely wrong name, according to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/SNP/snp_ref.cgi?rs=rs200511657 it is G to C mutation, while the mutation on the tree is indel 10186343 (hg38) GTCTC to G and according to new hg38 FTDNA VCF files it is 10186352 TCTCT to T.

From YSEQ I received the following comment:

ChrY:10186344 TCTC to del Centromeric repeat *
* = not recommended

AFAIK FTDNA does not work with new indels at present, they are missing from their Named/Unnamed variants display, but they are present in the VCF files. They are not the same as in the old hg19 VCF files.

MitchellSince1893
12-07-2017, 01:39 PM
I have discussed this topic here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9860-What-is-rs200511657

rs200511657 is definitely wrong name, according to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/SNP/snp_ref.cgi?rs=rs200511657 it is G to C mutation, while the mutation on the tree is indel 10186343 (hg38) GTCTC to G and according to new hg38 FTDNA VCF files it is 10186352 TCTCT to T.

From YSEQ I received the following comment:

ChrY:10186344 TCTC to del Centromeric repeat *
* = not recommended

AFAIK FTDNA does not work with new indels at present, they are missing from their Named/Unnamed variants display, but they are present in the VCF files. They are not the same as in the old hg19 VCF files.


Here it is http://ybrowse.org/gb2/gbrowse/chrY/? Maybe it too close to the centromere? :noidea:

Sounds similar to this situation

New subclades at the very top of the U106 tree
Michael Sager, who maintains FTDNA's haplotree has been monitoring the Big Y update process. He contacted the R-U106 admins about a SNP he had discovered (BY30097) during this update process. This SNP is located in the centromere area of the Y-chromosome, which is noted for having a lot of repeating patterns, and it is oftentimes very difficult to separate out the different segments.

Due to the additional clarity the new Build brought, the Big Y test has been able to separate the specific area where BY30097 is located from other similar regions. Even so, this SNP is only called sporadically in the new Big Y test results. Sager had to go in and visually inspect the BAM files in order to verify this SNP was indeed real.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?12769-New-subclades-at-the-very-top-of-the-U106-tree&p=321676#post321676

I will look at this tonight and contact Michael Sager.

lgmayka
12-07-2017, 03:55 PM
rs200511657 is definitely wrong name, according to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/SNP/snp_ref.cgi?rs=rs200511657 it is G to C mutation, while the mutation on the tree is indel 10186343 (hg38) GTCTC to G and according to new hg38 FTDNA VCF files it is 10186352 TCTCT to T.
This tree mutation is better described as an STR allele change, from 6 repetitions to 4.
Ancestral: GTCTCTCTCTCTC
Derived: GTCTCTCTC

Petr
12-07-2017, 07:46 PM
Is it good idea to place STRs on the Y Tree?

It looks like that Z40481 and Z38841 are STRs as well and ZZ11_1 is a bit mysterious: http://www.ytree.net/BlockInfo.php?blockID=2 (this area is not in FTDNA hg38 regions.bed)

And regarding indels, it looks like FTDNA does not plan to work with them, they wrote me:
As our indel variant data in the vcf file is not quality controlled (the only verified data is the Big Y SNPs) we do not offer support on data analysis.

MitchellSince1893
12-08-2017, 01:44 AM
Is it good idea to place STRs on the Y Tree?

IMO yes. They tell us more about the structure. Before Alex Williamson discovered Z40481, ZZ11 and Z38841 it wasn't known that U152 and DF27 were more closely related to each other than to L21.

It also tells us the minimum number of generations there has to be between P312 and U152 and DF27 in order to explain the existing structure.

If FTDNA doesn't want to include them that's their choice, but I'm glad Alex Williamson's ytree.net does show them.

To quote Alex Williamson

If we do believe the mutation exists and we can confidently place it on the tree then it should be on the tree even if not all the downstream branches are going to remain positive for it. I think those should be the only conditions.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6965-What-is-ZZ11-and-what-do-we-do-with-it&p=152384&viewfull=1#post152384

MitchellSince1893
12-16-2017, 08:16 PM
I would like to announce we have a new co-administrator in the FTDNA U152 project: Vincent van der Heijden. Besides general admin, Vincent will be our Z56 and Subclades specialist .

Welcome Vincent and thank you for volunteering your time to support the U152 project.

Romilius
01-14-2018, 04:12 PM
A question:

I noticed that in the Z36 subclades group in the U152 FTDna project all the A7993 people are now downgraded to A7992... why?

A friend of mine is in that group and I remember he was R-A7993 some weeks ago. Now he is R-A7992...

MitchellSince1893
01-14-2018, 04:50 PM
A question:

I noticed that in the Z36 subclades group in the U152 FTDna project all the A7993 people are now downgraded to A7992... why?

A friend of mine is in that group and I remember he was R-A7993 some weeks ago. Now he is R-A7992...

Are you saying that FTDNA changed their SNP name from A7993 to A7992, or that they have been moved from the A7993 group to the A7992 group within the project?

If the former, I have no idea (that's a FTDNA thing), if the latter then I can investigate.

Romilius
01-14-2018, 07:39 PM
Are you saying that FTDNA changed their SNP name from A7993 to A7992, or that they have been moved from the A7993 group to the A7992 group within the project?

If the former, I have no idea (that's a FTDNA thing), if the latter then I can investigate.

I think the first... but I'm not sure: the terminal SNP as it appeared before, isn't anymore A7993, but A7992. Or better, before it was marked as A7993, but now, even if they are all under A7992>A7993, they are listed as A7992.

MitchellSince1893
01-14-2018, 07:44 PM
I think the first... but I'm not sure: the terminal SNP as it appeared before, isn't anymore A7993, but A7992. Or better, before it was marked as A7993, but now, even if they are all under A7992>A7993, they are listed as A7992.

Ok that was changed by FTDNA. First I have heard of it. Your friend might want to contact FTDNA and open a request. https://www.familytreedna.com/contact

ViauMtl
01-14-2018, 08:33 PM
Hi there,

Live in Montreal. Haplogroup Z-34 with terminal SNP Y-20995* according to YFull. Hoping to learn more about upstream haplogroups and keep up to date with the latest findings. I'm a newbie so be gentle!

BY27761+, BY3070+, CTS10834+, CTS11985+, CTS12478+, CTS2664+, CTS3063+, CTS3358+, CTS3575+, CTS3654+, CTS4244+, CTS4368+, CTS623+, CTS9044+, F115+, F1209+, F1329+, F1704+, F1714+, F1753+, F1767+, F2048+, F2142+, F2155+, F2587+, F2688+, F2837+, F2985+, F3111+, F313+, F3136+, F3335+, F3556+, F3692+, F47+, F719+, F82+, L11+, L132+, L136+, L15+, L150+, L151+, L16+, L2+, L23+, L265+, L278+, L350+, L388+, L389+, L407+, L468+, L470+, L478+, L483+, L498+, L500+, L502+, L506+, L51+, L52+, L585+, L747+, L752+, L754+, L761+, L768+, L773+, L779+, L82+, M168+, M173+, M207+, M213+, M235+, M269+, M294+, M299+, M306+, M343+, M415+, M42+, M45+, M526+, M74+, M89+, M9+, M94+, P128+, P131+, P132+, P133+, P134+, P135+, P136+, P138+, P139+, P14+, P140+, P141+, P143+, P145+, P146+, P148+, P149+, P151+, P157+, P158+, P159+, P160+, P161+, P163+, P166+, P187+, P207+, P224+, P225+, P226+, P228+, P229+, P230+, P231+, P232+, P233+, P234+, P235+, P236+, P237+, P238+, P239+, P242+, P243+, P244+, P245+, P280+, P281+, P282+, P283+, P284+, P285+, P286+, P294+, P295+, P297+, P310+, P311+, P312+, P316+, PAGES00026+, PAGES00081+, PAGES00083+, PF2591+, PF2608+, PF2611+, PF2615+, PF2643+, PF2745+, PF2747+, PF2748+, PF2749+, PF2770+, PF3561+, PF5471+, PF5869+, PF5871+, PF5882+, PF5886+, PF5888+, PF5953+, PF5956+, PF5957+, PF5964+, PF5965+, PF5982+, PF6246+, PF6249+, PF6250+, PF6270+, PF6271+, PF6272+, PF6409+, PF6425+, PF6430+, PF6432+, PF6434+, PF6438+, PF6443+, PF6463+, PF6464+, PF6469+, PF6470+, PF6477+, PF6479+, PF6494+, PF6495+, PF6498+, PF6500+, PF6506+, PF6507+, PF6509+, PF6520+, PF6524+, s3+, U152+, V186+, V189+, V205+, V221+, V52+, V9+, YSC0000075+, YSC0000082+, YSC0000186+, YSC0000191+, YSC0000224+, YSC0000225+, YSC0000269+, YSC0000288+, Z21113+, Z259+, Z276+, Z29518+, Z34+

Kindest regards,

S.

MitchellSince1893
01-15-2018, 01:10 PM
Hi there,

Live in Montreal. Haplogroup Z-34 with terminal SNP Y-20995* according to YFull. Hoping to learn more about upstream haplogroups and keep up to date with the latest findings...
Hi and welcome.

If you haven’t done so:
1. Join the ftdna u152 project
2. Read the news section of the project Which will tell you the procedures for getting free analysis from ytree.net and Iain McDonald.

Anthrogenica is probably one of the best places to learn the latest on your haplogroup

MitchellSince1893
02-08-2018, 02:35 PM
The background page of the FTDNA U152 project now has a short history of U152's discovery section. https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-u152/about/background


For those interested:

History: U152/S28 came to the knowledge of the scientific community through the publication of the paper Whole-Genome Patterns of Common DNA Variations in Three Human Populations by David A. Hinds et al. in Science on 18 Feb 2005. The single positive subject in the Hinds paper was NA07349, or CEPH1345-01, a Utah Mormon from the Centre d'Etude du Polymorphism Humain (CEPH) collection, available at the Coriell Institute. Dr. Pui-Yan Kwok at the University of California, San Franscisco (UCSF) had discovered this SNP prior to its submission to Single Nucleotide Polymorphism database (dbSNP) on 18 May 2004. While the Hinds et al. manuscript doesn't mention the Y chromosome, analysis of the underlying data by Gareth Henson, a genetic genealogist in Wales, revealed a number of interesting new SNPs. In March 2005, Gareth shared his analysis with Dr Jim Wilson, President of EthnoAncestry. After some time exploring various SNPs, Dr. Wilson designed and ordered primers for S28 in late November 2005. The primer arrived on 7 Dec 2005. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed on 11 Dec, and Sanger sequencing on the 12th. The results revealed that Dr. David Faux (Partner of Dr. Wilson at EthnoAncestry) was positive for S28, while Dr. Wilson was negative. The following week EthnoAncestry discovered that customer, Charles Kerchner was also positive for S28. Kerchner had ordered his EthnoAncestry test on 30 Sep, received it on 8 Oct, and was notified of his results on 21 Dec 2005. By 3 February 2006, 5 people had tested positive for S28. It immediately became clear that S28 was a common R1b subgroup. While the SNP was universally known as "S28" in 2005 and 2006, the Sims et al. paper published on 8 December 2006, repeated EthnoAncestry's analysis and discovery using the name "U152", which was in turn used by FTDNA when they launched their SNP test; and thus many people began to use that name. (Sources: Dr. Jim Wilson, Dr David Faux & Charles Kerchner P.E. via emails to FTDNA project administrator, Mark Mitchell 6-7 Feb 2018)

Charles Kerchner P.E. (retired) launched this project with FamilyTreeDNA in 2008 to learn more about the SNP U152/S28. Both U152/S28 pioneers, Charles Kerchner and David Faux have retired from the daily management of their respective YSNP DNA projects in early 2011, and Charles Kerchner handed over the U152 Project on FTDNA servers to Tibor Fehér and Steve Gilbert. In September 2011, the project crossed the 500 member mark. In March 2014 it crossed the 1000 member mark and on 9 July 2017 the project crossed the 2000 member mark.

KloéValentina
10-04-2018, 10:40 PM
Woopsie daisies!

asquecco
10-06-2018, 08:50 AM
The background page of the FTDNA U152 project now has a short history of U152's discovery section. https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-u152/about/background


For those interested:

Very interesting, thanks. I tested S28+ with EA and my sample was EA1370.
I even found the envelope sent by Dr. Faux from EA with stamp 07/21/2006 on it. Later on, Dr. Wilson sent me an email saying I was the first Italian they found S28+.
Nice memories.
Adriano

rawnr
02-23-2019, 03:57 PM
Thank you!
I am R-P312+ R-U152+ R-L2+ R-FGC22501+ R-Y37744+ R-BY64614+ R-BY159214+

MitchellSince1893
07-18-2019, 03:12 PM
U152 samples in the Viking paper

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)&p=583324&viewfull=1#post583324

Webb
07-19-2019, 01:20 PM
U152 samples in the Viking paper

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)&p=583324&viewfull=1#post583324

These are the six that I found from the supplement. Please double check me, though.

VK40: U152>Z150

VK138: U152>Z142

VK177: U152

VK286: U152>L20

VK355: U152>L2

VK373: U152>L20

Kwheaton
07-19-2019, 01:35 PM
Thank you!
I am R-P312+ R-U152+ R-L2+ R-FGC22501+ R-Y37744+ R-BY64614+ R-BY159214+

Hi! If you haven't joined the L2-FGC22501 project please do so!
Kelly

MitchellSince1893
07-20-2019, 04:06 AM
These are the six that I found from the supplement. Please double check me, though.

VK40: U152>Z150

VK138: U152>Z142

VK177: U152

VK286: U152>L20

VK355: U152>L2

VK373: U152>L20

If 6 is correct then U152 made up ~2% of the Viking study samples (6 out of 276).

Looks like not much has changed in the last 1000 years as the present day Myres study had U152 at:
2% of Southeast Denmark
4.8% of North Denmark
2.2% of South Sweden

Present day Busby study had U152 at:
3.6% of Norway.

Of the 368 samples from Busby and Myres above, 11 were U152 which equals 2.99% today. Again not much different from the Viking Era.

Currently in the FTDNA database
Denmark: 581 total, 15 are U152: 2.58%
Norway: 1628 total, 23 are U152: 1.41%
Sweden: 3053 total, 54 are U152: 1.77%
Denmark/Norway/Sweden total: 92/5262 1.75% U152.

If you combine Myres, Busby and FTDNA numbers:
Denmark: 18 of 671 are U152 (2.68%)
Norway: 28 of 1766 are U152 (1.59%)
Sweden: 57 of 3192 are U152 (1.83%)
Denmark/Norway/Sweden grand total: 103 of 5629 samples are U152 (1.83%)

PS: 14 of 2672 samples in the FTDNA database for Finland are U152 (0.52%)

Kwheaton
07-20-2019, 02:07 PM
Thanks Mitchell! Do you mind if I share your post with my group of L2-FGC22501?

MitchellSince1893
07-20-2019, 05:59 PM
Share away. This is a public forum.

MitchellSince1893
08-04-2019, 04:25 PM
In case you weren't unaware, anthrogenica member, Richard Rocca maintains a map within ancient U152 samples
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=15zJwudMOPqf20VVXXNXkm4qydzTP3VW0&ll=48.96368074131006%2C12.704002117675827&z=4

Kwheaton
08-04-2019, 08:28 PM
Yes I love that map!

MitchellSince1893
08-05-2019, 07:49 PM
These are the six that I found from the supplement. Please double check me, though.

VK40: U152>Z150

VK138: U152>Z142

VK177: U152

VK286: U152>L20

VK355: U152>L2

VK373: U152>L20

R Rocca informed me that VK355 is haplogroup L2 found in Iran, rather than U152>L2 SNP.

So 5 samples are U152...1.8% of the total Viking samples

MitchellSince1893
09-06-2019, 09:33 PM
New y-dna study in the Netherlands has U152 info in it https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1217-P312-in-the-Netherlands&p=598205&viewfull=1#post598205

I created this map from the results from the study above and the old Brabant Study of Belgium and Luxembourg to create a U152 map of all 3 countries so that they all have the same color key.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/dc/f1/b2/dcf1b2f6a66d982aa95472172adb3f44.png

Depending on which source you use, U152 presently has the highest concentrations in the ancient tribal areas of the

Tungri (or Tongri, or Tungrians)
Julius Caesar...does not mention the Tungri, but does say that the Condrusi, the Eburones, the Caeroesi and the Paemani, living in the same approximate area as the later Tungri, were "called by the common name of Germans (Germani)" and had settled in Gaul already before the Cimbric wars, having come from Germany east of the Rhine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungri

Eburones
Gallic-Germanic tribe who lived in the northeast of Gaul, in what is now the southern Netherlands, eastern Belgium, and the German Rhineland, in the period immediately before this region was conquered by Rome. Though living in Gaul, they were also described as being both Belgae, and Germani
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eburones

Segni
one of a group of tribes listed by his local informants as the Germani of Belgian Gaul, along with the Eburones, Condrusi, Paemani (or Caemani), and Caeroesi (or Caeraesi)....location...was between the Eburones and the Treverii, somewhere in the region of the Ardennes....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segni_(tribe)

Condrusi
tribe living in Belgic Gaul when Julius Caesar's Roman forces entered the area in 57 BCE thought to have lived in the Condroz region in the north of the Ardennes,..Caesar reports that the Condrusi were under the protection of the Treveri along with the Eburones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condrus

Treveri or Treviri
Belgic tribe who inhabited the lower valley of the Moselle from around 150 BCE, if not earlier,[1] until their displacement by the Franks.[2] Their domain lay within the southern fringes of the Silva Arduenna (Ardennes Forest), a part of the vast Silva Carbonaria, in what are now Luxembourg, southeastern Belgium and western Germany;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treveri

Tomenable
09-07-2019, 09:30 PM
I8206 (sample from Empuries dated to 450-100 BCE, with R1b-U152>L2) was very similar autosomally to modern British and Irish people, as well as to Late Bronze Age Scottish samples. Moreover, he was also very similar autosomally to I6581 & I6580 (both with R1b-U152>L2) and other samples from Bronze Age Silesia. I ran I8206 against my regional pop. averages and top 12 regions are all Irish and British (mostly Non-English), then comes French Bretons, then English regions and Ulster. Then 23rd most similar modern population to I8206 are South-East English, 24th are Icelanders, and 25th are Danish people from Northern Jutland (former Cimbri settlement area).

Bronze Age Silesian samples (n=11) are most similar, as a collective (pop. average) to modern Irish, Orcadian, Welsh, and Bronze Age Scottish samples.

R.Rocca
09-08-2019, 01:03 PM
I8206 (sample from Empuries dated to 450-100 BCE, with R1b-U152>L2) was very similar autosomally to modern British and Irish people, as well as to Late Bronze Age Scottish samples. Moreover, he was also very similar autosomally to I6581 & I6580 (both with R1b-U152>L2) and other samples from Bronze Age Silesia. I ran I8206 against my regional pop. averages and top 12 regions are all Irish and British (mostly Non-English), then comes French Bretons, then English regions and Ulster. Then 23rd most similar modern population to I8206 are South-East English, 24th are Icelanders, and 25th are Danish people from Northern Jutland (former Cimbri settlement area).

Bronze Age Silesian samples (n=11) are most similar, as a collective (pop. average) to modern Irish, Orcadian, Welsh, and Bronze Age Scottish samples.

Thank you for the analysis. However, it is I8209 that is R-L2.

MitchellSince1893
10-27-2019, 07:29 PM
Out of frustration of my inability to make any progress on my mystery man; here is some U152 trivia

1. Liechtenstein has the highest percentage of U152 samples in the FTDNA database at 42.86% (3 out of 7 samples).
By the powers invested in me (none actually) I hereby declare Vaduz, Liechtenstein the Capital of U152.

2. Belize has the highest precentage of U152 in the Western Hemisphere at 25% (1 out of 4 samples).
I recently visited Belize and saw some Mayan temples (I'm pretty sure they were not built by U152 men :) )


Top 40 countries/territories/groups with at least 99 samples in the FTDNA database, and >1% U152 samples
1. Switzerland 14.05% U152 (191 of 1359 samples are U152)
2. France 10.71% (288 of 2689)
3. Italy 8.82% (252 of 2856)
4. Belgium 8.15% (30 of 368)
5. Puerto Rico 8.06% (10 of 124)
6. Austria 5.58% (28 of 502)
7. Germany 5.49% (421 of 7666)
8. Czech Rep. 4.95% (27 of 546)
9. England 4.62% (536 of 11596)
10. U.S. 4.23% (196 of 4635)
11. Netherlands 3.89% (40 of 1027)
12. United Kingdom 3.58% (153 of 4270)
13. Hungary 3.58% (30 of 858)
14. Slovenia 3.36% (4 of 119)
15. Brazil 2.94% (4 of 136)
16. Canada 2.93% (10 of 341)
17. Wales 2.80% (27 of 964)
18. Denmark 2.71% (16 of 591)
19. Spain 2.53% (54 of 2137)
20. Portugal 2.52% (20 of 793)
21. Latvia 2.50% (4 of 160)
22. Romania 2.39% (10 of 419)
23. N. Ireland 2.37% (22 of 929)
24. Scotland 2.26% (141 of 6239)
25. Serbia 2.19% (3 of 137)
26. Mexico 2.15% (16 of 745)
27. Poland 2.06% (57 of 2771)
28. Estonia 2.02% (2 of 99)
29. Sweden 1.85% (58 of 3136)
30. Ireland 1.84% (156 of 8462)
31. US Native American 1.82% (15 of 824)
32. Slovakia 1.80% (6 of 334)
33. Belarus 1.79% (11 of 615)
34. Algeria 1.55% (3 of 193)
35. Lithuania 1.48% (11 of 741)
36. Greece 1.40% (9 of 645)
37. Norway 1.39% (23 of 1658)
38. Lebanon 1.32% (5 of 379)
40. Ukraine 1.13% (15 of 1324)

NOTE: Luxembourg would be 2nd at 11.11% but only has 45 samples total (of which 5 are U152). This is not too different from the Brabant study that had Luxembourg at 14%. With a larger sample size they might even be closer to one another.

MitchellSince1893
10-27-2019, 07:53 PM
Associated Map

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0d/1b/6a/0d1b6acfb72577060c01335730323f62.png

Titane
10-31-2019, 11:50 AM
Out of frustration of my inability to make any progress on my mystery man; here is some U152 trivia

1. Liechtenstein has the highest percentage of U152 samples in the FTDNA database at 42.86% (3 out of 7 samples).
By the powers invested in me (none actually) I hereby declare Vaduz, Liechtenstein the Capital of U152.

2. Belize has the highest precentage of U152 in the Western Hemisphere at 25% (1 out of 4 samples).
I recently visited Belize and saw some Mayan temples (I'm pretty sure they were not built by U152 men :) )


Top 40 countries/territories/groups with at least 99 samples in the FTDNA database, and >1% U152 samples
1. Switzerland 14.05% U152 (191 of 1359 samples are U152)
2. France 10.71% (288 of 2689)
3. Italy 8.82% (252 of 2856)
4. Belgium 8.15% (30 of 368)
5. Puerto Rico 8.06% (10 of 124)
6. Austria 5.58% (28 of 502)
7. Germany 5.49% (421 of 7666)
8. Czech Rep. 4.95% (27 of 546)
9. England 4.62% (536 of 11596)
10. U.S. 4.23% (196 of 4635)
11. Netherlands 3.89% (40 of 1027)
12. United Kingdom 3.58% (153 of 4270)
13. Hungary 3.58% (30 of 858)
14. Slovenia 3.36% (4 of 119)
15. Brazil 2.94% (4 of 136)
16. Canada 2.93% (10 of 341)
17. Wales 2.80% (27 of 964)
18. Denmark 2.71% (16 of 591)
19. Spain 2.53% (54 of 2137)
20. Portugal 2.52% (20 of 793)
21. Latvia 2.50% (4 of 160)
22. Romania 2.39% (10 of 419)
23. N. Ireland 2.37% (22 of 929)
24. Scotland 2.26% (141 of 6239)
25. Serbia 2.19% (3 of 137)
26. Mexico 2.15% (16 of 745)
27. Poland 2.06% (57 of 2771)
28. Estonia 2.02% (2 of 99)
29. Sweden 1.85% (58 of 3136)
30. Ireland 1.84% (156 of 8462)
31. US Native American 1.82% (15 of 824)
32. Slovakia 1.80% (6 of 334)
33. Belarus 1.79% (11 of 615)
34. Algeria 1.55% (3 of 193)
35. Lithuania 1.48% (11 of 741)
36. Greece 1.40% (9 of 645)
37. Norway 1.39% (23 of 1658)
38. Lebanon 1.32% (5 of 379)
40. Ukraine 1.13% (15 of 1324)

NOTE: Luxembourg would be 2nd at 11.11% but only has 45 samples total (of which 5 are U152). This is not too different from the Brabant study that had Luxembourg at 14%. With a larger sample size they might even be closer to one another.
I’ve just arrived on the topic both my paternal lines (French Ancestry back to the 1600’s, Z193)and that of the father of my children (BY3961/CTS6389, Northern Italy current, exact location not proven before 1880) share the U152 label.

I was surprised, happy and discouraged at the same time looking at your map because it does not help me find out where in France my ancestors come from. In the list above, are the countries that of residence of current takers or the oldest known ancestors?

MitchellSince1893
10-31-2019, 12:54 PM
In the list above, are the countries that of residence of current takers or the oldest known ancestors?
It should be oldest known ancestors. Otherwise the United States numbers would outnumber everybody else.

MitchellSince1893
01-26-2020, 01:23 AM
New y-dna study in the Netherlands has U152 info in it https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1217-P312-in-the-Netherlands&p=598205&viewfull=1#post598205

I created this map from the results from the study above and the old Brabant Study of Belgium and Luxembourg to create a U152 map of all 3 countries so that they all have the same color key.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/dc/f1/b2/dcf1b2f6a66d982aa95472172adb3f44.png

Depending on which source you use, U152 presently has the highest concentrations in the ancient tribal areas of the...

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



Based on it geographic distribution and age, I have thought my own branch of U152, U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222>FGC12378>FGC12401, is possibly of Urnfield origin. I recently came across this in reference to the Eburnones

A further complication is that the population of the Eburones may have been made up of different components. As mentioned above, archaeological evidence implies continuity going back to Urnfield times, but with signs that militarized elites had moved in more than once, bringing forms of the Celtic-associated cultures known as Hallstatt and later La Tène. No clear archaeological evidence has been found to confirm Caesar's account that the Eburones came specifically from over the Rhine. However, these Celtic cultures were also present there, and in the period when Caesar supposes that they arrived, the peoples immediately over the Rhine were most likely not speakers of a Germanic language.

Map of Eburnones. On the map above the highest concentration of U152 is in Liege...right in the center of the former Eburnones territory.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bc/Belgae_rivers.png

MitchellSince1893
01-26-2020, 04:45 AM
Caesar claimed that the name of the Eburones was wiped out after their failed revolt against his forces during the Gallic Wars. Whether any significant part of the population lived on in the area as Tungri, the tribal name found here later, is uncertain but considered likely....Caesar reports that he burnt every village and building that he could find in the territory of the Eburones, drove off all the cattle, and his men and beasts consumed all the corn that the weather of the autumnal season did not destroy. He left those who had hid themselves, if there were any, with the hope that they would all die of hunger in the winter. Caesar says that he wanted to annihilate the Eburones and their name, and indeed we hear no more of the Eburones. Their country was soon occupied by a Germanic tribe with a different name, the Tungri.

As I've mentioned before the Tungri made up a significant part of the Roman Auxiliaries in Britain...especially along Hadrian's Wall. I've postulated that they may in part explain the apparent higher than average concentration of U152 in this part of England.


By the mid-2nd century, there were about 70 auxiliary regiments in Britain, for a total of over 40,000 men. These outnumbered the 16,500 legionaries in Britain (three Roman legions) by 2.5 to 1.[2] This was the greatest concentration of auxilia in any single province of the Roman Empire.


The discovery in the 1970s, and continuing unveiling of, the Vindolanda Tablets offer a unique glimpse into the everyday lives of auxiliary soldiers stationed in northern England in the period 85-122, just before the construction of Hadrian's Wall. These documents (573 of which have been published to date), consist of letters and memoranda written on wooden tablets to and from the auxiliary soldiers garrisoning the fort of Vindolanda (Chesterholm). The documents mainly relate to the Cohors I Tungrorum, a regiment originating among the Tungri tribe of the Ardennes region (Belgium/France/Luxembourg).


The Tablets range from official unit reports and memoranda to the unit commander to personal correspondence. Of special interest are unit status reports (renuntiae). One such shows the milliary I Tungrorum as under-strength, with only 752 instead of the official 800 men on its rolls.


Frere et al., have stated that “less than 20% of diploma [retirement papers] recipients moved out of the province in which they had served upon retirement.”
It is evident from the wording of the Malpas diploma that many of the soldiers must have had wives and children, who stood to gain rights as citizens upon the soldiers’ retirement.
Collingwood RG, Frere S, Roxan MM, Tomlin R, Wright RP (1990) The Roman Inscriptions of Britain, Vol. II. Alan Sutton, Gloucester.[27]


The Antonine Wall was a Roman fortification made predominantly of timber and turf that stretched the neck of modern day Scotland, from the Firth to the Clyde.
Although its occupation was brief (142-164 and then briefly between 208 and 211), for a time this wall served as the farthest north, physical border of the Roman Empire.

To maintain this far-flung frontier, the Romans placed strong garrisons in regularly spaced out forts. These garrisons consisted almost-completely of auxiliary (non-Roman citizen) troops, hailing from regions as far away as Syria.


The First Cohort of Tungrians originated from what we call today Belgium and consisted of a force of some 1,000 infantry. It was also found on Hadrian’s Wall at Carrawburgh.

The Tungrians were also based at the Roman Forts of Cramond by the river Forth and Castlecary on the Antonine Wall. It was later based during the 3rd century onward at Housestead’s on Hadrian’s Wall

So most of the Tungri auxiliaries would have stayed in Britain...in a lot a cases close to where they served and had families i.e. southern Scotland/northern England.

Assuming an average of 900 Tungri men in Britain and 1/25th retire each year = 36 men of which 29 would remain in Britain each year over. Starting in 142 AD with Hadrian's Wall abandoned in 401 AD. That's 259 years x 29 men = around 7500 Tungri men + all their male descendants. A good portion were undoubtedly U152.

Hodo Scariti
01-26-2020, 03:34 PM
Very interesting, thanks Mitchell!

MitchellSince1893
04-14-2020, 10:18 PM
Updated feature on the FTDNA site under the Maps and Frequencies section: U152 and Subclades Frequencies by Tibor Fehér
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-u152/about/results

Direct link here
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MvXmT3gDc74XnWHL_p7sAH_i6x12brCz/view

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0a/82/09/0a8209f53ddb7f93bd171dead3cd9e3b.png

MitchellSince1893
04-14-2020, 11:15 PM
Z49 has an interesting pattern, Below 20% in the middle (Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium). Above 20% to the East (Austria, Hungary, Czechia, Poland) and West (Spain, France, England). Although 1000 years younger than Z49, Hallstaat had Eastern and Western Zones, which might have partially contributed to this current pattern.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Hallstatt_culture.png

Z49 was probably at the tale end of the Beaker period, so there's many possibilities for this pattern.

Osiris
04-14-2020, 11:43 PM
Hmm, looks like some countries we're really close in on a final percentage. Others not so much. If I did my spreadsheet correctly and within each country the sampling was random.

Country Stan Dev.
England 6.31%
Germany 7.58%
Italy 9.47%
France 9.61%
Scotland 12.16%
Ireland 12.45%
Switzerland 13.72%
Sweden 15.90%
Netherlands 20.89%
Spain 20.89%
Poland 21.39%
Russia 26.19%
Norway 27.18%
Portugal 27.18%
Hungary 28.29%
Czechia 28.29%
Belgium 28.29%
Austria 29.55%
Denmark 34.65%
Romania 43.83%
Bulgaria 56.58%
Slovakia 69.30%
Greece 69.30%
Turkey 69.30%

Edit for further thoughts. I did based on current population but that's not really true. Also maybe I should have halved the original population because half don't have a Y chromosome. Ha! Statistics was always what I thought was the hardest to grasp math.

Osiris
04-15-2020, 01:14 AM
Hmm, what's interesting is that it doesn't really make much of a difference whether your population is 10 million or 100 million, it's the # of testers that matter. Get 100 testers and you're under 10% standard deviation. Get 1000 testers and you're down to less than 5%.

G Livesey
04-15-2020, 10:56 PM
Just 3.92% in Switzerland for Z56. (2 of 51). A little surprising?

Dieu
04-21-2020, 01:44 PM
Just 3.92% in Switzerland for Z56. (2 of 51). A little surprising?

my Z56 subclade is full of swiss guys.

MitchellSince1893
05-23-2020, 09:28 PM
New y-dna study in the Netherlands has U152 info in it https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1217-P312-in-the-Netherlands&p=598205&viewfull=1#post598205

I created this map from the results from the study above and the old Brabant Study of Belgium and Luxembourg to create a U152 map of all 3 countries so that they all have the same color key.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/dc/f1/b2/dcf1b2f6a66d982aa95472172adb3f44.png

An older study from 2016 about Flanders
https://flemish.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/2016/01/22/in-the-name-of-the-french-father/


Genetic Analysis of Flemish Men

...Extensive genealogical and archival research permitted an accurate selection of suitable candidates to support the genetic work on the northern French migration to Flanders at the end of the 16th century. The selection consisted of 549 Flemish men possessing an authentic Flemish surname and 50 with a French (Roman) surname. The oldest reported paternal ancestor in all the families with a French surname lived in present day Flanders, but the surname was not present in Flanders before 1575.

The Y chromosome for all 599 selected men was investigated. It is the human sex-determining chromosome and is transmitted from father to son – just like family names. After having been genotyped on the Y chromosome, the individuals were allocated to different evolutionary lineages (the so-called haplogroups). As a comparison, the haplogroup frequencies of approximately 160 Frenchmen with a French surname from two northern French regions (Nord-Pas-de-Calais and Île-de-France) have been included in the analysis.

Next, the haplogroup frequencies of the four different groups (Flemish surname, French surname, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, and Île-de-France) have been compared. A statistically significant difference exists between the Flemish men with an authentic Flemish surname and the Flemish men with a French surname. Also, there was a difference between the Flemish men with an authentic Flemish surname and the two groups of Northern Frenchmen (Figure 2). However, no significant difference exists between the Flemish men with a French surname and the two groups of Northern Frenchmen. From this, we were able to conclude that a migration that occurred more than four hundred years ago from Northern France to Flanders left traceable genetic marks on the Y chromosome in the current Flemish population.
Figure 2 above
http://flemish.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/files/2016/01/3.jpeg
AFS = authentic Flemish surnames, FRS = French/Roman surnames in Flanders

Dewsloth
05-24-2020, 12:04 AM
^^ Too bad they left it as P312*. I would have been interested to learn if there were any DF19s.

Pylsteen
05-31-2020, 07:21 AM
Some estimated frequencies using the FTDNA Haplotree
(more in this thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20488-Some-frequencies-in-West-Central-Europe&p=671386#post671386)).
I have the impression that the numbers for Italy are a bit low, but in the haplotree their amounts of G, E and J seem higher;
this is probably due to sample bias.

U152 subclades (extrapolated percentages of U152):



L2 Z36 Z56 Z193 U152*
England 74.7 7.2 11.2 5.0 1.9
Germany 68.3 19.9 6.8 3.1 1.8
France 78.1 7.8 10.0 1.9 2.2
Italy 53.9 21.3 18.7 5.7 0.4
Switz. 65.4 25.0 5.8 2.6 1.3
Spain 60.9 15.2 15.2 6.5 2.2
Benelux 70.1 7.5 13.4 6.0 3.0


Not a lot of surprises here, I think.

Subclades of U152 (extrapolated percentages of total):



L2 Z36 Z56 Z193 U152*
England 4.7 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.1
Germany 5.3 1.5 0.5 0.2 0.1
France 10.9 1.1 1.4 0.3 0.3
Italy 6.7 2.7 2.3 0.7 0.1
Switz. 12.1 4.6 1.1 0.5 0.2
Spain 2.4 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.1
Benelux 4.8 0.5 0.9 0.4 0.2

G Livesey
06-01-2020, 03:06 AM
Some estimated frequencies using the FTDNA Haplotree
(more in this thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20488-Some-frequencies-in-West-Central-Europe&p=671386#post671386)).
I have the impression that the numbers for Italy are a bit low, but in the haplotree their amounts of G, E and J seem higher;
this is probably due to sample bias.

U152 subclades (extrapolated percentages of U152):



L2 Z36 Z56 Z193 U152*
England 74.7 7.2 11.2 5.0 1.9
Germany 68.3 19.9 6.8 3.1 1.8
France 78.1 7.8 10.0 1.9 2.2
Italy 53.9 21.3 18.7 5.7 0.4
Switz. 65.4 25.0 5.8 2.6 1.3
Spain 60.9 15.2 15.2 6.5 2.2
Benelux 70.1 7.5 13.4 6.0 3.0


Not a lot of surprises here, I think.

Subclades of U152 (extrapolated percentages of total):



L2 Z36 Z56 Z193 U152*
England 4.7 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.1
Germany 5.3 1.5 0.5 0.2 0.1
France 10.9 1.1 1.4 0.3 0.3
Italy 6.7 2.7 2.3 0.7 0.1
Switz. 12.1 4.6 1.1 0.5 0.2
Spain 2.4 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.1
Benelux 4.8 0.5 0.9 0.4 0.2


The results for Z56 in Germany and Switzerland when compared to Z36 are interesting.

Unfortunately a lot of kits do not give their origin. A fair amount of these are from the USA and can be of British origin. These can be families of the same surname who have multiple kits. Maybe it's good that they don't name their origin because it could really create a sample bias :).

Pylsteen
06-01-2020, 08:03 AM
The results for Z56 in Germany and Switzerland when compared to Z36 are interesting.

Unfortunately a lot of kits do not give their origin. A fair amount of these are from the USA and can be of British origin. These can be families of the same surname who have multiple kits. Maybe it's good that they don't name their origin because it could really create a sample bias :).

Indeed; and if I remember well, many Italian Americans have a background in Southern Italy, and those with German ancestry often have ancestry from the Pfalz and surroundings.

Pylsteen
06-05-2020, 06:47 PM
I have made maps of Z36 and Z56 using information from FTDNA projects; except for Francalacci's study on Sardinia, no exact percentages are known (although Boattini lists xL2 percentages for Italy). Percentages were estimated based on the proportion of subclades relative to each other.

37904
37905

What do the maps tell us? I'm not an expert on Z36; perhaps a cumulation of intrusions from Switzerland into Italy since late Bell Beaker times, within Germany it might have to do with Hallstatt and La Tène; it seems conspicuously absent in France.

For Z56, I think of the following scenario: it must have originated during the Bell Beaker period, either north or south of the Alps. Different subclades then settled in different areas: I think of BY3538 and BY3544 near the Upper Rhine and Z145 and S47 perhaps near the Ligurian coast since the end of the Bell Beaker period. These last two might have been Ligurian-related (initially I saw Z145 as more Hallstatt related, but it doesn't look so anymore to me). At the end of the first millennium BC they would have been romanized and their spread would have been largely by Romans, although some spread by Ligurians into Gaul territory during the first millennium BC is possible too IMO.

Cascio
06-06-2020, 05:23 AM
I have made maps of Z36 and Z56 using information from FTDNA projects; except for Francalacci's study on Sardinia, no exact percentages are known (although Boattini lists xL2 percentages for Italy). Percentages were estimated based on the proportion of subclades relative to each other.

37904
37905

What do the maps tell us? I'm not an expert on Z36; perhaps a cumulation of intrusions from Switzerland into Italy since late Bell Beaker times, within Germany it might have to do with Hallstatt and La Tène; it seems conspicuously absent in France.

For Z56, I think of the following scenario: it must have originated during the Bell Beaker period, either north or south of the Alps. Different subclades then settled in different areas: I think of BY3538 and BY3544 near the Upper Rhine and Z145 and S47 perhaps near the Ligurian coast since the end of the Bell Beaker period. These last two might have been Ligurian-related (initially I saw Z145 as more Hallstatt related, but it doesn't look so anymore to me). At the end of the first millennium BC they would have been romanized and their spread would have been largely by Romans, although some spread by Ligurians into Gaul territory during the first millennium BC is possible too IMO.

Why do you think Z56 is "Ligurian-related" when it is most common in Tuscany, according to your map?

Pylsteen
06-06-2020, 07:06 AM
Why do you think Z56 is "Ligurian-related" when it is most common in Tuscany, according to your map?

Using Ligurian in the strict sense of the word is too narrow, although it would not surprise me if there was a dialect continuum between the Rhône and Tuscany during the early/mid-Bronze Age. An issue for me is, when and where did (Proto-)Italic speakers enter Italy? If we use the classical idea of a movement from the northeast with Proto-Villanovan during the 12th century BC, then they are not a very good fit for bringing Z56 with them, if indeed some subclades of Z56 were already present in Western Italy before that time and because of the lack of it in the north-east (although it could have been replaced later on). Within this narrative, most of Z56 would have been absorbed by Italic speakers (and Etruscans) during (Proto-)Villanovan times and would have spoken something else before that time. On the other hand, is the spread of Proto-Italic really settled? Although Proto-Villanovans may show some northern Balkan admixture, it seems not very abundant in the Praenestini Z145-man who is closer to current-day Southern France; I remain open to other possibilities.

asquecco
06-06-2020, 09:42 AM
Just to add some specific L2+ data coming from a different source than FTDNA, this is my tentative map of the present-day U152>L2>Z49>S8183>S20782 distribution based on 23andme results.
S20782's age should be quite old (somewhere between 2000 and 1000 BC, because it's part of YFull's R-Y17176 group)
This SNP seems mainly related to the North Adriatic area and, until now, I was not able to find any different big hot spot than this area.
So, if there is no a particular bias in the 23andme database or in my collection method, I think this SNP could even have been originated from this area.
Or it could be the result of a massive migration coming from somewhere else, but that left, at least in the starting point, some residual S20782 trace (similar to what you see for instance in the map along the Rhine valley).
But they are just my speculations.

37909

JoeyP37
06-06-2020, 12:58 PM
My stepfather is Italian-American and tested with 23andMe and got U152 before the update; he would have gotten a downstream subclade with the update, I'll have to ask him. His male line is southern Italy, Naples area. I can confirm Pylsteen's idea that most German-Americans are Pfalzers; my male line comes from Feilbingert in the northern Palatinate, although I am R1a. The first German settlers in America were Palatines who came to Pennsylvania, the famous Pennsylvania Dutch; Benjamin Franklin called them 'swarthy Palatines' because we have more Celtic blood than the Saxons, I am a proud Swarthy Palatine, though my swarthiness comes from a Sicilian-American great-grandfather.

Cascio
06-06-2020, 01:53 PM
Using Ligurian in the strict sense of the word is too narrow, although it would not surprise me if there was a dialect continuum between the Rhône and Tuscany during the early/mid-Bronze Age. An issue for me is, when and where did (Proto-)Italic speakers enter Italy? If we use the classical idea of a movement from the northeast with Proto-Villanovan during the 12th century BC, then they are not a very good fit for bringing Z56 with them, if indeed some subclades of Z56 were already present in Western Italy before that time and because of the lack of it in the north-east (although it could have been replaced later on). Within this narrative, most of Z56 would have been absorbed by Italic speakers (and Etruscans) during (Proto-)Villanovan times and would have spoken something else before that time. On the other hand, is the spread of Proto-Italic really settled? Although Proto-Villanovans may show some northern Balkan admixture, it seems not very abundant in the Praenestini Z145-man who is closer to current-day Southern France; I remain open to other possibilities.

Perhaps Z-56 was connected more with the Latin-Faliscan branch of "Italic"in west-central Italy while the Umbrian-Oscan branch of "Italic" was more L2.

MitchellSince1893
06-06-2020, 03:09 PM
I have made maps of Z36 and Z56 using information from FTDNA projects; except for Francalacci's study on Sardinia, no exact percentages are known (although Boattini lists xL2 percentages for Italy). Percentages were estimated based on the proportion of subclades relative to each other.

This may help you provide more detail/accuracy for Italy

http://r1b.org/?page_id=242

I discussed U152 subclades in Italy here

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?16487-The-Italian-Peninsula-through-Ancient-DNA&p=569868&viewfull=1#post569868

G Livesey
06-07-2020, 01:17 AM
I have made maps of Z36 and Z56 using information from FTDNA projects; except for Francalacci's study on Sardinia, no exact percentages are known (although Boattini lists xL2 percentages for Italy). Percentages were estimated based on the proportion of subclades relative to each other.

37904
37905

What do the maps tell us? I'm not an expert on Z36; perhaps a cumulation of intrusions from Switzerland into Italy since late Bell Beaker times, within Germany it might have to do with Hallstatt and La Tène; it seems conspicuously absent in France.

For Z56, I think of the following scenario: it must have originated during the Bell Beaker period, either north or south of the Alps. Different subclades then settled in different areas: I think of BY3538 and BY3544 near the Upper Rhine and Z145 and S47 perhaps near the Ligurian coast since the end of the Bell Beaker period. These last two might have been Ligurian-related (initially I saw Z145 as more Hallstatt related, but it doesn't look so anymore to me). At the end of the first millennium BC they would have been romanized and their spread would have been largely by Romans, although some spread by Ligurians into Gaul territory during the first millennium BC is possible too IMO.

Thanks for the map.

What we need is some aDNA. The 2 Praenestini samples (Z145) are the only 2 so far and finding them in the Latium area was maybe a surprise? I agree with the Ligurian coast as a likely point of origin, but recently I am thinking more in to Tuscany for some of the subbclades.

deputat
06-09-2020, 04:05 PM
yfull com/tree/R-CTS6389/ id:HGDP01166 new .
AncientDNA?

------
ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=5281&star=false

Pylsteen
06-10-2020, 03:58 PM
ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=5281&star=false

They are ancient; Praenestine R435 ca. 400 BC (Lazio, Italy); Medieval Roman sample R36 ca. 500 AD.

Pylsteen
06-10-2020, 04:16 PM
An issue for me is, when and where did (Proto-)Italic speakers enter Italy? If we use the classical idea of a movement from the northeast with Proto-Villanovan during the 12th century BC, then they are not a very good fit for bringing Z56 with them, if indeed some subclades of Z56 were already present in Western Italy before that time and because of the lack of it in the north-east (although it could have been replaced later on).

A Proto-Italic origin might work if this language was not brought by Proto-Villanova but developed within Italy and was brought as pre-Proto-Italic with Polada (ca. 2000 BC) as some suggest. This is an option I knew about, but I didn't give it much attention, until I saw that the few Italic samples we have do not all need a lot of Proto-Villanovan admixture, but can mostly do with Bell Beaker/Italy_CA mixture. With such a time frame, it is possible that they have brought (among others) the founders of Z56 branches Z145 and S47 with them, while leaving other branches such as BY3544 and BY3538 behind in the northern Alpine region. Perhaps they did replace a lot of Z193 in Italy (southwards and into Sardinia), while being replaced itself in the north by Z36 and L2 later on.

Nibelung
06-10-2020, 05:30 PM
If BY3544 wasn’t Roman then its distribution couldn’t be explained as other than that of an aggressive La Tene or Hallstatt family with a habit of roaming northeast.

Pylsteen
06-10-2020, 07:55 PM
If BY3544 wasn’t Roman then its distribution couldn’t be explained as other than that of an aggressive La Tene or Hallstatt family with a habit of roaming northeast.

Could be from these cultures. Do you mean Prussia with the northeast? There were also a lot of medieval settlers from Western Germany.

Solothurn
07-29-2020, 12:13 PM
A 102/111 match has ordered the BigY700.
I have the BigY500 so be interesting to see what SNPs we share.

G Livesey
07-29-2020, 11:45 PM
A 102/111 match has ordered the BigY700.
I have the BigY500 so be interesting to see what SNPs we share.

If you can, you should upgrade to Big Y-700. Usually the Y-700 will give more variants than Y-500 and you may match to some of those.

MitchellSince1893
09-19-2020, 01:53 PM
Update on 3 of the 5 U152 Viking samples mentioned in post 331 of this thread

Sample: VK40 / Sweden_Skara 106
Location: Varnhem, Skara, Sweden
Age: Viking 10-12th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-BY1701 (U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z150,Z12222,>FT38430>BY1701>BY166438)
FTDNA Comment: Shares 10 SNPs with a man with unknown origins (American) downstream of R-BY1701. New branch R-BY166438
mtDNA: T1a1

Sample: VK138 / Denmark_Galgedil AQQ
Location: Galgedil, Funen, Denmark
Age: Viking 9-11th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-S1491 (U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z51>L562>Z57>S1491)
mtDNA: T2b5

Sample: VK177 / UK_Oxford_#21
Location: St_John’s_College_Oxford, Oxford, England, UK
Age: Viking 880-1000 CE
Y-DNA: R-BY220332 (U152>BY3549>A520>BY220332>FT31867)
FTDNA Comment: Shares 3 SNPs with a man from Greece. Forms a new branch downstream of R-BY220332 (U152). New branch = R-FT31867
mtDNA: H82

https://dna-explained.com/2020/09/18/442-ancient-viking-skeletons-hold-dna-surprises-does-your-y-or-mitochondrial-dna-match-daily-updates-here/


Also via his own analysis R.Rocca believes that VK286 is: U152>L2>Z367/S255>L20>Z1909>Y6789>Y15106


Just waiting on any additional info on VK373: U152>L20

Chart that member Ajeje Brazorf posted/created
https://i.imgur.com/d4UcTVq.png

Main thread on this topic here
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)

MitchellSince1893
09-20-2020, 03:25 PM
Alex Williamson, owner of Bigtree.net has done his own analysis and there are a couple more U152 samples to add to the above 5.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)&p=701624&viewfull=1#post701624

Sample Coverage FTDNA Williamson's Current Analysis
VK40 1.874 R-BY1701 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>Z49>Z142/S211>Z150>BY1701
VK138 0.39 R-S1491 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>Z49>Z142/S211
VK177 1.06 R-BY220332 U152
VK273 1.092 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>BY4245>BY61747
VK286 0.809 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z367/S255>L20/S144>Z1909>Y6789
VK373 1.088 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z367/S255>L20/S144
VK534 1.158 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>ZZ45>Z36/S206>Y17161>Y16889>A7992>~6111568-C-A>FGC71023

CillKenny
09-22-2020, 03:42 PM
Given the dating is good has anyone looked at years per SNP?

Hodo Scariti
09-23-2020, 03:56 PM
Alex Williamson, owner of Bigtree.net has done his own analysis and there are a couple more U152 samples to add to the above 5.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)&p=701624&viewfull=1#post701624

Sample Coverage FTDNA Williamson's Current Analysis
VK40 1.874 R-BY1701 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>Z49>Z142/S211>Z150>BY1701
VK138 0.39 R-S1491 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>Z49>Z142/S211
VK177 1.06 R-BY220332 U152
VK273 1.092 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>BY4245>BY61747
VK286 0.809 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z367/S255>L20/S144>Z1909>Y6789
VK373 1.088 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z367/S255>L20/S144
VK534 1.158 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>ZZ45>Z36/S206>Y17161>Y16889>A7992>~6111568-C-A>FGC71023

The sample VK534 is similar to Northern Italians? To Southern? To Normans? That's a bizarre finding: a very Northern italian subclade far south...

MitchellSince1893
09-23-2020, 11:17 PM
Alex Williamson, owner of Bigtree.net has done his own analysis and there are a couple more U152 samples to add to the above 5.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)&p=701624&viewfull=1#post701624

Sample Coverage FTDNA Williamson's Current Analysis
VK40 1.874 R-BY1701 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>Z49>Z142/S211>Z150>BY1701
VK138 0.39 R-S1491 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>Z49>Z142/S211
VK177 1.06 R-BY220332 U152
VK273 1.092 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z41150>BY4245>BY61747
VK286 0.809 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z367/S255>L20/S144>Z1909>Y6789
VK373 1.088 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>L2/S139>Z367/S255>L20/S144
VK534 1.158 R-M269>P312/S116>Z40481>ZZ11>U152/S28>ZZ45>Z36/S206>Y17161>Y16889>A7992>~6111568-C-A>FGC71023

All samples are now analyzed

Sample: VK40 / Sweden_Skara 106
Location: Varnhem, Skara, Sweden
Age: Viking 10-12th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-BY166438 (U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222>FT38430>BY1701>BY166438)
FTDNA Comment: Shares 10 SNPs with a man with unknown origins (American) downstream of R-BY1701. New branch R-BY166438
mtDNA: T1a1

Sample: VK138 / Denmark_Galgedil AQQ
Location: Galgedil, Funen, Denmark
Age: Viking 9-11th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-S1491 (U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z51>L562>Z57>S1491)
mtDNA: T2b5

Sample: VK177 / UK_Oxford_#21
Location: St_John’s_College_Oxford, Oxford, England, UK
Age: Viking 880-1000 CE
Y-DNA: R-FT31867 (U152>BY3549>A520>BY220332>FT31867)
FTDNA Comment: Shares 3 SNPs with a man from Greece. Forms a new branch downstream of R-BY220332 (U152). New branch = R-FT31867

Sample: VK273 / Russia_Gnezdovo 77-255
Location: Gnezdovo, Russia
Age: Viking 10-11th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-BY61747 (U152>L2>BY61747)
mtDNA: U5a2a1b1

Sample: VK286 / Denmark_Bogovej Grav BJ
Location: Bogøvej, Langeland, Denmark
Age: Viking 10th century CE
Y-DNA: R-S10708 (U152>L2>L258>Z367>L20>Z1909>S10708)
mtDNA: J1c-C16261T

Sample: VK373 / Denmark_Galgedil BER
Location: Galgedil, Funen, Denmark
Age: Viking 9-11th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-L20 (U152>L2>Z258>Z367>L20)
mtDNA: J2b1a

Sample: VK534 / Italy_Foggia-869
Location: San_Lorenzo, Foggia, Italy
Age: Medieval 11-13th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-FGC71023 (U152>Z36>BY1328>BY2151>FGC71023)
mtDNA: H1

https://dna-explained.com/2020/09/18/442-ancient-viking-skeletons-hold-dna-surprises-does-your-y-or-mitochondrial-dna-match-daily-updates-here/

Grossvater
09-24-2020, 12:13 AM
Sample: VK534 / Italy_Foggia-869
Location: San_Lorenzo, Foggia, Italy
Age: Medieval 11-13th centuries CE
Y-DNA: R-FGC71023 (U152>Z36>BY1328>BY2151>FGC71023)
mtDNA: H1



So is this the oldest currently known sample of Z36?

Hodo Scariti
09-24-2020, 01:52 PM
So is this the oldest currently known sample of Z36?

It seems so...

VK534 isn't a viking, as per admixture... so who was he?

Grossvater
09-24-2020, 03:07 PM
It seems so...

VK534 isn't a viking, as per admixture... so who was he?

Good question! Why were these medieval samples from the east coast of Italy included with Vikings?

Hodo Scariti
09-24-2020, 08:20 PM
Good question! Why were these medieval samples from the east coast of Italy included with Vikings?

The area around the cemetery with the church of S. Lawrence was inhabited by the Normans in the XII century.

Grossvater
09-25-2020, 04:35 AM
The area around the cemetery with the church of S. Lawrence was inhabited by the Normans in the XII century.

Interesting. It seems more likely to me that the remains belong to a native Italian perhaps from Lombardy than being from a Norman descended from ancient Northwestern European Celts, since Northern Italy is a hotbed for Z36. I'd sure like to know what his autosomal DNA says.

Hodo Scariti
09-25-2020, 01:28 PM
Interesting. It seems more likely to me that the remains belong to a native Italian perhaps from Lombardy than being from a Norman descended from ancient Northwestern European Celts, since Northern Italy is a hotbed for Z36. I'd sure like to know what his autosomal DNA says.

I don't know. The actual situation is that also the Normans who went to Southern Italy weren't full-blood vikings/scandinavians, because they were for many generations in the northern part of France and they mixed with local nobility. VK534 could also have been a Norman, for what we know...

MitchellSince1893
11-19-2020, 03:05 AM
~500 AD U152>L2>DF103>FGC4166 Longobard from Hungary

Sample: SZ27B
Location: Szólád, Somogy County, Hungary
Age: Longobard 6th Century 412-538 cal CE
Y-DNA: R-FGC4166
FTDNA Comment: Shares 1 SNP with a man from France. Forms a new branch down of R-FGC4166 (U152). New branch = R-FT190624
mtDNA: N1a1a1a1445 BC to 167 BC)

https://dna-explained.com/2020/10/16...HVp14q80qCKk5Y

Also being discussed here
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?22235-Langobard-study-has-S1194-U106-P312-migrating-from-Sth-Baltic-to-Italy-in-600AD&p=721101#post721101

MitchellSince1893
02-15-2021, 06:15 AM
The Y-chromosomal haplotype and haplogroup distribution of modern Switzerland still reflects the alpine divide as a geographical barrier for human migration

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872497320301186



R1b-U152 being the most frequent haplogroup among all Swiss subpopulations, reaching 26 % in average and 53 % in the Ticino sample

Ticino is the Italian speaking part of Switzerland and is across the border (50km) from the highest U152 percentage region in Italy (Bergamo). In the Boattini et al. (2013) study, nearby Brescia was 51.3% U152.

Central Switzerland was next at 29% U152
East Switzerland was 28%
West Switzerland was 24%
Bern area was 20%
NW Switzerland was 19%

U152 had the highest percentage of any haplogroup in every region.

U106 was 13% overall
M269 other was 16%
I1 10%
G 9%
E1b1b 7%
I2 and J2 were both 6%
R1a 4%

MitchellSince1893
05-16-2021, 04:58 PM
Update from R. Rocca on the recent ancient Italian dna paper


Another paper with important implications for U152 was published this week. It studied 22 Chalcolithic and Bronze Age samples from Northern and Central Italy. Predictably, none of the Chalcolithic samples contained R1b nor steppe-ancestry. However, steppe ancestry showed up in Bronze Age samples and the two males from north-east Italy were R1b:

BRC002 L2 > DF90 > FGC29428+ (1735 – 1516 cal BC)
BRC003 L2 > Z49 > Y4353/FGC20796+ S12993- (1532–1452 cal BC)

These two samples are from the area where the Veneti, an Italic speaking tribe with strong ties to Central Europe, would later appear. The appearance of DF90 is also interesting because it later appears in pre-Roman Republic Latini samples near Rome. Unlike the rest of the peninsula, the Veneti and the Latins both spoke Q-Italic languages. My own FGC10543 is most frequent in modern day Veneto province and was also found in a Latini sample from around Rome, so I fully expect it will eventually be found in Bronze Age NE Italy as well. The best autosomal fit for the Bronze Age Northern Italian samples is Germany Bell Beaker + Chalcolithic Italy (Remedello Culture etc.). We are probably seeing here the split between U152 Italo-Celtic speakers in Central Europe and the first Proto-Italic speakers south of the Alps with further language breakup occurring later in time between Q-Italic and P-Italic. Those staying to the north of the Alps would have continued developing into Proto-Celtic > Q-Celtic > P-Celtic.

MitchellSince1893
08-25-2021, 10:46 PM
Ancient U152 in the paper
Dynamic changes in genomic and social structures in third millennium BCE central Europe
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2021/08/23/7.35.eabi6941.DC1

16 U152 samples in this study in Bohemia in Bell Beaker and Únětice cultural setting.

Dates range from 3931 to 3485 years before present-ybp (1981 to 1535 BC)

G Livesey
08-25-2021, 11:02 PM
Ancient U152 in the paper
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2021/08/23/7.35.eabi6941.DC1

40 U152 samples in this study in Bohemia in Bell Beaker and Únětice cultural setting.

Dates range from 3931 to 3485 years before present-ybp (1981 to 1535 BC)

Are they all L2?

MitchellSince1893
08-25-2021, 11:56 PM
Are they all L2?

It appears so. 16 are listed as U152>L2, but 1 is listed as U152, L2/S139, DF1/L513/S215

G Livesey
08-26-2021, 01:12 AM
It appears so. 39 are listed as U152>L2, but 1 is listed as U152, L2/S139, DF1/L513/S215

That's a good number of ancient DNA samples. The number of L2 aDNA samples now must be mounting. Disappointingly though is the number of U152 aDNA samples that are not L2. How difficult is it to talk about the origins of U152 when we are so lacking in aDNA of U152 samples that are not L2?

MitchellSince1893
08-26-2021, 01:29 AM
Correction to my earlier post. Only 16 of the 40 U152 samples in the supplemental data were new to this study. The other 24 were from 2018 Olalde study.

These new samples are Bell Beaker in Bohemia
HOP003
KOP002
VLI024
VLI029
VLI030
KOP003
PRU004
HOP001
KO1004
KO1003

And these are Únětice in Bohemia
CHL005
KO1008
MIS001
MIS002
MIB001
MIB004



So now we have found U152 samples in:
Bell Beaker (probably over 40 samples now)
Únětice (6 from this study and IIRC 1 more from another study)
Tumulus (1 sample)
Hallstaat (1 sample)

Kwheaton
08-26-2021, 08:25 PM
Will Rich Rocca be adding these to the map he maintains? https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=15zJwudMOPqf20VVXXNXkm4qydzTP3VW0&ll=49.94185809129339%2C-1.228721881347628&z=4 I hope so!