PDA

View Full Version : Ancient R1b DNA from Spain



Pages : [1] 2

r_r_abril
02-12-2015, 03:42 PM
ANCIENT R1B DNA FROM SPAIN

Dr. Reich's paper shows that an R1b man, who lived in Neolithic Spain (c. 5100 BC), was buried in Els Trocs cave in Northern Aragon. His haplogroup was R1b1, and was ancestral to M269 (Western European R1b), M73 and V88, so, in principle, I could be a patrilineal descendant from him.

As far as I know, these are the oldest Ancient DNA R1b samples from Western Europe, and they predate in 2.000 years both Yamnaya and the Bell Beaker Culture. In my opinion, R1b was introduced in Spain by Neolithic settlers from the Middle East, and later in expanded to other parts of Western Europe in times of the Bell Beaker Culture.

The Yamnaya R1b DNA found by doctor Reich belongs overwhilmingly to R1b1a2a2 (Z2103), which is common in the Caucasus, but not in Atlantic Europe.

parasar
02-12-2015, 03:51 PM
ANCIENT R1B DNA FROM SPAIN

Dr. Reich's paper shows that an R1b man, who lived in Neolithic Spain (c. 5100 BC), was buried in Els Trocs cave in Northern Aragon. His haplogroup was R1b1, and was ancestral to M269 (Western European R1b), M73 and V88, so, in principle, I could be a patrilineal descendant from him.

As far as I know, these are the oldest Ancient DNA R1b samples from Western Europe, and they predate in 2.000 years both Yamnaya and the Bell Beaker Culture. In my opinion, R1b was introduced in Spain by Neolithic settlers from the Middle East, and later in expanded to other parts of Western Europe in times of the Bell Beaker Culture.

The Yamnaya R1b DNA found by doctor Reich belongs overwhilmingly to R1b1a2a2 (Z2103), which is common in the Caucasus, but not in Atlantic Europe.

Is V88- confirmed?

rms2
02-12-2015, 04:50 PM
It isn't at all likely that the El Trocs R1b1 is the ancestor of any Western Europeans, or not very many of them anyway.

There are a lot of SNPs between R1b1 and L11, and most Western European R1b is L11+. How likely is it that all those SNPs would arise independently in two widely separated locations, Spain and Russia? That is what would have to happen, though, for the El Trocs man to be the ancestor of modern Western Europeans, because we know M269 and L23 were already present in the Samara region by ~3300 BC.

No, the R1b1 from El Trocs is likely an outlier who somehow ended up in Spain during the Neolithic as part of an Epicardial group. He is not the ancestor of most Western European R1b's.

rms2
02-12-2015, 04:51 PM
Is V88- confirmed?

No. The El Trocs R1b1 wasn't tested for V88.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 05:38 PM
ANCIENT R1B DNA FROM SPAIN
As far as I know, these are the oldest Ancient DNA R1b samples from Western Europe, and they predate in 2.000 years both Yamnaya and the Bell Beaker Culture. In my opinion, R1b was introduced in Spain by Neolithic settlers from the Middle East, and later in expanded to other parts of Western Europe in times of the Bell Beaker Culture.

It is very unlikely that R1b1 was introduced to Europe by Neolithic Settler from the Middle East unless you mean they mediated the gene flow, untimately R1b1 was found in a Hunter Gatherer sample from Samara, Russia 500 years before the Spanish Neolithic dated to 5500 BC, which makes its status more likely to be one of the Hunter Gatherers that picked up farming.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 05:43 PM
There are a lot of SNPs between R1b1 and L11, and most Western European R1b is L11+. How likely is it that all those SNPs would arise independently in two widely separated locations, Spain and Russia? That is what would have to happen, though, for the El Trocs man to be the ancestor of modern Western Europeans, because we know M269 and L23 were already present in the Samara region by ~3300 BC.

The samples from Yamnaya that were 5 R1b-Z2103 and 1-R1b-P297 and 1 R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103), thus R1b-M269 was present as a in the sense that people who carry R1b-Z2103 had to carry R1b-M269 or the guy who carried R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103). Now this is no way and shape dictates that "all those SNPs would have arise independently in two widely separated locations", there is a >2000+ years time gap between Iberian R1b1 and Samara R1b1 and the Yamnaya people, to assume that the mutations should have arise in one place or the other is like assuming that R1b-L21 should have risen in either Iberia or British Isles because today they both have amounts of it, they could have risen in the middle, that my point.

Jean M
02-12-2015, 05:50 PM
No. The El Trocs R1b1 wasn't tested for V88.

Seems most likely that he was of that branch though. It spread into North Africa with the Neolithic. One Neolithic route into Iberia was via North Africa.

alan
02-12-2015, 06:31 PM
Firstly only a massive bit of denial would ignore the whole sequence of SNPs under P25 that are or must have been present in the Yamnaya samples but are absent in the upstream R1b Neolithic Spanish guy. Its absurdly counter-intuitive to ignore all those SNPs. Ludicrous really.

What the Spanish Neolithic guy shows is that Basal or certainly non-P297 derived men had made it to Iberia in at least low numbers by the early Neolithic. IMO there are two possibilities. Firstly it could be related to a spread towards the end of the Mesolithic by pointed based pot users of the Swifterbant-Ertebolle type tradition seen at Roucadour around the Garrone. If this was genuine diffusion by moving hunters then its not impossible. It could then get into an early farmers around SW France/Iberia in low numbers. However one strike against this is that this guy, I understand, didnt carry ANE which is something I would associate as likely linked to both the pressure microblade groups and the spread of pointed based pottery. That would raise the alternative that it is related to the non-P297 P25 and V88 branch of R1b which probably separated from the northern group way back in the Palaeolithic or at least the early Mesolithic. It tends to be found mostly in SW Asia today so it seem not beyond possibility that this wandering offshoot of the main branch in SW Asia could have ended up in early farmers in the Levant and into the Cardial culture.

However, although this is interesting this is not related to the whole P297-M269-L23 and onwards sequence which looks very very likely to have happened reasonably near to where all these R1b people have just been found. What this Spanish guy and similar people elsewhere is is the ancestor of some of low number of non-P297 R1b people in western Europe. The danger is that this gives false hope for the uniformed and delusional to waste more of their lives in seeing SW Europe as some very deep time origin for much R1b in Europe today. Its clearly not and anyone still arguing that is coming across very badly. Just to be clear - I dont think JeanL is at all in this group as he is well informed, I respect his deep knowledge and he knows the score- its the uninformed who dont understand the significance of the chains of SNPs being present or absent who will end up wasting their time and coming across as in denial. I wonder if Maju will go with the evidence and Occam's razor or churn out some alternative reality.

alan
02-12-2015, 06:44 PM
Seems most likely that he was of that branch though. It spread into North Africa with the Neolithic. One Neolithic route into Iberia was via North Africa.

It does make me wonder then if the basal P343/P25 in SW Asia is a remnant of the pressure microblade using people who seem to have entered places like the Zagrosc. 9500BC and to have slowly spread west though SW Asia to made it to some of the east Med. coasts around 6500BC or so - a late date when it was touch and go whether it would be carried west. Also if V88 then sprang up in that group early enough to be carried west in trace numbers with Cardial. That kind of model would retain the link of R1b -not exclusively of course- with pressure microblades. It also makes sense in that an arrival in SW Asia c. 9500BC is likely to have involved a branching off upstream of P297 based on date alone. Perhaps modest survival of those Zagros hunters in a slightly displaced form explains the Iran concentration of the basal forms of R1b. Maybe the basal R1a too.

rms2
02-12-2015, 06:51 PM
The samples from Yamnaya that were 5 R1b-Z2103 and 1-R1b-P297 and 1 R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103), thus R1b-M269 was present as a in the sense that people who carry R1b-Z2103 had to carry R1b-M269 or the guy who carried R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103). Now this is no way and shape dictates that "all those SNPs would have arise independently in two widely separated locations", there is a >2000+ years time gap between Iberian R1b1 and Samara R1b1 and the Yamnaya people, to assume that the mutations should have arise in one place or the other is like assuming that R1b-L21 should have risen in either Iberia or British Isles because today they both have amounts of it, they could have risen in the middle, that my point.

I know Alan already answered this, but my point was that the El Trocs R1b1 is not the ancestor of Western Europeans, nor is it likely that the SNPs between R1b1 and L23 arose midway between Spain and Russia. Samara, as you pointed out, produced an R1b1 Mesolithic hunter-gatherer, as well as men who were already derived for M269 and L23, and Samara is closer to the likely source of the original R than Spain is, since 24k year old Mal'ta Boy, who was R*, was recovered near Lake Baikal in Siberia, and Q and R1a are found at decent frequencies not from there either.

So, it is not at all likely that the El Trocs man produced a y line that independently produced all the SNPs leading to L11 at the same time they were arising in Russia.

I think more ancient y-dna testing will rout out some L51 in Yamnaya at least.

BTW, I was not claiming R1b originated somewhere very near or in the Samara region, just that it probably originated somewhere in North Eurasia or perhaps even the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

Piquerobi
02-12-2015, 07:00 PM
The Western European R1b-M269-L23+ is the same as that found at Yamnaya, just a step downstream different. Even more, their immediate ancestor M297+ was living in the same place as Yamnaya would develop, thousands of years before, and in the vicinity of the proposed Indo European homeland. Western Europeans could not logically develop M269+ and L23+ independently.

Particularly given that:

- ANE is missing in Mesolithic and Neolithic Europe (i.e it entered Europe coming from the steppes)
- The trail of the Kurgan like in Europe with many archaeological and anthropological similarities linking them back to the steppe up to Hungary (i.e it entered Europe coming from the steppes)
- IE languages (i.e they entered Europe coming from the steppes)

That's why on page 48 of the study the researchers said:


Thus, it appears that before ~4,500 years ago, the frequency of R1a and R1b in Europe outside Russia was very low, and it rose in the Late Neolithic/Bronze Age period. The young, star-like phylogenies of these two haplogroups24 also suggest relatively recent expansions. The ubiquity of these haplogroups in Russia, Siberia, and Central Asia suggest that their rise in Europe was likely to have been due to a migration from the east, although more work is needed to trace these migrations and also to correlate them with regions of the world that have not yet been studied with ancient DNA (such as southern Europe, the Caucasus, the Near East, Iran, and Central and South Asia). Nonetheless, the Y-chromosome results suggest the same east-to-west migration as our analysis of autosomal DNA.

rms2
02-12-2015, 07:02 PM
Seems most likely that he was of that branch though. It spread into North Africa with the Neolithic. One Neolithic route into Iberia was via North Africa.

I don't know why they did not test him for it, though. They tested him for V35 and V69 (I am working from memory on that), which are downstream from V88, and he was ancestral for them, but they did not test him for V88 itself.

I agree that he probably was V88+. Wish we knew for sure.

ADW_1981
02-12-2015, 07:10 PM
Has anyone compared the Sardinian lineages to those found in the Neolithic cultures of Germany and Spain? A lot of these branches seem to be dead or exceedingly rare - G2a2 and F/H2 for instance who keep turning up. It might give some credibility to V88 as Neolithic settlement if these Y chromosomes lines up. Something to note is that the common European G lineages like P303 and M406 have not been found yet.

rms2
02-12-2015, 07:15 PM
Firstly only a massive bit of denial would ignore the whole sequence of SNPs under P25 that are or must have been present in the Yamnaya samples but are absent in the upstream R1b Neolithic Spanish guy. Its absurdly counter-intuitive to ignore all those SNPs. Ludicrous really . . .

Exactly. Very well said.



. . . The danger is that this gives false hope for the uniformed and delusional to waste more of their lives in seeing SW Europe as some very deep time origin for much R1b in Europe today. Its clearly not and anyone still arguing that is coming across very badly . . .

The original post shows how the El Trocs R1b1 is likely to be interpreted.

A little thought would reveal that in order for the El Trocs R1b1 to be the ancestor of Western European R1b's, or even something like the ancestor of Western European R1b's, all those SNPs between R1b1 and L11 would have had to develop in two places independently, both in Spain and in Russia, or, if jeanL insists, both in Spain and somewhere west of Russia, because El Trocs did not have them himself.

ADW_1981
02-12-2015, 07:16 PM
I don't know why they did not test him for it, though. They tested him for V35 and V69 (I am working from memory on that), .

I'm not sure about V35, but I think V69 is African specific, so it doesn't surprise me that this one would be negative.

Il PapÓ
02-12-2015, 07:18 PM
Firstly only a massive bit of denial would ignore the whole sequence of SNPs under P25 that are or must have been present in the Yamnaya samples but are absent in the upstream R1b Neolithic Spanish guy. Its absurdly counter-intuitive to ignore all those SNPs. Ludicrous really.

What the Spanish Neolithic guy shows is that Basal or certainly non-P297 derived men had made it to Iberia in at least low numbers by the early Neolithic. IMO there are two possibilities. Firstly it could be related to a spread towards the end of the Mesolithic by pointed based pot users of the Swifterbant-Ertebolle type tradition seen at Roucadour around the Garrone. If this was genuine diffusion by moving hunters then its not impossible. It could then get into an early farmers around SW France/Iberia in low numbers. However one strike against this is that this guy, I understand, didnt carry ANE which is something I would associate as likely linked to both the pressure microblade groups and the spread of pointed based pottery. That would raise the alternative that it is related to the non-P297 P25 and V88 branch of R1b which probably separated from the northern group way back in the Palaeolithic or at least the early Mesolithic. It tends to be found mostly in SW Asia today so it seem not beyond possibility that this wandering offshoot of the main branch in SW Asia could have ended up in early farmers in the Levant and into the Cardial culture.

However, although this is interesting this is not related to the whole P297-M269-L23 and onwards sequence which looks very very likely to have happened reasonably near to where all these R1b people have just been found. What this Spanish guy and similar people elsewhere is is the ancestor of some of low number of non-P297 R1b people in western Europe. The danger is that this gives false hope for the uniformed and delusional to waste more of their lives in seeing SW Europe as some very deep time origin for much R1b in Europe today. Its clearly not and anyone still arguing that is coming across very badly. Just to be clear - I dont think JeanL is at all in this group as he is well informed, I respect his deep knowledge and he knows the score- its the uninformed who dont understand the significance of the chains of SNPs being present or absent who will end up wasting their time and coming across as in denial. I wonder if Maju will go with the evidence and Occam's razor or churn out some alternative reality.

I was going to say that,You beat me at the punch to.

Also, it's a good thing that this neolithic R1b has been discovered now.
Imagine if the result of this R1b remain would have been published like 3 or 2 years ago without the Yamna data.
Everybody who think R1b-L23 didn't spread indo-european language would have used this as an absolute proof.

What puzzle me a bit is the R* in Baalberge 5500 yo BP, that is like 1200 yo earlier than the Bell-Beaker remains.
It is only negative for R1a1a (M515) and R1b L151, according to members here could it be L23+ or is it like the one in Spain ?

Piquerobi
02-12-2015, 07:19 PM
Finding R1b-M269-L23+ and R1b-M269-L23* at Yamnaya, as well as R1b-P297+ in the same area, but much earlier, is proof enough of the West European R1b-M269-L23+ being traced back to the steppe. One should not expect necessarily the same clade to be found. People were few, and so are the samples. Being so closely related is already more than enough.

rms2
02-12-2015, 07:21 PM
I'm not sure about V35, but I think V69 is African specific, so it doesn't surprise me that this one would be negative.

It's strange that they did not test him for V88. It's kind of like the Quedlinburg Bell Beaker man who was P312+. They tested him for some loose odds and ends, but not for U152, DF27, or L21.

Go figure.

Jean M
02-12-2015, 07:34 PM
It does make me wonder then if the basal P343/P25 in SW Asia is a remnant of the pressure microblade using people who seem to have entered places like the Zagros c. 9500BC.

I think your theory continues to look good Alan, but that date seems rather earlier than those on the dated map which you located in your researches.

Il PapÓ
02-12-2015, 07:35 PM
It's strange that they did not test him for V88. It's kind of like the Quedlinburg Bell Beaker man who was P312+. They tested him for some loose odds and ends, but not for U152, DF27, or L21.

Go figure.
Maybe they wanted to but they failed,that's the only logical explanation I could find or that they didn't test for certain snps since there is some snps more subject to no-calls than other.

ADW_1981
02-12-2015, 07:36 PM
What puzzle me a bit is the R* in Baalberge 5500 yo BP, that is like 1200 yo earlier than the Bell-Beaker remains.
It is only negative for R1a1a (M515) and R1b L151, according to members here could it be L23+ or is it like the one in Spain ?

The author did state that they didn't get a good result, hence the R*. Due to the fact, R1a1 was found in mesolithic Karelia, and R1b1 in Neolithic Spain, I would expect this to fall into one of these categories.

Megalophias
02-12-2015, 07:46 PM
However, although this is interesting this is not related to the whole P297-M269-L23 and onwards sequence which looks very very likely to have happened reasonably near to where all these R1b people have just been found. What this Spanish guy and similar people elsewhere is is the ancestor of some of low number of non-P297 R1b people in western Europe.

Agreed. The trick is "reasonably near" could still be in Central or West Asia, since we have no (early) samples from these regions whatsoever, and we know that R1b (and ANE) existed outside the European steppe at this time. We don't actually know whether or not the Samara EHG R1b was ancestral to P297 either. Of course it's plausible that the Yamnaya R1b does descend from the local foragers, but I think a lot of people are putting unwarranted confidence in a sample size of n=1 (Samara) and n=0 (West and Central Asia).

I do not buy the argument that there can't have been ANE in West Asia because Neolithic Europeans don't have it, or conversely that Eurasian steppe people couldn't be related to West Asian people because they lack Basal Eurasian. The distribution of these components at the time is unknown, and the South Caspian/Caucasus region need not have closely resembled the Eastern Mediterranean genetically in the distant past.

It sounds like we will actually have samples from the relevant areas soon though, so we shouldn't be in suspense for long.

Humanist
02-12-2015, 07:47 PM
Has anyone compared the Sardinian lineages to those found in the Neolithic cultures of Germany and Spain? A lot of these branches seem to be dead or exceedingly rare - G2a2 and F/H2 for instance who keep turning up. It might give some credibility to V88 as Neolithic settlement if these Y chromosomes lines up. Something to note is that the common European G lineages like P303 and M406 have not been found yet.

Ray Banks said, a few years back, that, in his opinion, much of the G in Europe today was not exceedingly old. Perhaps, if I recall correctly, 3,000 years or so.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 07:55 PM
Finding R1b-M269-L23+ and R1b-M269-L23* at Yamnaya, as well as R1b-P297+ in the same area, but much earlier, is proof enough of the West European R1b-M269-L23+ being traced back to the steppe. One should not expect necessarily the same clade to be found. People were few, and so are the samples. Being so closely related is already more than enough.

The people who are R1b* are very good candidates for further testing, namely because saying Yamnaya had R1b-L23+ plus is a bit misleading because their R1b-L23+ is R1b-Z2103 which is a sibling clade to European R1b-L51+ derived clades. Now remember that a couple of years ago all this R1b-Z2105 folks looked like R1b-L23(xL51) which a lot of people called R1b-L23*. The point here being that R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103) found in Yamnaya might or might not be the real deal in terms of R1b-L23*, he might belong to an extinct branch of L23, or he might truly shared on of the ancestral haplotypes. Now it is very likely that this guy is a dead end branch and not truly ancestral to R1b-P312, namely because of the following:




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

Then we have the following:



I0806 (Bell_Beaker_LN) 2296 BC - 2206 BC
The individual was assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a1a2 based on mutation P312:22157311C→A.
Two Bell Beaker individuals from Kromsdorf, Germany were previously determined2 to belong to
haplogroup R1b.
The individual also has upstream mutations for R1 (P236:17782178C→G), R1b1
(L278:18914441C→T), R1b1a2 (F1794:14522828G→A), and R1b1a2a1 (L51:8502236G→A). Its
haplotype is ancestral for R1b1a2a1a2a1a1a (S1217:7193830C→G, Z262:16320197C→T),
R1b1a2a1a2c1a (DF49:22735599G→A), R1b1a2a1a2c1a1 (DF23:17774409G→A), R1b1a2a1a2c1f1
(L554:15022777A→G), R1b1a2a1a2c1f2 (S868:19033817T→C), R1b1a2a1a2c1i
(CTS6581:16992602T→C) and R1b1a2a1a2c1l1a1 (CTS2457.2:14313081C→T).

Now as the user VinceT was saying in this previous thread:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3816-P312-in-quot-Massive-migration-from-the-steppe-is-a-source-for-IE-languages-in-Europe-quot&p=68786&viewfull=1#post68786



there are about 18 SNPs between R-P312 and R-L23.

5 at R-L51:
- PF6535
- PF6414
- L51/M412/PF6536/S167
- CTS8595/YSC0001291
- CTS10373/FGC39/PF6537

13 [or 14] at R-L11:
- FGC796/Y101/Z8159
- PF6415
- PF5856
- PF6540/YSC0000082
- S26903 [unconfirmed]
- L52/PF6541
- L151/PF6542
- PF6543/S1159/YSC0000191
- CTS7650/FGC44/PF6544
- PF6538
- L11/PF6539/S127
- P311/PF6545/S128
- P310/PF6546/S129
- CTS10353/S1175/YSC0001249

Let's assume that although this person was negative for L51 he was already positive for:

- PF6535
- PF6414
- CTS8595/YSC0001291
- CTS10373/FGC39/PF6537

That still leaves a total of 14 or [15] mutations to get to R1b-P312 in Germany, assuming this guy only had R1b-P312 and wasn't derived for anything else. Taking the upper bound of the Yamnaya individual as 3300 BC and the lower bound of the Bell Beaker at ~2200 BC we have 1100 years, divided by 14 and you get upper bound <=78 years per mutation. It's possible but highly unlikely. Do I make myself clear??

Now for the R1b-P297(xL51) guy, this possibility is even worse, however one thing to keep in mind is that he can still be R1b-M73, R1b-L23 or even R1b-M269, as he wasn't tested for it, see here:



I0439 (Yamnaya) 3305 BC- 2925 BC
This individual could be assigned to haplogroup R1b1a (P297:18656508G→C), with upstream
haplogroup R1 (M173:15026424A→C, M306:22750583C→A) also supported. It was ancestral for
haplogroup R1b1a2a1 (L51:8502236G→A) and so could be designated R1b1a*(xR1b1a2a1).

This is the main reason why I say that both the guy from Spain(5178 cal BC to 5066 cal BC) R1b1(xR1b1a1,R1b1a2,R1b1c2, R1b1c3) or the Samara Hunter Gatherer (5650 cal BC to 5555 cal BC) R1b1(xR1b1a1,R1b1a2) have far more likelihood to be ancestral to modern day Europeans than these Yamnaya individuals tested, because using the upper bound date for the R1b-P312 Bell Beaker which is ~2300 BC you still have >2700 years for the Spanish guy to go from R1b1(xR1b1a1,R1b1a2,R1b1c2, R1b1c3) to R1b-P312 in Bell Beaker, or even better for the Samara Hunter Gatherer whose descendants would have >3250 years to accumulate the mutations. Now as I said before the key here is to investigate this basal forms deeply, because if Spanish guy is R1b-V88 then he cannot be ancestral to modern day Europeans carrying R1b-L11+ derived lineages, and same applies to Samara Hunter Gatherer, if he carries any mutations not found in the line of ancestry of R1b-L11 then he is not ancestral. Now don't get me wrong, I'm enormously excited about these findings and I cannot begin to thank the authors for the tremendous work that they have done, but as many of you have said, when one question is answered many more appear, so we go back to the fact that more data is needed.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 07:59 PM
Here is a movie clip showing a group of Hunter Gatherers from the Ural mountains hunting mammoths in the year 10,000 BC , in light of the recent discoveries this could have easily represented our ancestors.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJJDM675Ypw

PS: I know it's a movie and it's not always scientifically accurate, but is funny how they made the tribe's wise woman be a Neanderthal. It's likely inaccurate because by the year 10,000 BC there were no Neanderthal around anymore.

MJost
02-12-2015, 08:02 PM
Note:
Table S4.2: 'Y-Haplogroup assignments for 34 ancient European males' shows that
'I0411 0.11 F* Spain_EN_relative_of_I0410"

'I0411, 5177-5068 cal BCE (MAMS 16162) Spain M K1a2a, is ChrY: F* (P135: 21618856C→T)

I0410 Spain_EN Els_Trocs 5178-5066 calBCE Spain M pre-T2c1d2 R1b1

MJost

jeanL
02-12-2015, 08:06 PM
Note:
Table S4.2: 'Y-Haplogroup assignments for 34 ancient European males' shows that
'I0411 0.11 F* Spain_EN_relative_of_I0410"

'I0411, 5177-5068 cal BCE (MAMS 16162) Spain M K1a2a, is ChrY: F* (P135: 21618856C→T)

I0410 Spain_EN Els_Trocs 5178-5066 calBCE Spain M pre-T2c1d2 R1b1

MJost

Wouldn't this support that the R1b1 came from the North instead of the Mediterranean, since the F* his relative has, has only been found in Central European early Neolithic??

R.Rocca
02-12-2015, 08:07 PM
R1b-V88(xV69,v35) is also found in some North African groups, especially the Berbers.

rms2
02-12-2015, 08:10 PM
The bit about the El Trocs R1b1 having even the remotest possibility of being the ancestor of Western European R1b's doesn't make sense.

In Samara you have six out of seven Yamnaya men all derived for M269 and L23, the seventh who was P297, and a hunter-gatherer who was R1b1. Five of those Yamnaya men were Z2103, but Z2103 did not come from another planet; it is a brother clade to L51, which is, like Z2103, derived for M269 and L23.

At El Trocs you have one R1b1 guy in a Neolithic Epicardial group of I2's (working from memory here). If he is the ancestor of Western European R1b's, he would have had to establish a y line in which all those SNPs between R1b1 and L23 arose independently of those that arose between R1b1 and L23 in Samara or at least in the R1b source population of Samara, unless one wants to claim that the Yamnaya guys are also descended from the El Trocs R1b1.

That just makes absolutely no sense and gives the impression of someone scraping to rescue R1b priority for an Iberian homeland.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 08:13 PM
R1b-V88(xV69,v35) is also found in some North African groups, especially the Berbers.

Can you dig up some studies? Because from the top of my head I recall R1b(xM269) making an appearance in a 2 out 74 people from Valencia, and also in some Sardinians. I thought the Berbers that had R1b-V88 were the Tuaregs, whereas the North Africans Berbers had more R1b-M269 derived clades! BTW an interesting point is the presence of R1b-M269 in 3 out of 30 people from the Canary Islands, while each island has a specific migration history, which is known given their different mitochondrial profiles(i.e. Tenerife and Gran Canaria aborigines being mostly H derived types, whereas la Gomera Aborigines being mostly U6b1 derived types), it is known that they were settled in the year 1000 BC, or even earlier. Any ideas(Beaker, Phoenician, Romans?) as to how those R1b-M269 made it there??

jeanL
02-12-2015, 08:18 PM
The bit about the El Trocs R1b1 having even the remotest possibility of being the ancestor of Western European R1b's doesn't make sense.

In Samara you have six out of seven Yamnaya men all derived for M269 and L23, one who was P297, and a hunter-gatherer who was R1b1. Five of those Yamnaya men were Z2103, but Z2103 did not come from another planet; it is a brother clade to L51, which is, like Z2103, derived for M269 and L23.

At El Trocs you have one R1b1 guy in a Neolithic Epicardial group of I2's (working from memory here). If he is the ancestor of Western European R1b's, he would have had to establish a y line in which all those SNPs between R1b1 and L23 arose independently of those that arose between R1b1 and L23 in Samara or at least in the R1b source population of Samara.

That just makes absolutely no sense and gives the impression of someone scraping to rescue R1b priority for an Iberian homeland.

They don't have to arise independently if the Yamnaya people were to descend from the Iberian guy. Now once more, I'm not saying they do, I simply work out the probabilities in my previous post (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) as to why the Samara sample or the Neolithic Spanish sample are far more likely to be the ancestors of the R1b-P312 Bell Beaker guy than the tested Yamnaya remains. Now as I said before if any of them turn out to be R1b-V88 or something else that is not on the ancestral line leading to P312 then, sure their likelihood of being ancestral will drop down to 0. Please if you find anything wrong with my math let me know!

Anglecynn
02-12-2015, 08:23 PM
They don't have to arise independently if the Yamnaya people were to descend from the Iberian guy. Now once more, I'm not saying they do, I simply work out the probabilities in my previous post (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) as to why the Samara sample or the Neolithic Spanish sample are far more likely to be the ancestors of the R1b-P312 Bell Beaker guy than the tested Yamnaya remains. Now as I said before if any of them turn out to be R1b-V88 or something else that is not on the ancestral line leading to P312 then, sure their likelihood of being ancestral will drop down to 0. Please if you find anything wrong with my math let me know!

And that is the only way it could be the case really, but it is extremely far-fetched.

R.Rocca
02-12-2015, 08:45 PM
Can you dig up some studies? Because from the top of my head I recall R1b(xM269) making an appearance in a 2 out 74 people from Valencia, and also in some Sardinians. I thought the Berbers that had R1b-V88 were the Tuaregs, whereas the North Africans Berbers had more R1b-M269 derived clades! BTW an interesting point is the presence of R1b-M269 in 3 out of 30 people from the Canary Islands, while each island has a specific migration history, which is known given their different mitochondrial profiles(i.e. Tenerife and Gran Canaria aborigines being mostly H derived types, whereas la Gomera Aborigines being mostly U6b1 derived types), it is known that they were settled in the year 1000 BC, or even earlier. Any ideas(Beaker, Phoenician, Romans?) as to how those R1b-M269 made it there??

These two come to mind...
Bekada 2013: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0056775
Cruciani 2010: http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v18/n7/full/ejhg2009231a.html

Megalophias
02-12-2015, 09:01 PM
In the Bekada study, R1b-L51 clades were 3.6% in Morocco and 6% in Algeria, but absent in the rest of North Africa. R1b-V88 was 1% in Morocco, 3% in Algeria, 2% in Tunisia, 6% in Libya, 3% in Egypt, and 7% in Mauritania/Western Sahara. R1b-M269(xL23) was 3% in Egypt, 1% in Algeria, and 1% in Mauritania/Western Sahara.

R1b*(xM269, V88) was absent, as was R1b-L23(xL51). R2 was found only in Egypt at 0.5%.

In the city of Sousse in Tunisia (Fadhlaoui-Zid et al 2014), V88 was 1% and R(xR1b-M269, R1a-M198, R1b-V88) was 4%. No R1b-M269 in this one. No idea what the extra R was.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 09:24 PM
The Iberian is L278. L23 is in the East!!! Two populations do not undergo the same 11 snps from opposite sides of a continent, independently!! We are from the east. Case closed!!

MJost
02-12-2015, 09:29 PM
Wouldn't this support that the R1b1 came from the North instead of the Mediterranean, since the F* his relative has, has only been found in Central European early Neolithic??

Yep, the only found Neolithic Y chromosome hg F* is rather rare in modern-day Europe so it does appear to have been involved via a land route. Neolithic LBK?

I0411 Troc4 (related to I0410) has a MtDNA: "K1a2a"<<<<<<

◦K1a2: found in northern Europe and Iran (Qashqai)
◦K1a2a : found in north-western Europe
◦K1a2b : found around Germany
◦K1a2c : found in northern Europe

Notice that I0410 has a MtDNA HG: "pre-T2c1d2" part of the Neolithic LBK and probably from the Balkins/Anatolian
'Y-chromosomes from a Central European Linearbandkeramik site, Derenburg Meerenstieg II in Germany. T2 appear to have a higher affinity to Near East poplations

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000536

MJost

ADW_1981
02-12-2015, 09:41 PM
They don't have to arise independently if the Yamnaya people were to descend from the Iberian guy. Now once more, I'm not saying they do, I simply work out the probabilities in my previous post (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) as to why the Samara sample or the Neolithic Spanish sample are far more likely to be the ancestors of the R1b-P312 Bell Beaker guy than the tested Yamnaya remains. Now as I said before if any of them turn out to be R1b-V88 or something else that is not on the ancestral line leading to P312 then, sure their likelihood of being ancestral will drop down to 0. Please if you find anything wrong with my math let me know!

The one Z2103- sample was brutally killed in his teen years so I agree with you he most likely left no descendants...most likely. Why not just assume there were other L23* people in the Samara region who lived on to leave descendants? (one of whom led to L51) Isn't this the most likely scenario?

I believe Reich stated the archaeology doesn't support such a west to east migration from Spain to the steppes. I'm sure historians who frequent this forum would state the same thing.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 09:57 PM
The one Z2103- sample was brutally killed in his teen years so I agree with you he most likely left no descendants...most likely. Why not just assume there were other L23* people in the Samara region who lived on to leave descendants? (one of whom led to L51) Isn't this the most likely scenario?

I believe Reich stated the archaeology doesn't support such a west to east migration from Spain to the steppes. I'm sure historians who frequent this forum would state the same thing.

Well basically as I mentioned before (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) the main problem is the following:


That still leaves a total of 14 or [15] mutations to get to R1b-P312 in Germany, assuming this guy only had R1b-P312 and wasn't derived for anything else. Taking the upper bound of the Yamnaya individual as 3300 BC and the lower bound of the Bell Beaker at ~2200 BC we have 1100 years, divided by 14 and you get upper bound <=78 years per mutation. It's possible but highly unlikely. Do I make myself clear??

Basically we need to find R1b-L51 derived mutations in Yamnaya, or R1b-L23* in the Steppe earlier. As I was saying before to get from R1b-L23* to R1b-P312 in 2200 BC you need to sweep throught at least 14+ mutations in a period of 1100 years, this is assuming upper bounds for Yamnaya age and lower bounds for both age of beaker guy and number of mutations between R1b-L23* and R1b-P312, it is highly unlikely that 14+ mutations will accumulate in a period of 1100 years.

Augustus
02-12-2015, 10:04 PM
Basically we need to find R1b-L51 derived mutations in Yamnaya, or R1b-L23* in the Steppe earlier. As I was saying before to get from R1b-L23* to R1b-P312 in 2200 BC you need to sweep throught at least 14+ mutations in a period of 1100 years, this is assuming upper bounds for Yamnaya age and lower bounds for both age of beaker guy and number of mutations between R1b-L23* and R1b-P312, it is highly unlikely to assume that 14+ mutations will accumulate in a period of 1100 years.

Very good point. Surprised no one has mentioned this yet.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:06 PM
Well basically as I mentioned before (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) the main problem is the following:



Basically we need to find R1b-L51 derived mutations in Yamnaya, or R1b-L23* in the Steppe earlier. As I was saying before to get from R1b-L23* to R1b-P312 in 2200 BC you need to sweep throught at least 14+ mutations in a period of 1100 years, this is assuming upper bounds for Yamnaya age and lower bounds for both age of beaker guy and number of mutations between R1b-L23* and R1b-P312, it is highly unlikely to assume that 14+ mutations will accumulate in a period of 1100 years.

Here's another deal that totally eliminates your hypothesis Jean. If you look at the supplemental material, there's no chance. If R1b was from Iberia, it would be WHG, not EHG. They found NO evidence that WHG is actually in EHG. It is rejected by making it WHG and ANE. It is like something that would be WHG and ANE, but it isn't. R1b originates in the East. This is a pre-v88 or v88 male that was picked up by the farmers. A separation of P25 branches is what makes sense with no V88 in Beaker or IE, or outside of West Asia, Europe, and Africa.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:07 PM
Very good point. Surprised no one has mentioned this yet.

Jean and Augustus,
One Yamnaya was P297 and another was straight L23*, ancestral to L51.

Augustus
02-12-2015, 10:09 PM
Here's another deal that totally eliminates your hypothesis Jean. If you look at the supplemental material, there's no chance. If R1b was from Iberia, it would be WHG, not EHG. They found NO evidence that WHG is actually in EHG. It is rejected by making it WHG and ANE. It is like something that would be WHG and ANE, but it isn't. R1b originates in the East. This is a pre-v88 or v88 male that was picked up by the farmers. A separation of P25 branches is what makes sense with no V88 in Beaker or IE, or outside of West Asia, Europe, and Africa.

Spanish Neolithic guy aside, his point about L51 improbably deriving from the Steppe sample still stands.



another was straight L23*, ancestral to L51.

Did you read what he wrote? To get from L23* to the sample in Germany in that little time is improbable, considering all the intermediate mutations. L23* would need to be found earlier in the steppe.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:11 PM
It is one person.. He had a father.. may have L23* brothers and cousins around. It is there.. that is important!!

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:18 PM
Spanish Neolithic guy aside, his point about L51 improbably deriving from the Steppe sample still stands.



Did you read what he wrote? To get from L23* to the sample in Germany in that little time is improbable, considering all the intermediate mutations. L23* would need to be found earlier in the steppe.

BTW, it's not impossible. L51 is dated to about 3500BCE by SNP's. So, it is not really out of range. MJost can post his dates here. I don't remember the exact number.

Piquerobi
02-12-2015, 10:20 PM
Well basically as I mentioned before (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) the main problem is the following.

The important point from the study is that R1b-M269+ came from the steppes. The timeframe, the yDNA findings, autosomal component changes, archeological remains (Kurgan trail), etc. It does not belong to the Western European Mesolithic nor its Neolithic.

In Gimbutas' scheme (as well as in the revision by David Anthony), there were about 3 waves from the steppes to Europe. There are many scenarios but the point is R1b-M269+ is a steppe marker, fitting with the spread of IE in Western Europe.

ADW_1981
02-12-2015, 10:22 PM
Well basically as I mentioned before (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) the main problem is the following:



Basically we need to find R1b-L51 derived mutations in Yamnaya, or R1b-L23* in the Steppe earlier. As I was saying before to get from R1b-L23* to R1b-P312 in 2200 BC you need to sweep throught at least 14+ mutations in a period of 1100 years, this is assuming upper bounds for Yamnaya age and lower bounds for both age of beaker guy and number of mutations between R1b-L23* and R1b-P312, it is highly unlikely that 14+ mutations will accumulate in a period of 1100 years.

I agree with your first statement, and judging by the SNP diversity of these Samarans I wouldn't wager him being the L23* founder.
What I do know is that the R1b1 Superman of the Pyrenees and his horde of flint and tinder wielding goons needs to be thrown out with the bathwater.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:23 PM
Even if L51 is up to 3900BCE, no one is saying that L51 is from Samara. We are saying further southwest. I will bet it is the dominant lineage of Cotafeni people. With some L11 turning up in later stages. You guys keep confusing Samara with Yamnaya. The Samara Valley is 25% of Yamnaya. There is another 75% that isn't turned over yet. It'll show up. I promise you.

r_r_abril
02-12-2015, 10:25 PM
First of all, I didn't say that the Els Trocs man was my ancestor. I only stated that his haplogroup was ancestral to M269, so theoretically he could have been my patrilineal ancestor.

Only three men had their DNA analysed in Els Trocs. One of them was I2a, other F*, and finally the third was R1b1*. It is clear that R1b arrived the Iberian Peninsula long before the arising of the Bell Beaker culture let alone the introduction of the Indoeuropean languages, which only took place from the time of the Urnfield culture on. As the samples are scarce, why not to think there were already M269 men in Spain along with that R1b1* man, which was buried in Els Trocs?

At the coming of the Romans, roughly 40% of the Paleo-hispanic population (mostly R1b) spoke non-Indoeuropean languages: Iberian, Aquitanian-Basque, probably Tartesian. On the other hand, the indoeuropean paleo-hispanic languages, Celtiberian, Gaulish, Lusitanian, Gallaecian, belong to the Italo-Celtic continuum, so they had to come from Central Europe in the last millenium BC, not in Yamnaya/Bell Beaker times.

In any case, I agree that the three samples of Els Trocs are statistically insignificant. I hope that in the next years we will have enough ancient DNA evidence to determine whether there was M269 in the Iberian Peninsula in the 5th and the 4th millenium BC or not.

In my opinion, in the period 5.500-3.500 BC, the Iberian Peninsula underwent dramatic genetic changes that led to the displacement of the G2a and I2a haplogroups by R1b.

r_r_abril
02-12-2015, 10:33 PM
On the other hand, 5 o 7 of the seven Yamnaya men were R1b1a2a2 (Z2103): The remains were colected from diferent locations, and belonged to diferent times. We can conclude that it is highly probable that the Z2103 haplogroup was dominant in the Samara area.

In which parts of Western Europe is Z2103 nowadays dominant?

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:36 PM
First of all, I didn't say that the Els Trocs man was my ancestor. I only stated that his haplogroup was ancestral to M269, so theoretically he could have been my patrilineal ancestor.

Only three men had their DNA analysed in Els Trocs. One of them was I2a, other F*, and finally the third was R1b1*. It is clear that R1b arrived the Iberian Peninsula long before the arising of the Bell Beaker culture leta alone the introduction of the Indoeuropean languages, which only took place from the time of the Urnfield culture on. As the samples are scarce, why not to think there were already M269 men in Spain along with that R1b1*, which was buried in Els Trocs?

At the coming of the Romans, roughly 40% of the Paleo-hispanic population spoke non-Indoeuropean languages: Iberian, Aquitanian-Basque, probably Tartesian. On the other hand, the indoeuropean paleo-hispanic languages, Celtiberian, Gaulish, Lusitanian, Gallaecian, belong to the Italo-Celtic continuum, so they came from Central Europe in the last millenium BC, not in Yamnaya/Bell Beaker times.

In any case, the three samples of Els Trocs are statistically insignificant. I hope that in the next years we will have enough evidence to determine whether there was M269 in the Iberian Peninsula in the 5th and the 4th millenium BC.

In my opinion, in the period 5.500-3.500 BC, the Iberian Peninsula underwent dramatic genetic changes that led to the displacement of the G2a and I2a haplogroups by R1b.

He is not your ancestor, unless you're L278/P25, in Western Europe. R1b that almost all of us descend from was not in Spain that early. Not a chance.

ADW_1981
02-12-2015, 10:36 PM
In my opinion, in the period 5.500-3.500 BC, the Iberian Peninsula underwent dramatic genetic changes that led to the displacement of the G2a and I2a haplogroups by R1b.

Well the period you mention is the Spanish neolithic and only the single R1b1* was found. It's not unfathomable that there were R1b1* hunter gatherers floating around Europe (see the R1a1 Karelian), nor that V88 may have been linked to Cardial ware or some other Spanish neolithic culture.

If R1b in a west European context with derived mutations of L11+ appear prior to Bell Beaker I will be surprised. You'd have to rethink everything.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:39 PM
On the other hand, 5 o 7 of the seven Yamnaya men were R1b1a2a2 (Z2103): They remains were colected from diferent locations, and belonged to diferent times. We can conclude that it is highly probable that the Z2103 haplogroup was dominant in the Samara area.

In which parts of Western Europe is Z2103 nowadays dominant?

Again, you guys are not understanding that the Samara Valley is only 25% of the Yamnaya area. Let's stop re-hashing the same stuff.

r_r_abril
02-12-2015, 10:51 PM
If R1b was so dominant in Yamnaya, where does all the R1a from Eastern Europe, Kashmir and ancient Andronovo sites come from? Why is R1b so scarce in these areas?

Anglecynn
02-12-2015, 10:53 PM
If R1b was so dominant in Yamnaya, where does all the R1a from Eastern Europe, Kashmir and ancient Andronovo sites come from? Why is R1b so scarce in these areas?

Well we don't know that R1b was so dominant in Yamnaya, but we know it was dominant in Samara.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 10:53 PM
R1a will probably be found in Yamnaya, in some location. Give it time. Population turnovers happen. Just look at the steppes now.

Piquerobi
02-12-2015, 10:55 PM
If R1b was so dominant in Yamnaya, where does all the R1a from Eastern Europe, Kashmir and ancient Andronovo sites come from? Why is R1b so scarce in these areas?


In which parts of Western Europe is Z2103 nowadays dominant?


Why do you make the question one way when it comes to R1a and the other when it comes to R1b? The R1a common in Eastern Europe is the Z282. The one common in Kashmir and Andronovo sites is Z93.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 10:56 PM
Here's another deal that totally eliminates your hypothesis Jean. If you look at the supplemental material, there's no chance. If R1b was from Iberia, it would be WHG, not EHG. They found NO evidence that WHG is actually in EHG. It is rejected by making it WHG and ANE. It is like something that would be WHG and ANE, but it isn't. R1b originates in the East. This is a pre-v88 or v88 male that was picked up by the farmers. A separation of P25 branches is what makes sense with no V88 in Beaker or IE, or outside of West Asia, Europe, and Africa.

What exactly is my hypothesis, and how does that in any shape or form eliminate the following:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920


As I was saying before to get from R1b-L23* to R1b-P312 in 2200 BC you need to sweep throught at least 14+ mutations in a period of 1100 years, this is assuming upper bounds for Yamnaya age and lower bounds for both age of beaker guy and number of mutations between R1b-L23* and R1b-P312, it is highly unlikely that 14+ mutations will accumulate in a period of 1100 years.

Also the authors tested different models some of which included assuming that Loschbour was admixed whereas EHG were not, another assumed Malta-1 was mixed, etc. Can you find a quote in the study that says the EHG did not have WHG blood? BTW if you read my comment you could see that I have been one of the people who said that the Iberian guy can have easily been a Hunter Gatherer who joined in with the farmers.


He is not your ancestor, unless you're L278/P25, in Western Europe. R1b that almost all of us descend from was not in Spain that early. Not a chance.

See this is the stuff that drives me crazy, you make massively bold assumptions, when in reality as I showed before the guy from Spain is far more likely(assuming he doesn't test positive for R1b-V88, or other mutation that is not on the ancestral line of R1b-L11 disclosure#1) to be an ancestor of modern day R1b-L11+ derived Europeans than the 8 Yamnaya samples tested. Granted the Hunter Gatherer from Samara has an even higher(*Assuming disclosure #1 above) chance than all of them. Need I remind you, you said that there was no ANE in Western Europe prior to Beaker and Corded Ware arrivals, and that no R1b1 will turn up in Iberia before 2000 BC just a couple of days ago.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 11:00 PM
The Iberian R1b is probably from an EHG group that had crossed into West Asia. This one just ended up in the wave, prior to becoming V88. He still could be v88.

The hypothesis I'm referring to is the one where you say the R1b in Iberia could be ancestral to the steppes. That just isn't the case. There's no such migration anyways. I'll try to find the section for you. Give me a bit. I have some stuff to do.

That L278 doesn't matter. I was talking about R1b L51 derived, in Iberia before 2000BCE. I've already said that before. None of that out of Iberia crud.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-12-2015, 11:20 PM
page 85 - Fig. S8.6 shows Karelia_HG as a 2-way mixture of ANE and WHG, but this may be due to the fact that the model of Fig. S8.1 was developed before the EHG were sampled. We do not want to reify ANE and WHG simply on the basis of their having been described earlier in the literature, so we also explored models in which EHG are not admixed. This was driven, in part, by our observation that the statistic f4(Karelia_HG, MA1; Karitiana, Chimp) = -0.00014 (Z=-0.2) which appears to be show a perfect symmetry in the relationship of (Karelia_HG, MA1) with Native Americans.

From Matt at Eurogenes, above

It looks like we will be seeing papers go away from WHG and ANE soon. They are probably no more real than Baltic and West Asian. They may be closer to the truth, but obviously mixes of other people. It does look like MA-1 is EHG mixed with something else. EHG is something that broke off of MA-1 before he mixed with something else. No WHG. I guess that is the gist of it. You can look it over.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 11:34 PM
page 85 - Fig. S8.6 shows Karelia_HG as a 2-way mixture of ANE and WHG, but this may be due to the fact that the model of Fig. S8.1 was developed before the EHG were sampled. We do not want to reify ANE and WHG simply on the basis of their having been described earlier in the literature, so we also explored models in which EHG are not admixed. This was driven, in part, by our observation that the statistic f4(Karelia_HG, MA1; Karitiana, Chimp) = -0.00014 (Z=-0.2) which appears to be show a perfect symmetry in the relationship of (Karelia_HG, MA1) with Native Americans.

From Matt at Eurogenes

It looks like we will be seeing papers go away from WHG and ANE soon. They are probably no more real than Baltic and West Asian. They may be closer to the truth, but obviously mixes of other people. It does look like MA-1 is EHG mixed with something else. EHG is something that broke off of MA-1 before he mixed with something else. No WHG. I guess that is the gist of it. You can look it over.

The keyword here is "model", from page 116-117(pdf document page # not article page#)


A population that had not been previously studied is the Eastern European hunter-gatherers
(EHG) from European Russia, so we attempt to fit Karelia_HG (the best sample from the
EHG) to the model of Fig. S8.1. No models could accommodate Karelia_HG as a simple (not
admixed) population (|Z|>9), or a 2-way mixture (|Z|>3). However, three models failed only
marginally (3.1<|Z|<3.7) and we show one of them in Fig. S8.6. The model of Fig. S8.6
derives the Western Eurasian-related ancestry in Karelia_HG from a node D related to the
population that admixed into the LBK_EN. The other two models (not shown) differ only
slightly, by deriving the admixture into Karelia_HG either from the Loschbour branch, or a
node that is basal to the Western_Eurasian node. Given the number of f-statistics computed, a
largest |Z|-score of 3.1-3.7 does not provide very strong rejection of the model.

All three of these 2-way mixture models arrive at a similar inference of 38-40% ANE and 60-
62% WHG ancestry in Karelia-HG, which is higher than the ~20% ANE ancestry inferred for
Motala12 in a previous study4, consistent with the fact that EHG are the population sharing
more alleles with “Ancient North Eurasians” (SI 7) than any other. This is also consistent
with a previous hypothesis4 of a “Hunter” population with 60-80% WHG/(WHG+ANE)
ancestry that combined with early European farmers (EEF) to produce (in different
proportions) present-day Europeans.

Now from page 121-122: (pdf document page # not article page#)




Uncertainty about the modeling of ancient Europeans may be a consequence of two factors.

First, it is possible that these populations were related in complex ways with gene flow between them. We show that at least one admixture event is required to jointly fit (EHG, WHG, and ANE). Models with more admixture events or bidirectional gene flow are more complex and thus less parsimonious; however, it is possible that they better capture the actual history of these populations.

Second, the sparse sampling of pre-Neolithic Europeans makes inferences about their relationships problematic. With the exception of Holocene hunter-gatherers from Sweden where multiple individuals are now known (ref. 4,10 and this study), a total of nine individuals of likely hunter gatherer ancestry have autosomal data that is amenable to analysis (Samara_HG and Karelia_HG in this study, Loschbour4, LaBrana, KO1 (HungaryGamba_HG)[sup]12, Kostenki147, MA19, Ust-Ishim6, and Tianyuan13). Tens of thousands of years since the earliest settlement of Europe by anatomically modern humans14 and until the Holocene remain to be filled with data points that will doubtless inform our understanding of the distant past of European populations.

In the current paper, we do not address these issues, except to show, as we did above, the most salient points shared by some successful models, and to reject others. Fortunately, for the much shorter period since the Neolithic transition, there is an abundance of data from different parts of Europe and different points in time, allowing us to reconstruct some key transitions without explicitly modeling the deep phylogenetic relationships of Eurasian populations (SI9)

newtoboard
02-12-2015, 11:34 PM
It does make me wonder then if the basal P343/P25 in SW Asia is a remnant of the pressure microblade using people who seem to have entered places like the Zagrosc. 9500BC and to have slowly spread west though SW Asia to made it to some of the east Med. coasts around 6500BC or so - a late date when it was touch and go whether it would be carried west. Also if V88 then sprang up in that group early enough to be carried west in trace numbers with Cardial. That kind of model would retain the link of R1b -not exclusively of course- with pressure microblades. It also makes sense in that an arrival in SW Asia c. 9500BC is likely to have involved a branching off upstream of P297 based on date alone. Perhaps modest survival of those Zagros hunters in a slightly displaced form explains the Iran concentration of the basal forms of R1b. Maybe the basal R1a too.

The other possibility is lineages upstream of L23+ (and even L23+) originated in Northwest Central Asia and migrated to both the steppe and Iran/NE Caucasus. Or even migrated from the steppe very early to SW Asia. If I recall the Mugrab river was still very vibrant at this point and the Aral sea used to empty into the Caspian so those deserts in NW Kazakhstan would have been less of a barrier for migration. The fact that Yamnaya looks less WHG than previously thought could support that. I would guess the rest of Iranian R1b that is L23+ Z2103+ arrived with an R1a and I2 rich population (Cimmerians). I am still standing by by idea that Iranian, Kurdish and NE Caucasian R1b did not arrive with Anatolian or Balkan speakers. They never really existed that far east and were certainly not in any position to dominate their eastern neighbors.

And basal R1a is anything but basal. It has one or two very recent founders and I have heard it might even be younger than both Z645/CTS4385 and possibly even Z93+ and Z283+.

Coldmountains
02-12-2015, 11:44 PM
If R1b was so dominant in Yamnaya, where does all the R1a from Eastern Europe, Kashmir and ancient Andronovo sites come from? Why is R1b so scarce in these areas?

R1b was surely not dominant everywhere in Yamna and assuming that it was dominant there because in a small region all tested males had r1b is like assuming that all people in Russia must have much R1b because Bashkirs are rich in it. We even dont know if this R1b there was native or derived from some "caucasian/west asian" immigrants.

This iberian R1b is proving that R1b was already 7000 years ago present in western and central europe but in much lower frequencies than today.So western european R1b could also be derived outside the steppe even when this iberian male was perhaps not ancestral to western european R1b

newtoboard
02-12-2015, 11:44 PM
Even if L51 is up to 3900BCE, no one is saying that L51 is from Samara. We are saying further southwest. I will bet it is the dominant lineage of Cotafeni people. With some L11 turning up in later stages. You guys keep confusing Samara with Yamnaya. The Samara Valley is 25% of Yamnaya. There is another 75% that isn't turned over yet. It'll show up. I promise you.

The NE quadrant right? Samara is at the steppe-forest steppe interface right? Correct me if I am wrong.

newtoboard
02-12-2015, 11:47 PM
If R1b was so dominant in Yamnaya, where does all the R1a from Eastern Europe, Kashmir and ancient Andronovo sites come from? Why is R1b so scarce in these areas?

Yamnaya is a horizon. There is no doubt it had multiple subcultures. Even horizons that are likely very homogenous on the yside will have regional variations.

But Yamnaya has at least two dividing lines. The Don river where agriculture is more common to the west and pastoralizm to the east. And then you also have the forest steppe-steppe dividing line.

jeanL
02-12-2015, 11:53 PM
R1b was surely not dominant everywhere in Yamna and assuming that it was dominant there because in a small region all tested males had r1b is like assuming that all people in Russia must have much R1b because Bashkirs are rich in it. We even dont know if this R1b there was native or derived from some "caucasian/west asian" immigrants.

The evidence as it stands right now points to Yamnaya(at least in Samara) being R1b dominated, we cannot make any informative inference about the rest of Yamnaya, though the presence of R1b pretty much shows that it was there. Now using absolute statements such as "surely" in an otherwise random scenario shows that the discussion has departed from being scientific to being politically or ethnically motivated. While not knowing whether R1b is native vs immigrant its presence in Hunter Gatherers from the region who appear to lack Middle Eastern ancestry would point to R1b being native to the region, nothing is absolute, but the weight of evidence balances towards the native direction.


This iberian R1b is proving that R1b was already 7000 years ago present in western and central europe but in much lower frequencies than today.So western european R1b could also be derived outside the steppe even when this iberian male was perhaps not ancestral to western european R1b

This Iberian being R1b1 could be due to a number of reasons as I said before, one of which is that it was picked up in the farmers trail.

rms2
02-12-2015, 11:57 PM
They don't have to arise independently if the Yamnaya people were to descend from the Iberian guy.

I mentioned that, too, because it is the only way Western Europeans could be descended from the El Trocs R1b1, but it is extremely unlikely, so, honestly, I did not think you could possibly be suggesting that.

The Samara hunter-gatherer is far more likely to represent the ancestry of both Western Europeans and the Z2103 Yamnaya guys, and his remains were recovered from a site that has also produced finds from the Repin culture which preceded Yamnaya.



Now once more, I'm not saying they do, I simply work out the probabilities in my previous post (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=68920&viewfull=1#post68920) as to why the Samara sample or the Neolithic Spanish sample are far more likely to be the ancestors of the R1b-P312 Bell Beaker guy than the tested Yamnaya remains. Now as I said before if any of them turn out to be R1b-V88 or something else that is not on the ancestral line leading to P312 then, sure their likelihood of being ancestral will drop down to 0. Please if you find anything wrong with my math let me know!

I don't think anyone has suggested the Z2103 Yamnaya guys are the ancestors of Z2103- L51+ Europeans because that is simply not possible, obviously.

Honestly, I don't think it is possible for the El Trocs R1b1 to be the y-dna ancestor of the P312+ Bell Beaker man from Quedlinburg or of any L11+ Western Europeans for the reasons I have already given, chiefly because the alternatives are equally highly unlikely: either the El Trocs R1b1 is the ancestor of the Yamnaya R1b's, or all the SNPs between R1b1 and L23 arose independently of one another in two widely separated places and in the same order.

rms2
02-13-2015, 12:02 AM
If R1b was so dominant in Yamnaya, where does all the R1a from Eastern Europe, Kashmir and ancient Andronovo sites come from? Why is R1b so scarce in these areas?

Because people move, pretty obviously. Today Western Europe is overwhelmingly R1b and Indo-European-speaking.

The El Trocs R1b1 is probably V88, but even if he isn't, there's no way L11+ Western Europeans with plenty of ANE and steppe ancestry are descended from him. It is so unlikely as to be impossible.

Coldmountains
02-13-2015, 12:11 AM
The evidence as it stands right now points to Yamnaya(at least in Samara) being R1b dominated, we cannot make any informative inference about the rest of Yamnaya, though the presence of R1b pretty much shows that it was there. Now using absolute statements such as "surely" in an otherwise random scenario shows that the discussion has departed from being scientific to being politically or ethnically motivated. While not knowing whether R1b is native vs immigrant its presence in Hunter Gatherers from the region who appear to lack Middle Eastern ancestry would point to R1b being native to the region, nothing is absolute, but the weight of evidence balances towards the native direction.



This Iberian being R1b1 could be due to a number of reasons as I said before, one of which is that it was picked up in the farmers trail.

if R1b was everywhere so dominant like in Samara than Andronovo and corded ware are not directly derived from Yamna. Also corded ware was genetically very close to Yamna but the tested samples lacked r1b and had r1a. To assume that r1b must be dominant there because it was dominant in a tiny border region of Yamna is very speculative. We need more samples

RCO
02-13-2015, 12:21 AM
For many years I have been observing the Iberian and the Portuguese R1b types and sincerely it's impossible to classify them in clusters using only the STR results because they are extremely mixed and only a good number of tested samples with complete SNPs (Y full seq. NGS) can find the correct positions of the SNPs. I have also observed the intense variation of some Iberian R1b1 types since the first days of 23andMe as the first tested base of different SNPs showing the diversity of the Iberian types. We can also observe the Yfull tree and the Iberian and American different types in completely different positions. It looks like the common ancestor of the Samaran R1b1's and the Iberian R1b1 were not necessarily from the steppes but the ancestral population could be situated more to the South, close to the same source of the previous expansion of R1b V88 from the East to the West (North Africa). Just like most of the haplogroups R1b had had several waves of penetration in Iberia in different times, different groups with different SNPs and lineages, many still living today.

rms2
02-13-2015, 12:48 AM
I think the R1b1 Samara hunter-gatherer - Eastern Hunter Gatherer (EHG), that is - casts some doubt on that. I think it more likely, given the R* Mal'ta Boy find near Lake Baikal, that both R1b and R1a are North Eurasian in origin.

rms2
02-13-2015, 12:55 AM
if R1b was everywhere so dominant like in Samara than Andronovo and corded ware are not directly derived from Yamna. Also corded ware was genetically very close to Yamna but the tested samples lacked r1b and had r1a. To assume that r1b must be dominant there because it was dominant in a tiny border region of Yamna is very speculative. We need more samples

You are assuming no R1b will be found in Corded Ware because it hasn't yet. Well, be consistent. After all, no R1a has been found in Yamnaya yet, so . . .

The odds that it is a mere fluke that not only are all seven of the Yamnaya males from the Samara region R1b, but that the Samara hunter-gatherer (an EASTERN Hunter Gatherer) is likewise R1b, must be astronomical. And that Samara hunter-gatherer was recovered from a site that has yielded finds from the Repin culture that preceded Yamnaya.

Some of the stuff that has been posted here at Anthrogenica in the last couple of days is just breathtaking in its sheer desperation.

Piquerobi
02-13-2015, 01:00 AM
I think the R1b1 Samara hunter-gatherer - Eastern Hunter Gatherer (EHG), that is - casts some doubt on that. I think it more likely, given the R* Mal'ta Boy find near Lake Baikal, that both R1b and R1a are North Eurasian in origin.

Exactly. Let us not forget the study also showed a close genetic autosomal relationship between the two R1a and R1b oldest samples who lived about 7000 years ago. They plot at about the same place and were rich in the EHG component. Being both R1 already hinted at a closer genetic relationship back in the past. Now the autosomal map shows it. Not only this, they were found both up in the North in Karelia and in Samara in Russia.

jdean
02-13-2015, 01:02 AM
You are assuming no R1b will be found in Corded Ware because it hasn't yet. Well, be consistent. After all, no R1a has been found in Yamnaya yet, so . . .

The odds that it is a mere fluke that not only are all seven of the Yamnaya males from the Samara region R1b, but that the Samara hunter-gatherer (an EASTERN Hunter Gatherer) is likewise R1b, must be astronomical. And that Samara hunter-gatherer was recovered from a site that has yielded finds from the Repin culture that preceded Yamnaya.

Some of the stuff that has been posted here at Anthrogenica in the last couple of days is just breathtaking in its sheer desperation.

Just a tad : )

Piquerobi
02-13-2015, 01:02 AM
R -> ~ 24000 years ago
R1a and R1b > ~ 7000 years ago

Their locations:
http://i60.tinypic.com/1j7mfm.gif

Oldest R1a and R1b and their close autosomal relationship, they lived ~7000 years ago:
http://i58.tinypic.com/fnthrk.png

RCO
02-13-2015, 01:10 AM
That's the only results we have, not yet a critical mass and remember the long way from Sundaland with strange basal types found in distant places along the way. We need more results. When we observe the spread of the big continental languages in Africa and South America, equivalents to IE, we could observe a big variety of social conditions. Some societies were traditionally hunter-gatherers living in small, nomadic bands, while others were in sophisticated economies in large villages with dualistic segmentary morphologies or clans and they could easily change their organizations as a result of pressures, wars, food crisis, failures, alliances, expansions and in some generations they could change the political shapes. I think in North America it also happened in some cases even without a major continental language like Tupi-Guarani or Bantu.

Coldmountains
02-13-2015, 01:20 AM
You are assuming no R1b will be found in Corded Ware because it hasn't yet. Well, be consistent. After all, no R1a has been found in Yamnaya yet, so . . .

The odds that it is a mere fluke that not only are all seven of the Yamnaya males from the Samara region R1b, but that the Samara hunter-gatherer (an EASTERN Hunter Gatherer) is likewise R1b, must be astronomical. And that Samara hunter-gatherer was recovered from a site that has yielded finds from the Repin culture that preceded Yamnaya.

Some of the stuff that has been posted here at Anthrogenica in the last couple of days is just breathtaking in its sheer desperation.

Corded ware and Andronovo are derived from Yamna but not the Bell Beakers. Show me one archaeologist who sees a direct connection between Yamna and Bell Beakers. Yamna r1b is not found in western europe and western European r1b is almost absent in eastern Europe. Nobody knows where western European R1b originated and unlike this yamna r1b it could also orginate in western or central Europe. If r1b was already present 7000 years ago in Iberia than we can not exclude this

Anglecynn
02-13-2015, 01:22 AM
Corded ware and Andronovo are derived from Yamna but not the Bell Beakers. Show me one archaeologist who sees a direct connection between Yamna and Bell Beakers. Yamna r1b is not found in western europe and western European r1b is almost absent in eastern Europe. Nobody knows where western European R1b originated and unlike this yamna r1b it could also orginate in western or central Europe. If r1b was already present 7000 years ago in Iberia than we can not exclude this

What y-lineages did you think brought Yamnaya-like ancestry to western Europe if that is the case?

rms2
02-13-2015, 01:22 AM
R -> ~ 24000 years ago
R1a and R1b > ~ 7000 years ago

Their locations:
http://i60.tinypic.com/1j7mfm.gif

Oldest R1a and R1b and their close autosomal relationship, they lived ~7000 years ago:
http://i58.tinypic.com/fnthrk.png

Well, I wanted to give you some added reputation for that post, but it says I can't do it again so soon. But, anyway, thanks for that.

It is enlightening indeed to see how close both that old R1b and old R1a were.

newtoboard
02-13-2015, 01:25 AM
You are assuming no R1b will be found in Corded Ware because it hasn't yet. Well, be consistent. After all, no R1a has been found in Yamnaya yet, so . . .

The odds that it is a mere fluke that not only are all seven of the Yamnaya males from the Samara region R1b, but that the Samara hunter-gatherer (an EASTERN Hunter Gatherer) is likewise R1b, must be astronomical. And that Samara hunter-gatherer was recovered from a site that has yielded finds from the Repin culture that preceded Yamnaya.

Some of the stuff that has been posted here at Anthrogenica in the last couple of days is just breathtaking in its sheer desperation.

Well then lets be open to the possibility of R1a in Bell Beaker than. Fair is Fair.

Piquerobi
02-13-2015, 01:28 AM
Well, I wanted to give you some added reputation for that post, but it says I can't do it again so soon. But, anyway, thanks for that.

You are welcome. And I thank you very much for all you have done since the beginning of these forums. You were one the few who could foresee R1b-M269+ could be found in the IE proposed homelands (Yamnaya, etc), much earlier than many people who were then lurking. It has been proven now. That site of yours with the ancient yDNA haplogroups in a map is very informative. I used to look at it regularly and the lack of R1b-M269+ in ancient European remains was a clear sign of what was to come.

rms2
02-13-2015, 01:30 AM
Corded ware and Andronovo are derived from Yamna but not the Bell Beakers. Show me one archaeologist who sees a direct connection between Yamna and Bell Beakers. Yamna r1b is not found in western europe and western European r1b is almost absent in eastern Europe. Nobody knows where western European R1b originated and unlike this yamna r1b it could also orginate in western or central Europe. If r1b was already present 7000 years ago in Iberia than we can not exclude this

Bell Beaker had only slightly less ANE than Corded Ware. Marija Gimbutas, for one, derived Beaker from Vucedol, and Vucedol from Yamnaya.

3774

The following is from Gimbutas' book, The Kurgan Culture and the Indo-Europeanization of Europe:




The Bell Beaker complex, an offshoot of the Vucedol bloc (more precisely of the Zok-Mako group in Hungary) continued Kurgan characteristics. The Bell Beaker of the second half of the 3rd millennium BC were vagabondic horse riders and archers in much the same way as their uncles and cousins, the Corded people of northern Europe and Catacomb-grave people of the North Pontic region. Their spread over central and western Europe to the British Isles and Spain as well as the Mediterranean islands terminates the period of expansion and destruction . . . (p. 104)

In western Hungary and northwestern Yugoslavia, the Vucedol complex was followed by the Samogyvar-Vinkovci complex, the predecessor of the Bell Beaker people. Furthermore, the exodus of the horse-riding Bell Beaker people in the middle of the 3rd millennium, or soon thereafter, from the territories of the Vucedol complex, may not be unconnected with the constant threat from the east. They carried to the west Kurgan traditions in armament, social structure, and religion. The fact of paramount importance of Bell Beaker mobility is the presence of the horse. Seven Bell Beaker sites at Budapest in Hungary have shown that the horse was the foremost species of the domestic fauna (pp. 258-259).

rms2
02-13-2015, 01:32 AM
Well then lets be open to the possibility of R1a in Bell Beaker than. Fair is Fair.

It wouldn't surprise me at all, nor would R1b in Corded Ware.

newtoboard
02-13-2015, 01:36 AM
It wouldn't surprise me at all, nor would R1b in Corded Ware.

Both would likely be associated with Germanic speakers if true imo

R1a-CTS4385 in Eastern Bell Beakers and R1b U106 in Western Corded Ware

sweuro
02-13-2015, 01:41 AM
Corded ware and Andronovo are derived from Yamna but not the Bell Beakers. Show me one archaeologist who sees a direct connection between Yamna and Bell Beakers. Yamna r1b is not found in western europe and western European r1b is almost absent in eastern Europe. Nobody knows where western European R1b originated and unlike this yamna r1b it could also orginate in western or central Europe. If r1b was already present 7000 years ago in Iberia than we can not exclude this
But the Yamna autosomal contribution to Western Europe is a fact, and the question is, which haplogroup was associated with this genetic contribution ? Scotland is today 73% R1b and has close to 50% Yamna-derived contribution.

rms2
02-13-2015, 01:48 AM
Both would likely be associated with Germanic speakers if true imo

R1a-CTS4385 in Eastern Bell Beakers and R1b U106 in Western Corded Ware

I said years ago I expect U106 in Corded Ware.

On the other hand, I don't think Beaker had much to do with Germanic languages. I think its connection is to Italo-Celtic.

ADW_1981
02-13-2015, 01:57 AM
R1b was surely not dominant everywhere in Yamna and assuming that it was dominant there because in a small region all tested males had r1b is like assuming that all people in Russia must have much R1b because Bashkirs are rich in it. We even dont know if this R1b there was native or derived from some "caucasian/west asian" immigrants.

Actually we do know that the Yamnaya males didn't come from the Caucasus. Did you even bother to look at the admixture results from the supplementary info? The Caucasus has plenty of Early Farmer ancestry - Yamnaya has ZERO early farmer ancestry.

MJost
02-13-2015, 02:12 AM
BTW, it's not impossible. L51 is dated to about 3500BCE by SNP's. So, it is not really out of range. MJost can post his dates here. I don't remember the exact number.

Using my 130 years per SNP, the L51 with four unordered SNPs in the block range from 4652 to 4130bc
or using Mal'ta boy's supposed 24ky age at 174 years per SNP is 6870 to 6174bc.

s/b 'the L51 with four unordered SNPs in the block range from 5943 (3943bc) to 5427 (3427bc)

MJost

Ebizur
02-13-2015, 02:27 AM
Actually we do know that the Yamnaya males didn't come from the Caucasus. Did you even bother to look at the admixture results from the supplementary info? The Caucasus has plenty of Early Farmer ancestry - Yamnaya has ZERO early farmer ancestry.This is an interesting point. I suppose it might have something to do with the dearth of haplogroup G2 Y-DNA in modern Europeans despite the high frequency of that haplogroup in tested remains of Early European Farmers.

The Near Eastern-related element in the tested Yamnaya genomes seems to be more similar to that found in more southerly peoples, such as the Armenians or the Jews. I would bet on Indo-European expansion being one vehicle for the reduction of G2 and I2 Y-DNA lineages and the increase of J(2) and E1b1b lineages in Europe.

J Man
02-13-2015, 02:41 AM
This is an interesting point. I suppose it might have something to do with the dearth of haplogroup G2 Y-DNA in modern Europeans despite the high frequency of that haplogroup in tested remains of Early European Farmers.

The Near Eastern-related element in the tested Yamnaya genomes seems to be more similar to that found in more southerly peoples, such as the Armenians or the Jews. I would bet on Indo-European expansion being one vehicle for the reduction of G2 and I2 Y-DNA lineages and the increase of J(2) and E1b1b lineages in Europe.

Hard to say in the case of J2 and E1b1b. When it come to ancient DNA from Europe we have one J2a sample from Late Bronze Age Hungary and one Neolithic E-V13 sample from Spain so far.

ADW_1981
02-13-2015, 02:43 AM
This is an interesting point. I suppose it might have something to do with the dearth of haplogroup G2 Y-DNA in modern Europeans despite the high frequency of that haplogroup in tested remains of Early European Farmers.

The Near Eastern-related element in the tested Yamnaya genomes seems to be more similar to that found in more southerly peoples, such as the Armenians or the Jews. I would bet on Indo-European expansion being one vehicle for the reduction of G2 and I2 Y-DNA lineages and the increase of J(2) and E1b1b lineages in Europe.

The admixture results have blue-green peaking east of the Zagros in Central Asian populations. Some of the earliest PIE evidence exists in Turkey and Syria, so should be no surprise that this component shows up there. I'm certain it arrived AFTER the spread of farmers to Europe though, since LBK and Spanish farmers were nearly completely EEF without even a sprinkle of blue-green.

If we want to associate YDNA groups to this component, the strongest options are : R1b-Z2103, R1a-Z93, J2, and possibly L. Seeing the genomes from the ancient mid-east would help. PPN, Sumerian, BMAC are some which come to mind.

Highly improbable that E-V13 were PIE speakers, but J2 has always been a strong possibility IMHO. If it is found within a Sumerian context, and those southern Iraq cultures are closer to EEF than to Central Asian ones, we can probably rule it out.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-13-2015, 02:46 AM
Using my 130 years per SNP, the L51 with four unordered SNPs in the block range from 4652 to 4130bc
or using Mal'ta boy's supposed 24ky age at 174 years per SNP is 6870 to 6174bc.

MJost

What happened to this?

Using my estimated 129 years per mutation dating SNP blocks above DF13 at 3750 ybp (my suggested DF13 age) working backwards similar to Wei Wei, Qasim Ayub, [...], and Chris Tyler-Smith's results.

R1b1a2 - M269 - 7 < 903 yrs in block plus 6330 ybp = 7233 (5233bc)
R1b1a2a - L23 - 3 < 387 yrs in block plus 5943 ybp = 6330 (4330bc)
R1b1a2a1 - L51 - 4 < 516 yrs in block plus 5427 ybp = 5943 (3943bc)
R1b1a2a1a - L11 - 7 < 903 yrs in block plus 4524 ybp = 5427 (3427bc)
R1b1a2a1a2 - P312 - 2 < 258 in block yrs plus 4266 ybp = 4524 (2524bc)
R1b1a2a1a2c - L21 - 4 < 516 in block yrs plus 3750 ybp = 4266 (2266bc)

Ebizur
02-13-2015, 03:01 AM
Well, I might sound like a kooky conspiracy theorist saying this, but is there really any strong evidence for the antiquity of Caucasian peoples in the Caucasus? Is it just a coincidence that European names for some of the ancient kingdoms of the Caucasians (e.g. Iberia, Albania) are weirdly similar to names for some parts of Europe that were last to be overrun (or at least most lightly overrun) by Yamnaya-derived or Yamnaya-related peoples? Near Easterners, too, like the ancient Greeks, considered Caucasians to be "barbaric foreigners" and such. The Caucasus also seems to be a very rare hotspot for distribution of Y-DNA haplogroup I outside Europe proper.

Why do the Yamnayans, north of the Caucasus, seem to contain admixture from a population whose autosomal DNA is more similar to Armenians, Jews, and similar Levantine-esque populations rather than Caucasians, these latter folks apparently having some relationship with EEFs?

On the other hand, I suppose modern Caucasians could be a remnant of early Near Eastern Neolithic populations that also have spread into Europe to produce EEFs through mixing with native Mesolithic Europeans. That opens up a question of where the later Levantine-like populations may have come from to replace or dilute the earlier Caucasian-like Neolithic peoples in most of the Near East.

ADW_1981
02-13-2015, 03:11 AM
Well, I might sound like a kooky conspiracy theorist saying this, but is there really any strong evidence for the antiquity of Caucasian peoples in the Caucasus? Is it just a coincidence that European names for some of the ancient kingdoms of the Caucasians (e.g. Iberia, Albania) are weirdly similar to names for some parts of Europe that were last to be overrun (or at least most lightly overrun) by Yamnaya-derived or Yamnaya-related peoples? Near Easterners, too, like the ancient Greeks, considered Caucasians to be "barbaric foreigners" and such. The Caucasus also seems to be a very rare hotspot for distribution of Y-DNA haplogroup I outside Europe proper.

Why do the Yamnayans, north of the Caucasus, seem to contain admixture from a population whose autosomal DNA is more similar to Armenians, Jews, and similar Levantine-esque populations rather than Caucasians, these latter folks apparently having some relationship with EEFs?

On the other hand, I suppose modern Caucasians could be a remnant of early Near Eastern Neolithic populations that also have spread into Europe to produce EEFs through mixing with native Mesolithic Europeans. That opens up a question of where the later Levantine-like populations may have come from to replace or dilute the earlier Caucasian-like Neolithic peoples.

I would anticipate, although can't prove that the EEF influence in the Caucasus is through the Trans-Caucasian cultures and at least the spread of G2 haplogroup. Hopefully we get some aDNA to prove this. I'm also expecting the PPN to be at least G2.

jeanL
02-13-2015, 04:24 AM
What happened to this?

Using my estimated 129 years per mutation dating SNP blocks above DF13 at 3750 ybp (my suggested DF13 age) working backwards similar to Wei Wei, Qasim Ayub, [...], and Chris Tyler-Smith's results.

R1b1a2 - M269 - 7 < 903 yrs in block plus 6330 ybp = 7233 (5233bc)
R1b1a2a - L23 - 3 < 387 yrs in block plus 5943 ybp = 6330 (4330bc)
R1b1a2a1 - L51 - 4 < 516 yrs in block plus 5427 ybp = 5943 (3943bc)
R1b1a2a1a - L11 - 7 < 903 yrs in block plus 4524 ybp = 5427 (3427bc)
R1b1a2a1a2 - P312 - 2 < 258 in block yrs plus 4266 ybp = 4524 (2524bc)
R1b1a2a1a2c - L21 - 4 < 516 in block yrs plus 3750 ybp = 4266 (2266bc)

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3816-P312-in-quot-Massive-migration-from-the-steppe-is-a-source-for-IE-languages-in-Europe-quot&p=68786&viewfull=1#post68786



there are about 18 SNPs between R-P312 and R-L23.

5 at R-L51:
- PF6535
- PF6414
- L51/M412/PF6536/S167
- CTS8595/YSC0001291
- CTS10373/FGC39/PF6537

13 [or 14] at R-L11:
- FGC796/Y101/Z8159
- PF6415
- PF5856
- PF6540/YSC0000082
- S26903 [unconfirmed]
- L52/PF6541
- L151/PF6542
- PF6543/S1159/YSC0000191
- CTS7650/FGC44/PF6544
- PF6538
- L11/PF6539/S127
- P311/PF6545/S128
- P310/PF6546/S129
- CTS10353/S1175/YSC0001249

If you calibrate based on Bell Beaker R1b-P312 circa 2200 BC, and assuming he was only derived for a single R1b-P312 mutation then you have minimum 18 mutations going back to R1b-L51, at an average value of 129 years per mutation you get 2322 years, which means that R1b-L51 will have to be at minimum 6522 years old dating to 4507 BC. By the year 3300 BC R1b-L51 wasn't just a single guy or a family, it must have been diversified already, mostly because the vast majority of mutations occur in the R1b-L11 line, so that might have been a single guy or a small family for a while!

Chad Rohlfsen
02-13-2015, 04:44 AM
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3816-P312-in-quot-Massive-migration-from-the-steppe-is-a-source-for-IE-languages-in-Europe-quot&p=68786&viewfull=1#post68786



If you calibrate based on Bell Beaker R1b-P312 circa 2200 BC, and assuming he was only derived for a single R1b-P312 mutation then you have minimum 18 mutations going back to R1b-L51, at an average value of 129 years per mutation you get 2322 years, which means that R1b-L51 will have to be at minimum 6522 years old dating to 4507 BC. By the year 3300 BC R1b-L51 wasn't just a single guy or a family, it must have been diversified already, mostly because the vast majority of mutations occur in the R1b-L11 line, so that might have been a single guy or a small family for a while!

Gotcha! Hmm.. I wonder if that fits the Repin group. That would mean that if it went through Cotafeni, it would be full on L11 by then. We need some damn samples from the western half of Yamnaya.

MJost
02-13-2015, 05:04 AM
What happened to this?

Using my estimated 129 years per mutation dating SNP blocks above DF13 at 3750 ybp (my suggested DF13 age) working backwards similar to Wei Wei, Qasim Ayub, [...], and Chris Tyler-Smith's results.

R1b1a2 - M269 - 7 < 903 yrs in block plus 6330 ybp = 7233 (5233bc)
R1b1a2a - L23 - 3 < 387 yrs in block plus 5943 ybp = 6330 (4330bc)
R1b1a2a1 - L51 - 4 < 516 yrs in block plus 5427 ybp = 5943 (3943bc)
R1b1a2a1a - L11 - 7 < 903 yrs in block plus 4524 ybp = 5427 (3427bc)
R1b1a2a1a2 - P312 - 2 < 258 in block yrs plus 4266 ybp = 4524 (2524bc)
R1b1a2a1a2c - L21 - 4 < 516 in block yrs plus 3750 ybp = 4266 (2266bc)

I corrected my post. thx for the catch.

MJost

MJost
02-13-2015, 05:12 AM
SNPs I counted from YFull

4 SNPs R1b1a2a1 L51/M412/S167/PF6536 * PF6414 * CTS10373/PF6537 * PF6535

8 SNPs R1b1a2a1a YSC0000191/PF6543/S1159 * P311/S128/PF6545 * P310/S129/PF6546 * L52/PF6541 * L11/S127/PF6539 * PF5856 * L151/PF6542 * CTS7650/PF6544/S1164

MJost

Chad Rohlfsen
02-13-2015, 05:24 AM
I corrected my post. thx for the catch.

MJost

You bet. Where are we at for m343, l278, m269, l23, and such with these extra snp's? How about for me? I'm supposedly positive for everything L11, but negative for p312 and u106. I know I've got p311,310,l52,l151. Not sure about the rest or the order. I'm getting my big y in a couple weeks. Thanks!

Ignis90
02-13-2015, 06:44 AM
In the Bekada study, R1b-L51 clades were 3.6% in Morocco and 6% in Algeria, but absent in the rest of North Africa. R1b-V88 was 1% in Morocco, 3% in Algeria, 2% in Tunisia, 6% in Libya, 3% in Egypt, and 7% in Mauritania/Western Sahara. R1b-M269(xL23) was 3% in Egypt, 1% in Algeria, and 1% in Mauritania/Western Sahara.

R1b*(xM269, V88) was absent, as was R1b-L23(xL51). R2 was found only in Egypt at 0.5%.

In the city of Sousse in Tunisia (Fadhlaoui-Zid et al 2014), V88 was 1% and R(xR1b-M269, R1a-M198, R1b-V88) was 4%. No R1b-M269 in this one. No idea what the extra R was.

A couple of Algerians @ 23andme turned out R1* btw. Not meaningful, but still interesting.

What is sure is as a whole, R1b and R are very minor in Berbers (nowadays?), except in Siwa Berbers (who are in all ways possible very distinct). ANE is also at 0% or close in Northwest Africa.

rms2
02-13-2015, 12:19 PM
Gotcha! Hmm.. I wonder if that fits the Repin group. That would mean that if it went through Cotafeni, it would be full on L11 by then. We need some damn samples from the western half of Yamnaya.

Yes, and I have mentioned a couple of times that Samara is pretty far east, although I am thankful they bagged that R1b1 hunter-gatherer, which I think is probably just as or even more important than all seven of the Yamnaya boys.

It would sure be nice to see some ancient y-dna from Yamnaya in the Carpathian Basin and on the Hungarian Plain along with some from subsequent cultures that sprang up nearby, like Vucedol.

alan
02-13-2015, 12:23 PM
I think your theory continues to look good Alan, but that date seems rather earlier than those on the dated map which you located in your researches.

I may well be misremembering but I thought it was around that sort of time in the the paper I posted about Iran and the Zagros and others and I saw a pretty similarly early date for Butovo in Europe. Was it not from 9500 or at least 9000BC. I suppose the exact date is not important to explain this Spanish guy as long as the pressure blades did penetrate into SW Asia's east Med. coast by the time Cardial was taking off. Cardial took off for Europe in the 7th millennium didnt it. One of the papers traced the pressure blades as having some sort of east to west date cline in SW Asia with Iran several thousand years before they reached the Levant in the second half of the 7th millenium. It does seem to me that Cardial was heading for Europe around the same time pressure microblades reached the Levant and western Turkey and a thin overlap window might explain why small amounts of P25 or perhaps V88 made it into Cardial. It really does seem likely it was very small amounts though when we consider that Cardial and LBK are considered autosomal twins practically and its never been found before in these cultures in a fairly large sample. Might also explain why he had no ANE if he was a stray who had been in other populations of farmers for centuries.

I have suggested the alternative of a link of this Spanish R1b guy to pointed pot in the Roucadourian of the Garrone area but I hadnt had time to think through the chronology. I think it can be dumped now having looked into it. There is very little about this culture easily accessible on the Web in English. I seems to be immediately pre-Cardial in the classic French paper by Arnal if my very bad French is reading this correctly. There seems to still today be real uncertainty about the Roucadourian judging by the summary of it in this more up to date paper http://www.academia.edu/2335044/Neolithic_transition_processes_in_southern_Europe_ The_present_state_of_knowledge_and_its_deficiencie s_in_Northern_Italy_and_Southwestern_France

Removed post

rms2
02-13-2015, 12:50 PM
. . .

If this Spanish farmer dates to around 6000BC then chronologically the pointed pot theory I brought up yesterday fails and can be binned now. The Neolithic theory looks much more likely.

He dates closer to the other end of the 6th millennium BC:

Troc3/I0410 (5178-5066 cal BCE, MAMS 16161)

The R1b1 hunter-gatherer from Samara was about 500 years older:

I0124/SVP44 (5640-5555 cal BCE, Beta-392490)

alan
02-13-2015, 01:36 PM
He dates closer to the other end of the 6th millennium BC:

Troc3/I0410 (5178-5066 cal BCE, MAMS 16161)

The R1b1 hunter-gatherer from Samara was about 500 years older:

I0124/SVP44 (5640-5555 cal BCE, Beta-392490)

Thanks - its such a big paper its exhausting to go hunting after something I have forgotten in it. I need to take a few notes probably. To be honest the Roucadourian stuff is just too badly understood to know its date but its pre-Cardial in the area. Swifterbant, the closest pointed pot culture to France and Iberia is quoted as starting about 5000BC. I suppose a date around 5000BC for the Spanish farmer leaves it open although it only leaves a very tight window for such a hunter to lose all his ANE and WHG

The alternative of a stray R1b guy spreading west in overwhelmingly non-R1b Cardial farming wave would mean this guy got caught up in Cardial near the start in Levant because Cardials path doesnt get any closer to the likely R1b steppe zone east of the Dniester than the Adriatic so I cant see how R1b could have been picked up in the Balkans for instance. Seem possible a little basal R1b spilled into SW Asian from the north after the Younger Dryas - possibly tracked by the pressure microblades - and that this may also be the origin of the basal forms we still see around Iran today. A couple of of those guys may have made it into these G dominated people on the east Med. coast just before they headed west.

alan
02-13-2015, 01:43 PM
Well I think we have indirect evidence that L51 was on the steppe anyway. It seems likely it is as old as 4500-4000BC and that at least 500 years lie between it and L11. Well, we can see that L51xL11 is very rare and it would be pretty absurd to see it as expanding on some farming crest of the wave. It suggests to me that the period between L51 and L11 - perhaps c. 4500/4000 to 4000/3500BC was spent in a place with limited agriculture and a barely above survival demography/subsistance strategy. That of course fits a steppe position very well. There is little doubt that steppe life for R1b and a was not one that led to much demographic explosion when you look at how little clades survive prior to 3500BC give or take a couple of centuries. Not to mention of course its total absence in Neolithic samples in farming Europe. So, as well as the P297-M269-L23-L23xL51 sequence looking like a steppe or adjacent thing, it seems highly probably that L51 was in the steppe to me and only entered farming Europe in numbers in L11 form. Similar patterns are also of course true for R1a.

Isidro
02-13-2015, 02:12 PM
To the extent that people will go to prove their point is ridiculous. R1b1 was found in Neolithic times in Iberia, possibly of a pastoralist or Mesolithic individual. Deal with it own it and move forward. Before further testing it would be the smart thing to do.

alan
02-13-2015, 02:24 PM
Think in a year or two there should be an DNA ancestry package tour that take you node by node down your YDNA chain, finishing a R at Lake Baikal unless anyone wants to go for an extra month and follow their yDNA back through SW Asia to Africa.

alan
02-13-2015, 02:41 PM
To the extent that people will go to prove their point is ridiculous. R1b1 was found in Neolithic times in Iberia, possibly of a pastoralist or Mesolithic individual. Deal with it own it and move forward. Before further testing it would be the smart thing to do.

Your missing the point. The Iberian guy c. 5000BC was from an above P297 branch off rather like the basal clades in and around Iran today and scattered very thinly elsewhere. The point is he is only potentially ancestral to other R1b P25 people who are P297 negative today. The samara guy was P297 and clearly did share much closer ancestry with the L23 and derived Yamnaya guys in the same locality. The Iberian guy dating around 5000BC means he could have come as a stray with Cardial or he could have been a stray hunter from the northern European ANE bearing Mesolithic hunters. However the timeframe seems too tight and he has a lack of hunter genes and ANE so it does seem more likely he arrived with Cardial up to 1000 years earlier and that would give him plenty of time for some timeat the Cardial origin point and across the whole length of the Med. plus 1000-500 years among farmers in Iberia to lose any hunter genes.

alan
02-13-2015, 02:42 PM
To the extent that people will go to prove their point is ridiculous. R1b1 was found in Neolithic times in Iberia, possibly of a pastoralist or Mesolithic individual. Deal with it own it and move forward. Before further testing it would be the smart thing to do.

I also believe no R1b existed anywhere in Europe or SW Asia until 9500BC and it was Siberian up to then.

alan
02-13-2015, 02:43 PM
As a side issue, what is the latest thinking on the origin date of V88

Hok
02-13-2015, 04:14 PM
I said years ago I expect U106 in Corded Ware.

On the other hand, I don't think Beaker had much to do with Germanic languages. I think its connection is to Italo-Celtic.

Yes, R1b U106 out of all the R1b L51 subclades probably played an important role for the Proto-Germanic language and i am convinced that R1b U106 will be found in the western zones of Corded Ware.

rms2
02-13-2015, 04:29 PM
To the extent that people will go to prove their point is ridiculous. R1b1 was found in Neolithic times in Iberia, possibly of a pastoralist or Mesolithic individual. Deal with it own it and move forward. Before further testing it would be the smart thing to do.

I think we have much more to own and deal with in the Samara results.

The facts remain that 1) the El Trocs R1b1 may be V88+ (they didn't get a read for V88), and 2) it is extremely unlikely that this individual is the ancestor of most Western European R1b, since all the SNPs between his R1b1 and L23 would have had to have arisen independently in two widely separated places (Spain and Russia) and in the same order, unless one wants to argue the nearly impossible scenario that El Trocs is also the ancestor of the Yamnaya males from Samara.

Remember too that the R1b1 hunter-gatherer from Samara predates El Trocs by 500 years and is far more likely to be the ancestor of European R1b.

Megalophias
02-13-2015, 05:15 PM
Somewhat tangential, but they didn't fail to *test* for the missing SNPs like V88 - they just didn't have reads for those SNPs. According to the paper they tested everyone for all the Y-SNPs on the ISOGG 2013 tree, but the coverage was not good enough to capture a lot of SNPs. The Spanish R1b1 guy was only 3x coverage for Y-SNPs, and a lot of samples were worse.

rms2
02-13-2015, 07:40 PM
Somewhat tangential, but they didn't fail to *test* for the missing SNPs like V88 - they just didn't have reads for those SNPs. According to the paper they tested everyone for all the Y-SNPs on the ISOGG 2013 tree, but the coverage was not good enough to capture a lot of SNPs. The Spanish R1b1 guy was only 3x coverage for Y-SNPs, and a lot of samples were worse.

Okay, I see that now. That makes sense and explains a lot.



The 390k capture reagent targeted all SNPs present in the Y-DNA SNP index of the International
Society of Genetic Genealogy (ISOGG) version 8.22 as of April 22, 2013
(http://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNA_SNP_Index.html).

I will correct my post above.

Il PapÓ
02-13-2015, 08:07 PM
Somewhat tangential, but they didn't fail to *test* for the missing SNPs like V88 - they just didn't have reads for those SNPs. According to the paper they tested everyone for all the Y-SNPs on the ISOGG 2013 tree, but the coverage was not good enough to capture a lot of SNPs. The Spanish R1b1 guy was only 3x coverage for Y-SNPs, and a lot of samples were worse.

they failed to read/test V88 that's about the same ,it's a bit playing with the words.

parasar
02-13-2015, 10:06 PM
they failed to read/test V88 that's about the same ,it's a bit playing with the words.

If they had failed to test then there is a chance the sample could still be tested. But if the sample has no read at the position we are not going to know the state at the V88 locus.

Isidro
02-13-2015, 11:20 PM
To be honest I haven't seen R1b1 from Els trocs autosomal results. Thank you for sharing how you see and interpret the results in a reasonable way; but, I see it like it all amounts to results from aDNA and why the one result from Els Trocs was a Cardial scattered individual by default eludes me. Maybe I am missing something.I see it as a huge result that should impact how we deduct how populations spread differently than before the paper was published. In addition, multiple Yamnaya-horizon R1b-23+ were found. Unfortunately not the predominant Western European branch one, like some were expecting.So yes, The "Spanish guy" and the Sarmana R1b hunter gatherer are a big deal.


Your missing the point. The Iberian guy c. 5000BC was from an above P297 branch off rather like the basal clades in and around Iran today and scattered very thinly elsewhere. The point is he is only potentially ancestral to other R1b P25 people who are P297 negative today. The samara guy was P297 and clearly did share much closer ancestry with the L23 and derived Yamnaya guys in the same locality. The Iberian guy dating around 5000BC means he could have come as a stray with Cardial or he could have been a stray hunter from the northern European ANE bearing Mesolithic hunters. However the timeframe seems too tight and he has a lack of hunter genes and ANE so it does seem more likely he arrived with Cardial up to 1000 years earlier and that would give him plenty of time for some timeat the Cardial origin point and across the whole length of the Med. plus 1000-500 years among farmers in Iberia to lose any hunter genes.

J Man
02-14-2015, 12:20 AM
To be honest I haven't seen R1b1 from Els trocs autosomal results. Thank you for sharing how you see and interpret the results in a reasonable way; but, I see it like it all amounts to results from aDNA and why the one result from Els Trocs was a Cardial scattered individual by default eludes me. Maybe I am missing something.I see it as a huge result that should impact how we deduct how populations spread differently than before the paper was published. In addition, multiple Yamnaya-horizon R1b-23+ were found. Unfortunately not the predominant Western European branch one, like some were expecting.So yes, The "Spanish guy" and the Sarmana R1b hunter gatherer are a big deal.

So the Yamnaya R1b guys are not the direct paternal line ancestors of most modern day West European R1b men?

Il PapÓ
02-14-2015, 12:21 AM
If they had failed to test then there is a chance the sample could still be tested. But if the sample has no read at the position we are not going to know the state at the V88 locus.

are you really sure about this ?

newtoboard
02-14-2015, 12:27 AM
I said years ago I expect U106 in Corded Ware.

On the other hand, I don't think Beaker had much to do with Germanic languages. I think its connection is to Italo-Celtic.

I should have said modern day Germanic speakers. CTS4385+ might have been a fellow traveler with P312+. Its distribution is certainly a good candidate for having traveled with P312+. It is often called the NW European clade and really is concentrated in that region while other Germanic associated clades like U106 do have some presence in East Central Europe (I'm thinking Poland, the Czech republic, Slovakia and Hungary). It might have been associated with Beaker and shifted to Germanic later along with other P312+ clades in Germany.

newtoboard
02-14-2015, 12:34 AM
The admixture results have blue-green peaking east of the Zagros in Central Asian populations. Some of the earliest PIE evidence exists in Turkey and Syria, so should be no surprise that this component shows up there. I'm certain it arrived AFTER the spread of farmers to Europe though, since LBK and Spanish farmers were nearly completely EEF without even a sprinkle of blue-green.

If we want to associate YDNA groups to this component, the strongest options are : R1b-Z2103, R1a-Z93, J2, and possibly L. Seeing the genomes from the ancient mid-east would help. PPN, Sumerian, BMAC are some which come to mind.

Highly improbable that E-V13 were PIE speakers, but J2 has always been a strong possibility IMHO. If it is found within a Sumerian context, and those southern Iraq cultures are closer to EEF than to Central Asian ones, we can probably rule it out.

Maybe J2 traveled with Late PIE speakers. Recall J2b has two regions of concentration. One in North India. And one in the Balkans. But the concentration in North India might actually suggested Indo-Aryan speakers pushed J2b into the Ganges basin and out of the IVC basin. Maybe it entered the steppe from the Caucasus post Yamnaya but I doubt it was speaking PIE.

On the other hand the only non R1 lineage found from the steppe from aDNA has been shown to be G2a.

Isidro
02-14-2015, 01:03 AM
You are right, Els Trocs R1b1 could be V88+ and it could mean a big twist in the accepted line of thinking about V88+ spread in relation not only to the Neolithic Iberian R1b1 but also to the Samara hunter gatherer results since they all are R1b.On the second point, how do we know the mutations did not occur in one place and spread in two places?. the bountiful one in Western Europe being R1b+ (XL23). Yamnaya results are L23+, it is what they are, with all the mutation added through time.And autosomaly speaking the amount EEF in Western Europeans has to have some type of equivalent Y chromosome DNA I imagine.



I think we have much more to own and deal with in the Samara results.

The facts remain that 1) the El Trocs R1b1 may be V88+ (they didn't get a read for V88), and 2) it is extremely unlikely that this individual is the ancestor of most Western European R1b, since all the SNPs between his R1b1 and L23 would have had to have arisen independently in two widely separated places (Spain and Russia) and in the same order, unless one wants to argue the nearly impossible scenario that El Trocs is also the ancestor of the Yamnaya males from Samara.

Remember too that the R1b1 hunter-gatherer from Samara predates El Trocs by 500 years and is far more likely to be the ancestor of European R1b.

Isidro
02-14-2015, 01:21 AM
So the Yamnaya R1b guys are not the direct paternal line ancestors of most modern day West European R1b men?

Yamnaya R1b were R1bL23+. There are descendants of that branch in Europe today , I don't know how big it is or where it's concentrated. but the most populous R1b in Western Europe is R1b+(x23)

newtoboard
02-14-2015, 01:27 AM
Yamnaya R1b were R1bL23+. There are descendants of that branch in Europe today , I don't know how big it is or where it's concentrated. but the most populous R1b in Western Europe is R1b+(x23)


Most were also Z2103+. In Europe seems to be concentrated in the Balkans but pockets all over Europe from the UK to Italy to the Urals.

nuadha
02-14-2015, 02:13 AM
The bit about the El Trocs R1b1 having even the remotest possibility of being the ancestor of Western European R1b's doesn't make sense.

In Samara you have six out of seven Yamnaya men all derived for M269 and L23, the seventh who was P297, and a hunter-gatherer who was R1b1. Five of those Yamnaya men were Z2103, but Z2103 did not come from another planet; it is a brother clade to L51, which is, like Z2103, derived for M269 and L23.

At El Trocs you have one R1b1 guy in a Neolithic Epicardial group of I2's (working from memory here). If he is the ancestor of Western European R1b's, he would have had to establish a y line in which all those SNPs between R1b1 and L23 arose independently of those that arose between R1b1 and L23 in Samara or at least in the R1b source population of Samara, unless one wants to claim that the Yamnaya guys are also descended from the El Trocs R1b1.

That just makes absolutely no sense and gives the impression of someone scraping to rescue R1b priority for an Iberian homeland.

M269 arising independently in the steppe and Spain is statistically impossible. Its not worth a moments thought. The only possible way to salvage the idea that M269 arose in West Europe is to say that the yamnaya descend from M269 West Europeans. However, all the evidence is soundly against this and decidedly favors an origin of M269 on the steppe. Some points on R1b.

* R1b1 is more likely to have originated in the Eurasian steppe given that with only a singe test it was found to be present, the fact that the related haplogroups R* and R1a both have an relatively early presence in North Eurasia, and that all three are tied together autosomally which reinforces common descent.

* Neither M269 nor R1b1a2a2 could not have originated in West Europe since R1b1a2a2 is found in the yamnaya at a location far from Western Europe but at a time relatively close to the genesis of M269 and R1b1a2a2. In other words M269 and R1b1a2a2 probably originated not too far from the Samara Valley.

* Neither M269 nor R1b1a2a2 originated in the Middle East. The natural hypothesis that M269 and R1b1a2a2 originated locally and the complete absence of direct evidence that M269 was in the Middle East before 5kya, should render any hypothesis claiming a Middle Eastern origin of M269 as speculative and unlikely. The fact that 7 out of 7 yamnaya were found to be M269 tells us that the that its very improbable that M269 was introduced to the steppe, because if it were, we would expect more Samara Yamnaya to be non M269.

The steppe origin for R1b1a2a2 and M269 isn't just plausible, its what the evidence decidedly favors.

rms2
02-14-2015, 02:48 AM
You are right, Els Trocs R1b1 could be V88+ and it could mean a big twist in the accepted line of thinking about V88+ spread in relation not only to the Neolithic Iberian R1b1 but also to the Samara hunter gatherer results since they all are R1b.On the second point, how do we know the mutations did not occur in one place and spread in two places?. the bountiful one in Western Europe being R1b+ (XL23). Yamnaya results are L23+, it is what they are, with all the mutation added through time.And autosomaly speaking the amount EEF in Western Europeans has to have some type of equivalent Y chromosome DNA I imagine.

Well, pretty obviously, R1b1 did arise in one place, and it got to Spain and Africa, as well as Asia and Europe. The thing is, it most likely arose in Northern Eurasia, probably Siberia. We have Mal'ta Boy from near Lake Baikal in Siberia who is R* and about 24k years old. Now we have an R1b1 hunter-gatherer from Samara about 7600 years old who is autosomally an Eastern Hunter Gatherer (EHG) and who plots right next to the R1a hunter-gatherer from Karelia. Not too far from where he was found, we have seven out of seven Yamnaya males who are R1b: one R1b-P297, one R1b-L23, and five who are R1b-Z2103.

On top of that, we know that R1b has an east-to-west phylogeography.

The point of all that is that it is plain that the El Trocs R1b1 was not all that "bountiful", since Western European R1b's cannot be descended from him.

rms2
02-14-2015, 02:58 AM
. . . but the most populous R1b in Western Europe is R1b+(x23)

No. Most European R1b is L11+, and L11 is downstream of L23 and L51: M207>M173>M343>P25>P297>M269>L23>L51>L11. In other words, by far most European R1b is L23+.

P312 and U106 are the two big divisions of L11.

Five of the seven Yamnaya males were L23+ but belonged to the Z2103 clade, which is brother to L51 (a sixth one was L23*, and a seventh was P297). It is likely that L51 will also turn up in Yamnaya remains, possibly farther west, since we know the ancestors of today's Western European R1b's went west at some point, and Yamnaya spread into the Carpathian Basin and the Hungarian Plain.

Isidro
02-14-2015, 06:14 AM
The point of all that is that it is plain that the El Trocs R1b1 was not all that "bountiful", since Western European R1b's cannot be descended from him.

I must be losing the English I know...where is that come from?

Isidro
02-14-2015, 06:28 AM
Thank you for the lesson in properly writing that the Yamnaya were L23 but not L51.

To end this lively exchange with you and those that still think that I need to understand that Western European R1b does not come from Iberia -PLEASE- I got it.I got your point. I am a logical guy. I still think That R1b1 in Iberia at that time is a big deal. No need to expand any further and make our points of view more clear than they are now I assume.




No. Most European R1b is L11+, and L11 is downstream of L23 and L51: M207>M173>M343>P25>P297>M269>L23>L51>L11. In other words, by far most European R1b is L23+.

P312 and U106 are the two big divisions of L11.

Five of the seven Yamnaya males were L23+ but belonged to the Z2103 clade, which is brother to L51 (a sixth one was L23*, and a seventh was P297). It is likely that L51 will also turn up in Yamnaya remains, possibly farther west, since we know the ancestors of today's Western European R1b's went west at some point, and Yamnaya spread into the Carpathian Basin and the Hungarian Plain.

rms2
02-14-2015, 12:16 PM
I must be losing the English I know...where is that come from?

From your use of the word "bountiful" here and erroneously applying it to an L23- branch of R1b:



You are right, Els Trocs R1b1 could be V88+ and it could mean a big twist in the accepted line of thinking about V88+ spread in relation not only to the Neolithic Iberian R1b1 but also to the Samara hunter gatherer results since they all are R1b.On the second point, how do we know the mutations did not occur in one place and spread in two places?. the bountiful one in Western Europe being R1b+ (XL23). Yamnaya results are L23+, it is what they are, with all the mutation added through time.And autosomaly speaking the amount EEF in Western Europeans has to have some type of equivalent Y chromosome DNA I imagine.

rms2
02-14-2015, 12:33 PM
Thank you for the lesson in properly writing that the Yamnaya were L23 but not L51.

To end this lively exchange with you and those that still think that I need to understand that Western European R1b does not come from Iberia -PLEASE- I got it.I got your point. I am a logical guy. I still think That R1b1 in Iberia at that time is a big deal. No need to expand any further and make our points of view more clear than they are now I assume.

This thread is really not about you. You may get it already, but not everyone else does, as is apparent from some of the incredibly asinine stuff that has been posted (not by you) here at Anthrogenica since the news broke of the sledgehammer-to-the-head obvious connection between Yamnaya, PIE, and R1b.

For those who still need it, the Els Trocs R1b1 guy had a line like this: M207>M173>M343>M415 (M415 is on the same level as P25).

All of the Yamnaya guys save one (who was R1b-P297) had lines that went at least this far: M207>M173>M343>M415>P297>M269>L23. Five of the seven got a step further, a couple to Z2105, and a couple to Z2103 (Z2105 and Z2103 are on the same level).

By far most European R1b's today track like this: M207>M173>M343>M415>P297>M269>L23 and then on to L51>L11 and then either to P312 or U106 and beyond to some terminal SNP downstream of either of those.

Notice that the Samara Yamnaya boys and we modern Westerners have that same M207>M173>M343>M415>P297>M269>L23 track. We part company with some (but not all) of them just past L23, where some of them descend from a Z2103/Z2105 ancestor who was a relative of our L51 ancestor. My own opinion is that L51 (and maybe L11) was in Yamnaya but in the part that went west, into the Carpathian Basin, the Hungarian Plain, and on up the Danube, getting caught up in Corded Ware and Beaker, especially the latter.

Isidro
02-14-2015, 02:07 PM
The point of all that is that it is plain that the El Trocs R1b1 was not all that "bountiful", since Western European R1b's cannot be descended from him.

I think what you are doing by adding that comment to my quote is missing the point I was making, not only that, you extrapolate and infer that I said that all L51 descended from Els Trocs sample.

Regardless of what I think You don't know for sure where L51 came to be and expanded from. I would think after so many years in this hobby you would at least contemplate that the Yamnana -L51 results combined with the R1b1 from Iberia and Samara's R1b opens more question than it has answered in light of having found 2 R1b's with a possible
3 continent spread.
These results are not proof of a Kurgan riders answer to all R1b in Europe, to some yes not all.The day it is found in the steppe with a clear path to Europe I will celebrate, the same way that I will celebrate if it is found elsewhere.

Actually, even reading the paper I even get the feeling they were semi apologizing for having found a R1b1 in Iberia.

Why spend so many entries, you and Alan about the ELS Trocs results if it is so clear.

rms2
02-14-2015, 02:18 PM
. . .

Why spend so many entries, you and Alan about the ELS Trocs results if it is so clear.

Well, because I find it interesting and because you keep posting things that betray a misunderstanding of the results of this paper. It is also necessary to point out why Els Trocs cannot be the ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's because so much damage was done to good sense in the past by the R1b-in-the-FC-Ice-Age-Refuge error. We have already spent years trying to recover from it. I still get asked by project members about their connection to "Basque cavemen". Yikes!

Besides, the results are clear to those who understand something of the R1b phylogeny, but not everyone does, so it wants explaining from time to time.

Isidro
02-14-2015, 02:22 PM
This thread is really not about you.

I really want to avoid this line of exchanges... I don't like your attitude so much. I had what I had to say and I will leave it at that.

And by the way when you say 'WE" in your quotes as "them and us" mentality, I think you are in the wrong hobby.

Isidro
02-14-2015, 02:25 PM
"Well, because I find it interesting and because you keep posting things that betray a misunderstanding of the results of this paper."

The only one that betrays the sense of exploration is you by trying to spoon feed you theories to others.

rms2
02-14-2015, 02:30 PM
I really want to avoid this line of exchanges... I don't like your attitude so much. I had what I had to say and I will leave it at that.

And by the way when you say 'WE" in your quotes as "them and us" mentality, I think you are in the wrong hobby.

That was an extraordinary post for someone who wants "to avoid this line of exchanges", but you have posted worse before.

I really don't care what you think of my attitude. I remember your dyspeptic advocacy of the FC Ice Age Refuge for R1b back on the old dna-forums, which seemed to stem more from Iberian ethnocentrism than reason, so this is not surprising.

You don't get to decide what hobbies I involve myself in, but at least my reasons for choosing this one do not include stumping for the priority of one particular nation or ethnic group in the genesis of my own y haplogroup.

r_r_abril
02-14-2015, 03:10 PM
The Ice Age Iberian refuge theory was put forward by Brian Sykes.

rms2
02-14-2015, 03:13 PM
The Ice Age Iberian refuge theory was put forward by Brian Sykes.

Among others. No doubt there was an Iberian Ice Age Refuge, but R1b probably wasn't in it.

The problem with that theory is that it was spread as gospel for R1b long before anybody really knew much (like the fact that most Iberian R1b is P312+ and DF27+), and that confused a lot of people. Now we spend half our time trying to undo the damage caused by it.

r_r_abril
02-14-2015, 03:24 PM
1) I am not saying that R1b originated in the Iberian Peninsula. I am just affirming that the Els Trocs samples open new lines of investigation. Some months ago, many people thought that R1b was introduced in Western Europe along with the Indo-european languages. Well, after the publishing of Dr. Reich's paper we now that both M343 and P25 were already present in the Iberian Peninsula 2.000 years before the arising of the Bell Beaker culture and the Yamnaya Horizon.

2) Some of you say, that if extensive DNA analysis are done, L11* and L51* will be certainly be found in decent quantities in the Don and the Dnieper Basins. With the same line of reasoning: why couldn't they also be found in Spain? After all, M343 and P25 already reached the Iberian Peninsula in Neolithic times (probably with the Cardial pottery). So could have done L23.

3) I am not saying that the Iberian Peninsula is the original R1b homeland. I'm just afirming that in my opinion, both R1b and L51 attained the Iberian Peninsula long before the introduction of the Indoeuropean languages.

rms2
02-14-2015, 03:52 PM
1) I am not saying that R1b originated in the Iberian Peninsula. I am just affirming that the Els Trocs samples open new lines of investigation. Some months ago, many people thought that R1b was introduced in Western Europe along with the Indo-european languages. Well, after the publishing of Dr. Reich's paper we now that both M343 and P25 were already present in the Iberian Peninsula 2.000 years before the arising of the Bell Beaker culture and the Yamnaya Horizon.

What is it you have missed in this discussion? R1b probably was introduced to Western Europe along with IE languages, just as Haak et al asserts and David Reich himself said at his lecture (as reported by Jean Manco).

Els Trocs does not change that, since it is next to impossible for him to be the ancestor of most Western European R1b's.



2) Some of you say, that if extensive DNA analysis are done, L11* and L51* will be certainly be found in decent quantities in the Don and the Dnieper Basins. With the same line of reasoning: why couldn't they also be found in Spain? After all, M343 and P25 already reached the Iberian Peninsula in Neolithic times (probably with the Cardial pottery). So could have done L23.

Well, there have been plenty of Neolithic samples obtained, and the Els Trocs R1b1 is one out of about 70. No ancient L23, L51, or L11 has been found in Spain yet. On the other hand, ancient L23 has turned up in Russia.

Since we have Mal'ta Boy found near Lake Baikal in Siberia, and he is R* and 24k years old; and an R1b1 (L278) hunter-gatherer about 7700 years old from Samara who plots right next to a 7500-year-old R1a1 hunter-gatherer from Karelia; along with all those R1b-L23 Yamnaya guys from the 4th millennium BC; it certainly looks more likely that any R1b found in Iberia has a Russian origin than the other way around.



3) I am not saying that the Iberian Peninsula is the original R1b homeland. I'm just afirming that in my opinion, both R1b and L51 attained the Iberian Peninsula long before the introduction of the Indoeuropean languages.

R1b yes, obviously, at least one, but L51? No, not at all likely.

Since L51 is L23+ (L23>L51), and we know L23 was on the steppe in the 4th millennium BC among PIE's, it is not at all likely that L51 predates the arrival of Indo-European anywhere in Western Europe.

jeanL
02-14-2015, 04:38 PM
Notice that the Samara Yamnaya boys and we modern Westerners have that same M207>M173>M343>M415>P297>M269>L23 track. We part company with some (but not all) of them just past L23, where some of them descend from a Z2103/Z2105 ancestor who was a relative of our L51 ancestor. My own opinion is that L51 (and maybe L11) was in Yamnaya but in the part that went west, into the Carpathian Basin, the Hungarian Plain, and on up the Danube, getting caught up in Corded Ware and Beaker, especially the latter.

For the R1b-P312 to be found in Bell Beaker circa 2200 BC you need R1b-L11 to have risen at least at 3370 BC(For those using only 8 mutations at the L11 level) or 4020 BC for those using 13 mutations at the L11 level, this is using the lower bound of 130 years per SNPs. Thus any R1b-L51 found in Western Yamnaya will likely belong to a different branch, what this likely means is that R1b-L51 will have to have lived and exited the Steppe in pre-Yamnaya times, unless one wants to argue that R1b-L11 was born in the Steppe???

jeanL
02-14-2015, 04:49 PM
Well, because I find it interesting and because you keep posting things that betray a misunderstanding of the results of this paper. It is also necessary to point out why Els Trocs cannot be the ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's because so much damage was done to good sense in the past by the R1b-in-the-FC-Ice-Age-Refuge error. We have already spent years trying to recover from it. I still get asked by project members about their connection to "Basque cavemen". Yikes!

Besides, the results are clear to those who understand something of the R1b phylogeny, but not everyone does, so it wants explaining from time to time.

There were no Basques back in 5000 BC, now as I said to Chad when you guys say stuff such as "Els Trocs cannot be be ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's" just goes to show a very deep lack of understanding of probability theory. Truth be told, El Trocs is far more likely to be the ancestor of all Western European R1b's than any of the Yamnaya males tested. Why? Because he has plenty of time to accumulate mutations whereas Yamnaya do not, now as migrations and historic record, need I remind you that the ratio of samples to overall population we are working with is incredibly small, and a lot of this samples are anything but random, as we are testing dead people, not a random sample of the population. Not trying to vindicate myself or anything, but back in 2012 I was one of the people who said in worldfamilies.net where you are a moderator that R1b had not been found in Western Europe because they had not looked in the right places, and you asked me, and I said the mountainous fringes of Western Europe(i.e. The Pyrenees), now it was found there. Now before you all rain down on my with the whole zombie/Basque/Iberian refuge Iberophobia, I have also to admit that R1b1 found in Samara HG makes it a more likely candidate to be the ancestor of all modern day European R1b's by virtue of it being older, thus more statistically likely to accumulate mutations. I should also point out, that all this is based on the data we have at hand, that is, if either Samara HG and El Trocs turns out to carry any mutations not in the R1b-L11 ancestral line, then their true probabilities of being ancestral most to European R1b's will definitely decay down to nearly(Why nearly, because there is an extremely small, yet nonzero probability for a back mutation, but for all intensive purposes it can be thought of as zero) zero.

PS: I personally don't want to get a rise out of you(Whom I know has heart issues) or anything, you are older than me, and I have a lot of respect for you and others here, if it wasn't for you guys we wouldn't know a lot of SNPs that we know today, and I understand it can be extremely frustrating when you want to know the origin of your paternal line, and still can't zero in on it. My main issue is that as an scientist I do get extremely aggravated when I see absolute statements thrown around in otherwise random scenarios. Look at history, the Titanic was unsinkable, etc. BTW back in the pre-ancient DNA era, I can definitely see how the whole R1b Iberian caveman thing could have come to be, it was what the observable data made it seem like back then. In order for science to progress who all have to keep an open mind and be ready to have our hypotheses rocked to the ground!

alan
02-14-2015, 05:18 PM
There were no Basques back in 5000 BC, now as I said to Chad when you guys say stuff such as "Els Trocs cannot be be ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's" just goes to show a very deep lack of understanding of probability theory. Truth be told, El Trocs is far more likely to be the ancestor of all Western European R1b's than any of the Yamnaya males tested. Why? Because he has plenty of time to accumulate mutations whereas Yamnaya do not, now as migrations and historic record, need I remind you that the ratio of samples to overall population we are working with is incredibly small, and a lot of this samples are anything but random, as we are testing dead people, not a random sample of the population. Not trying to vindicate myself or anything, but back in 2012 I was one of the people who said in worldfamilies.net where you are a moderator that R1b had not been found in Western Europe because they had not looked in the right places, and you asked me, and I said the mountainous fringes of Western Europe(i.e. The Pyrenees), now it was found there. Now before you all rain down on my with the whole zombie/Basque/Iberian refuge Iberophobia, I have also to admit that R1b1 found in Samara HG makes it a more likely candidate to be the ancestor of all modern day European R1b's by virtue of it being older, thus more statistically likely to accumulate mutations. I should also point out, that all this is based on the data we have at hand, that is, if either Samara HG and El Trocs turns out to carry any mutations not in the R1b-L11 ancestral line, then their true probabilities of being ancestral most to European R1b's will definitely decay down to nearly(Why nearly, because there is an extremely small, yet nonzero probability for a back mutation, but for all intensive purposes it can be thought of as zero) zero.

PS: I personally don't want to get a rise out of you(Whom I know has heart issues) or anything, you are older than me, and I have a lot of respect for you and others here, if it wasn't for you guys we wouldn't know a lot of SNPs that we know today, and I understand it can be extremely frustrating when you want to know the origin of your paternal line, and still can't zero in on it. My main issue is that as an scientist I do get extremely aggravated when I see absolute statements thrown around in otherwise random scenarios. Look at history, the Titanic was unsinkable, etc. BTW back in the pre-ancient DNA era, I can definitely see how the whole R1b Iberian caveman thing could have come to be, it was what the observable data made it seem like back then. In order for science to progress who all have to keep an open mind and be ready to have our hypotheses rocked to the ground!

L23 is in Samara 3000BC. It would be incredibly improbable that this mutation started in western Europe. For a start the people didnt carry European farmer type DNA so it didnt come from there. The two components in Samara Yamnaya are eastern hunter and some sort of non-European farmer sort of southern DNA. So I just dont see how L23 could have been from anywhere other than eastern Europe or - and this seem very unlikely - the north-eastern part of south-west Asia. Farming Europe seems to have no role at all in the autosomal genes of these L23 derived Yamnaya people. So, it looks like, even at the outside, you could rule out L23xL51 clades arising anywhere west of the Dnieper or - and this is unlikely-west of the Caucasus in south-west Asia. So, it is clear to me that farming Europeans had absolutely nothing to do with these R1b L23xL51 people.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-14-2015, 05:22 PM
That Spanish R1b is probably from the Near East, with Cardial. I am thinking that EHG is in EEF. R1b in the Near East, coupled with fstats showing Loschbour as 48%EHG, 52% outgroup, could point to that. If the rate of EHG in the non-Basal part of EEF is lower than Loschbour's rate, then he won't fill the 56% non-basal part, and EHG won't show up in admixture. Loschbour fits in at like 42%, so EEF could be 20%EHG. There is a possibility that some R1b reached Western Europe from Samara, but it won't have the same mutations. There is no migration from Western Europe to the Middle East and Central Asia. He is not ancestral, from Spain, but maybe West Asia.

alan
02-14-2015, 05:30 PM
That Spanish R1b is probably from the Near East, with Cardial. I am thinking that EHG is in EEF. R1b in the Near East, coupled with fstats showing Loschbour as 48%EHG, 52% outgroup, could point to that. If the rate of EHG in the non-Basal part of EEF is lower than Loschbour's rate, then he won't fill the 56% non-basal part, and EHG won't show up in admixture. Loschbour fits in at like 42%, so EEF could be 20%EHG. There is a possibility that some R1b reached Western Europe from Samara, but it won't have the same mutations. There is no migration from Western Europe to the Middle East and Central Asia. He is not ancestral, from Spain, but maybe West Asia.

Having thought this through a couple of times I think its practically impossible for an R1b person ultimately from the EHG zone to have come straight from a stray hunter pack c. 5000BC and somehow to have lost all his autosomal signature an eastern hunter gatherer should have by that date. There is only the narrowest of windows for this and on balance it seems much more likely this guy was part of a basal R1b offshoot that entered somewhere like Iran from western Siberia or adjacent after the Younger Dyas and the line ended up among the mainly G farmers heading to Europe with Cardial and ultimately to Iberia. That provides far more time for him to lose all his eastern hunter signature - potentially up to 4000 years of mixing with farming groups across SW Asia and Europe before arriving in Iberia.

ADW_1981
02-14-2015, 05:36 PM
There were no Basques back in 5000 BC, now as I said to Chad when you guys say stuff such as "Els Trocs cannot be be ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's" just goes to show a very deep lack of understanding of probability theory.

If he was, this would results in a west to east SNP diversity cline from Iberia/France to Eurasia and the Middle East, when it's actually the reverse (east to west). Furthermore, there is no archaeology supporting this type of movement of people from France/Iberia between 5000 BC to 3000 BC to the steppes.

alan
02-14-2015, 05:37 PM
For the R1b-P312 to be found in Bell Beaker circa 2200 BC you need R1b-L11 to have risen at least at 3370 BC(For those using only 8 mutations at the L11 level) or 4020 BC for those using 13 mutations at the L11 level, this is using the lower bound of 130 years per SNPs. Thus any R1b-L51 found in Western Yamnaya will likely belong to a different branch, what this likely means is that R1b-L51 will have to have lived and exited the Steppe in pre-Yamnaya times, unless one wants to argue that R1b-L11 was born in the Steppe???

Given the epic changes in modern distributions it is not impossible L11 did first exist on the steppe. Or it or its immediate L51 ancestor have left the steppe with the 1st Suvorovo wave which may have left the steppes a century or so before 4000BC. It doesnt change the big picture though.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-14-2015, 05:39 PM
Having thought this through a couple of times I think its practically impossible for an R1b person ultimately from the EHG zone to have come straight from a stray hunter pack c. 5000BC and somehow to have lost all his autosomal signature an eastern hunter gatherer should have by that date. There is only the narrowest of windows for this and on balance it seems much more likely this guy was part of a basal R1b offshoot that entered somewhere like Iran from western Siberia or adjacent after the Younger Dyas and the line ended up among the mainly G farmers heading to Europe with Cardial and ultimately to Iberia. That provides far more time for him to lose all his eastern hunter signature - potentially up to 4000 years of mixing with farming groups across SW Asia and Europe before arriving in Iberia.

You're missing the point... If EHG is in EEF, then he didn't lose his hunter signature!!!! It just makes up part of another cluster, like it does in Yamnaya.

jeanL
02-14-2015, 05:46 PM
Just a couple of things R1b-L23 is older than 3000 BC calibrating by the R1b-P312 guy in Bell Beaker circa 2200 BC. Using the lowest bound mutations of 8 mutations for L11 and 4 for L51 you get 3890 BC for the birth of R1b-L51, thus R1b-L23(xL51,Z2105) could have been in the Steppe for ~700-1000 years getting rid of the farmers DNA and mixing with the locals, is not impossible, just look at the R1b1 from Spain, whom as Chad pointed out he could have the EHG inside the EEF component. Now people let's not get carried away though, Loschbour could be fitted as 48% EHG and 52% Outgroup, this was assuming that he was admixed and that Karelia/Samara were not admixed. Now while the EHG admixture models fails marginally 3<|Z|<4 , it is the only one that produces admixtures from real populations(i.e. MA-1, Loschbour), the models that have Loschbour and MA-1 as admixed have fictitious or not yet discovered outgroups which they label A,B,C,etc. The authors also say, that this is all assuming no admixture, or admixture between two components, as it is right now, they cannot model bi-directional gene flow, or more complex scenarios, so again as I said no long ago, the keyword here is "models".

@Chad:


There is a possibility that some R1b reached Western Europe from Samara, but it won't have the same mutations. There is no migration from Western Europe to the Middle East and Central Asia. He is not ancestral, from Spain, but maybe West Asia.

Three questions:

Who do you know that is won't have the same mutations? R1b1 Samara, and R1b1 Spain as it is right now, look pretty similar.

Why should there be a migration from Western Europe to the Middle East and Central Asia for R1b to get there?

The Spanish guys is not ancestral, and the Titanic was unsinkable, the BP disaster couldn't happen, and the O-rings in the Challenger couldn't fail. All but the first scenario show the damage that speaking in absolute terms in otherwise random scenarios can have.

Quantify(if you can) the probability that the Spanish guy is not ancestral, and then get back to me. I can help you out too, first let's investigate how many SNPs are in between R1b1-M415 and R1b-P312, let's then fit this into the 2800 years that separate El Trocs from Bell Beaker P312. As I said before, it is far more likely that Samara HG is ancestral given its older age, but nonetheless it is a good exercise.

alan
02-14-2015, 05:49 PM
You're missing the point... If EHG is in EEF, then he didn't lose his hunter signature!!!! It just makes up part of another cluster, like it does in Yamnaya.
It seems to me EHG is basically some sort of WHG/ANE mix which probably came about when Siberians mixed with European hunters in the Mesolithic. I dont see much of a difference between WHG and EHG if you subtract ANE. We know that ANE is not present in early farmers. As far as I can guess, the early farmers did not pass through any potentially EHG are en-route to Cardial and Spain. The nearest Cardial came to eastern hunter gatherer type cultures was Adriatic NW Greece and the Adriatic Balkans coast. What archaeologically look to be eastern hunter gatherers to me dont extend west of Moldova. It seems much more likely that the SW Asian derived farmers didnt share autosomal makeup with eastern hunters although they could have picked up some WHG on their way through Europe. I think the report has autosomal DNA from a hunter from Hungary or the like and he had no EHG.

jeanL
02-14-2015, 05:53 PM
If he was, this would results in a west to east SNP diversity cline from Iberia/France to Eurasia and the Middle East, when it's actually the reverse (east to west). Furthermore, there is no archaeology supporting this type of movement of people from France/Iberia between 5000 BC to 3000 BC to the steppes.

Not really, not if Western Europe is dominated by R1b-P312 and R1b-U106, nonetheless, R1b-M343*(<=this doesn't mean ancestral), R1b-L23*, etc do make extremely rare yet known appearance in Western or at least Central Europe. All this tell us is that R1b-P312 and R1b-U106 were born in Europe and that after 3000 BC not only did they almost completely replace the G2a farmers in most places but also their R1b cousins.

alan
02-14-2015, 05:53 PM
Nevertheless the possibility that V88 could at least in small numbers have spread with Cardial is interesting in itself. At one time I recall V88 being dated relatively young - too young for such a spread. Do we have any V88 SNP count dates

Chad Rohlfsen
02-14-2015, 06:03 PM
It seems to me EHG is basically some sort of WHG/ANE mix which probably came about when Siberians mixed with European hunters in the Mesolithic. I dont see much of a difference between WHG and EHG if you subtract ANE. We know that ANE is not present in early farmers. As far as I can guess, the early farmers did not pass through any potentially EHG are en-route to Cardial and Spain. The nearest Cardial came to eastern hunter gatherer type cultures was Adriatic NW Greece and the Adriatic Balkans coast. What archaeologically look to be eastern hunter gatherers to me dont extend west of Moldova. It seems much more likely that the SW Asian derived farmers didnt share autosomal makeup with eastern hunters although they could have picked up some WHG on their way through Europe. I think the report has autosomal DNA from a hunter from Hungary or the like and he had no EHG.

Making it WHG ANE failed.. nothing positive putting ENA in it either. It's something different.

Chad Rohlfsen
02-14-2015, 06:09 PM
Jean, I think L51 to L11 happened in the Western Steppes. Maybe in Cotafeni or Kemi Oba, the L11 branch pops up, then splits into U106 and P312 in Central Europe. Kemi Oba Kurgans pop up west of the Carpathians in 3000BCE. Then we have Early Mako and Vucedol influence on Beaker. I think the L51 line is responsible for that and most of the Yamnaya in Bell Beaker, with some of it from mixing with Corded.

jeanL
02-14-2015, 06:18 PM
Jean, I think L51 to L11 happened in the Western Steppes. Maybe in Cotafeni or Kemi Oba, the L11 branch pops up, then splits into U106 and P312 in Central Europe.

Yes, but if our SNP calculations are correct then it happened earlier, possibly during 3900 BC, perhaps you could look into some possible migration associated with that! In any case, if the SNPs calculations are correct, and your assumptions are correct then ancient DNA samples from say places should indeed produce R1b-L51, no disagreements there!

Chad Rohlfsen
02-14-2015, 06:21 PM
Yes, but if our SNP calculations are correct then it happened earlier, possibly during 3900 BC, perhaps you could look into some possible migration associated with that! In any case, if the SNPs calculations are correct, and your assumptions are correct then ancient DNA samples from say places should indeed produce R1b-L51, no disagreements there!
Then we bump it back to Sredny Stog/Dereivka. Still the same place. Obviously, it's confined until 3000BCE. We could have L51 and L11 happen in the same region, then a huge boom and expansion. Pushed west by their Z2103 brothers moving towards the Balkans, from the Volga.

rms2
02-14-2015, 06:21 PM
There were no Basques back in 5000 BC, . . .

What was the point of that? We all know that. I said I still get project members who ask about their connection to "Basque cavemen", and I do. That is because of the confusion sown in their minds by all that *stuff* that was put out some years back about the Iberian Ice Age Refuge and the Irish being the descendants of "Basque fishermen," yadda, yadda, yadda.

Now we have the Els Trocs R1b1 to sow more confusion, and, man, you seem to be allowing yourself to participate in that to some degree.



. . . now as I said to Chad when you guys say stuff such as "Els Trocs cannot be be ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's" just goes to show a very deep lack of understanding of probability theory. Truth be told, El Trocs is far more likely to be the ancestor of all Western European R1b's than any of the Yamnaya males tested . . .

A "very deep lack of understanding of probability theory" has nothing to do with this, but a very deep lack of understanding of what I and others have posted does. No one, including me, thinks that Western European R1b's are descended from those Yamnaya guys. Related to them? Yes. But descended from them? No, not possible, since most of them turned left down the Z2103 trail just after L23 and not right (I am speaking figuratively here) down the L51 highway like our own ancestors did. So, stop thinking we're all stupid. We're not.



. . .
My main issue is that as an scientist I do get extremely aggravated when I see absolute statements thrown around in otherwise random scenarios . . .

Come on. You really think there is any chance that the Els Trocs R1b1 (M415) is the ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's? I mean, really?

Look at the preponderance of the evidence. It is what makes nearly absolute or at least very confident statements possible. Once again, what are the chances that either 1) all the SNPs between M415 and L23 arose independently in two widely separated locations (Spain and Russia) and in the same order, or, alternatively, 2) most European R1b's, including those seven Yamnaya males, are descended from the Els Trocs R1b1?

The odds against either of those scenarios must be astronomical (speaking of probability theory), so, really, what you posted is just absurd.

Add to that the facts that 1) Mal'ta Boy, ~24k years old and R*, was recovered near lake Baikal in Siberia; 2) the ~7700-year-old Samara hunter-gatherer was R1b1 (L278); 3) the Samara R1b1 hunter-gatherer is EHG and plots right next to the 7500-year-old R1a1 hunter-gatherer from Karelia autosomally, and 4) there is a great deal of ANE in Western European populations that did not likely get into them via R1a.

So, yeah, I think the R1b1 Els Trocs guy is not the ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's.

ADW_1981
02-14-2015, 06:34 PM
Not really, not if Western Europe is dominated by R1b-P312 and R1b-U106, nonetheless, R1b-M343*(<=this doesn't mean ancestral), R1b-L23*, etc do make extremely rare yet known appearance in Western or at least Central Europe. All this tell us is that R1b-P312 and R1b-U106 were born in Europe and that after 3000 BC not only did they almost completely replace the G2a farmers in most places but also their R1b cousins.

R1b-L23*(xL51) from west-central Europe are ALL Z2103 to date. Perhaps L51+ spread west with the Sredny Stog culture.

jeanL
02-14-2015, 06:39 PM
Well it's up to you to think whatever you want to think Rick! Only thing I want to add, is that Mal'ta R lineage isn't ancestral to any R1 or R2 lineage found nowadays, is a dead end lineage, so he isn't R*(<=Meaning ancestral), he had plenty of private SNPs. Other than that, as I said, I don't want to waste our time here, I already said what needed to be said, have a good day man!

rms2
02-14-2015, 06:46 PM
Gimbutas timed her three waves of kurgan thrusts west from the steppe at 4400 - 4200 BC (Wave 1), 3400 - 3200 BC (Wave 2), and 3000 - 2800 BC (Wave 3).

rms2
02-14-2015, 06:50 PM
Well it's up to you to think whatever you want to think Rick! Only thing I want to add, is that Mal'ta R lineage isn't ancestral to any R1 or R2 lineage found nowadays, is a dead end lineage, so he isn't R*(<=Meaning ancestral), he had plenty of private SNPs. Other than that, as I said, I don't want to waste our time here, I already said what needed to be said, have a good day man!

The point is that is he was on an R line, not that he was our "founding father" or something like that (although he makes a good proxy, given the dearth of such finds elsewhere and his being the standard for the ANE so many of us carry). Then there are the other pieces of the puzzle accumulating in Russia that I mentioned.

rms2
02-14-2015, 06:52 PM
Gimbutas timed her three waves of kurgan thrusts west from the steppe at 4400 - 4200 BC (Wave 1), 3400 - 3200 BC (Wave 2), and 3000 - 2800 BC (Wave 3).

I would also caution against thinking SNP counting is going to give us really terribly precise dates. It's good, perhaps, but I would take them with big margin-of-error grains of salt.

nuadha
02-14-2015, 06:54 PM
There were no Basques back in 5000 BC, now as I said to Chad when you guys say stuff such as "Els Trocs cannot be be ancestor of most of today's Western European R1b's" just goes to show a very deep lack of understanding of probability theory. Truth be told, El Trocs is far more likely to be the ancestor of all Western European R1b's than any of the Yamnaya males tested. Why? Because he has plenty of time to accumulate mutations whereas Yamnaya do not, now as migrations and historic record, need I remind you that the ratio of samples to overall population we are working with is incredibly small, and a lot of this samples are anything but random, as we are testing dead people, not a random sample of the population. Not trying to vindicate myself or anything, but back in 2012 I was one of the people who said in worldfamilies.net where you are a moderator that R1b had not been found in Western Europe because they had not looked in the right places, and you asked me, and I said the mountainous fringes of Western Europe(i.e. The Pyrenees), now it was found there. Now before you all rain down on my with the whole zombie/Basque/Iberian refuge Iberophobia, I have also to admit that R1b1 found in Samara HG makes it a more likely candidate to be the ancestor of all modern day European R1b's by virtue of it being older, thus more statistically likely to accumulate mutations. I should also point out, that all this is based on the data we have at hand, that is, if either Samara HG and El Trocs turns out to carry any mutations not in the R1b-L11 ancestral line, then their true probabilities of being ancestral most to European R1b's will definitely decay down to nearly(Why nearly, because there is an extremely small, yet nonzero probability for a back mutation, but for all intensive purposes it can be thought of as zero) zero.

PS: I personally don't want to get a rise out of you(Whom I know has heart issues) or anything, you are older than me, and I have a lot of respect for you and others here, if it wasn't for you guys we wouldn't know a lot of SNPs that we know today, and I understand it can be extremely frustrating when you want to know the origin of your paternal line, and still can't zero in on it. My main issue is that as an scientist I do get extremely aggravated when I see absolute statements thrown around in otherwise random scenarios. Look at history, the Titanic was unsinkable, etc. BTW back in the pre-ancient DNA era, I can definitely see how the whole R1b Iberian caveman thing could have come to be, it was what the observable data made it seem like back then. In order for science to progress who all have to keep an open mind and be ready to have our hypotheses rocked to the ground!

Wait, you do realize that L23 had one origin, right? So anything you say about the origin of L23 dictates the origin of the male line in the samara yamnaya. Do you think it is more likely that the L23 in Yamnaya originated in Western Europe rather than Eastern Europe? If you side with the former then you are hypothesizing that L23 traveled from Western Europe to the Samara Valley in a relatively short amount of time. Not only that, but you would have to expect multiple forms of r1b to make the journey and end up in 7/7 finds of yamnaya which lacked a single outside ydna.

As for which, Spanish or Russian (or other), R1b1 line led to L23, it makes a lot more sense to place it in the area that L23 originated. I agree there are more possibilities when talking about which r1b1 line led to L23, but the Spanish one is much less likely if L23 originated outside of Western Europe. As I hinted at above, L23 is extremely likely to have originated outside of Western Europe and in Eastern Europe.

nuadha
02-14-2015, 06:59 PM
Yes, but if our SNP calculations are correct then it happened earlier, possibly during 3900 BC, perhaps you could look into some possible migration associated with that! In any case, if the SNPs calculations are correct, and your assumptions are correct then ancient DNA samples from say places should indeed produce R1b-L51, no disagreements there!

Im guessing the real point of this discussion is wether or not modern West European r1b derived from Western Yamnaya. Whatever form of r1b Western Europeans descend from at the time of the Yamnaya is very likely to be found in Yamnaya given the ydna and autosomal evidence.

rms2
02-14-2015, 07:08 PM
Wait, you do realize that L23 had one origin, right? . . .

That was my point precisely and why it is possible to say pretty confidently that the R1b1 Els Trocs guy is not the ancestor of most of today's Western European, ANE-carrying R1b's.

Either every SNP between M415 and including L23 arose independently in two widely separated places, and in the same order, or Els Trocs is the ancestor of all those Yamnaya R1b's.

How likely is either scenario, really?

rms2
02-14-2015, 07:18 PM
I was kind of hoping that we could get a little excited about the Quedlinburg Bell Beaker man being P312+ (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2929-P312-and-the-Ancient-Celts&p=69474&viewfull=1#post69474), but no such luck thus far.

Il PapÓ
02-14-2015, 08:18 PM
I was kind of hoping that we could get a little excited about the Quedlinburg Bell Beaker man being P312+ (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2929-P312-and-the-Ancient-Celts&p=69474&viewfull=1#post69474), but no such luck thus far.



Well, before the publication almost everybody agreed that Beal-Beaker were R1b while there was many arguing about R1b-L23 being indo-european or not in orgin.Hence why that lack of interest.

rms2
02-14-2015, 08:22 PM
Well, before the publication almost everybody agreed that Beal-Beaker were R1b while there was many arguing about R1b-L23 being indo-european or not in orgin.Hence why that lack of interest.

R1b, yes, after the Kromsdorf results of a couple of years ago, but P312+ was another matter. That is BIG news and very important, I think.

Agamemnon
02-14-2015, 08:38 PM
R1b, yes, after the Kromsdorf results of a couple of years ago, but P312+ was another matter. That is BIG news and very important, I think.

I second that, finding P312 in Beaker remains is very relevant. Not only that, but it really looks like R1b was a major lineage in the Bell Beaker horizon.

rms2
02-14-2015, 08:45 PM
I second that, finding P312 in Beaker remains is very relevant. Not only that, but it really looks like R1b was a major lineage in the Bell Beaker horizon.

Yes, and all three R1b's were U106-. That is important to notice, too, although, admittedly, three is a small number.

Isidro
02-15-2015, 05:19 AM
Very interesting article from Science magazine, even Carles Lalueza pitches in on the study.

(http://news.sciencemag.org/archaeology/2015/02/mysterious-indo-european-homeland-may-have-been-steppes-ukraine-and-russia)http://news.sciencemag.org/archaeology/2015/02/mysterious-indo-european-homeland-may-have-been-steppes-ukraine-and-russia

Also I wanted to suggest for those interested in the Neolithic R1b1 found in the Pyrenees to search for "Els" Trocs, or La Cova dels Trocs meaning in the local language the "bartering cave" .

Bobo Manbuck
02-22-2015, 09:52 AM
Well, pretty obviously, R1b1 did arise in one place, and it got to Spain and Africa, as well as Asia and Europe. The thing is, it most likely arose in Northern Eurasia, probably Siberia.

Why siberia? Just because the most recent find is in siberia? Just like when it "obviously" came from the location of the previous earliest find.

To anyone sane this find totally obliterates this possibility. R1b is not even slightly associated with blonde hair, it only takes it on in places more nordic populations mix in. If it truly developed in siberia while r1a and I are known to be in the vicinity, this would not be the case.



We have Mal'ta Boy from near Lake Baikal in Siberia who is R* and about 24k years old. Now we have an R1b1 hunter-gatherer from Samara about 7600 years old who is autosomally an Eastern Hunter Gatherer (EHG) and who plots right next to the R1a hunter-gatherer from Karelia. Not too far from where he was found, we have seven out of seven Yamnaya males who are R1b: one R1b-P297, one R1b-L23, and five who are R1b-Z2103.


Haha, talk about some delusions. How many times have I heard over and over how incredibly new r1b is and it only came to europe 5k years ago, and here we are with r1b now proven ALL OVER EUROPE 7500 years ago and this fairytale is not discarded but "confirmed".

It's incredibly doubtful this arose in siberia and this study has forever blown this possibility out of existence even if it had some remote possibility. Why? There was a little something called THE ICE AGE.

If we truly found a peek into the time and place where r1b arose then you would find that there was just one hanging branch off of R, and you would also UNDOUBTEDLY find mainly H and V mtdna to go along with it. Instead we found a mixture of various clades that are almost certain to have come into central europe only in recent times!

No one has pointed out the obvious that all these clades take thousands of years to form. So now instead of a "born yesterday" story for r1b we have a new fairytale to replace it - r1b immediately formed after the ice age and magically split into what amounts to all the modern clades and the presumed archaic version in an extremely short time. And not in all different places as you'd expect, but all mixed together even though today each of these clades is concentrated with a central focal point!

R1b and r1a today BARELY MIX AT ALL. An area is pretty much one or the other with only a small overlap. That is completely impossible if both r1a and r1b formed right next to each other. They had to have been separated for some time, thousands of years at least, for this to have happened without a bunch of mixing.

This is the dumbest idea in history, and finally data comes out that blows away any possibility it's true, and of course the same narrative (ie propaganda) continues on regardless. With a tiny footnote that hey we also found r1b in spain at the same time we found it in russia. But we decide it came from russia anyway, just because. Not spain, not any of the million places in between. Hell it could just as easily come from north africa at this point, any idea this is some newcomer to europe should be discarded forever the data just doesn't support that any more (if it ever did).

There's also studies to show berbers reached their level of mixture around 15k-20k years ago. If so, it means that r1b was around at least since then. These ages are just computed by looking at the oldest specimens found and comparing rate of change to looking at changes in modern times. IE they are pulled out of thin air and don't mean anything, and the data here prove this is the case (just like we know blue eyes is not a couple thousand years old now).



On top of that, we know that R1b has an east-to-west phylogeography.

The point of all that is that it is plain that the El Trocs R1b1 was not all that "bountiful", since Western European R1b's cannot be descended from him.

If we follow out of africa logic, we should now be declaring victory for an Iberian r1b origin. It's funny how they choose what data means based on whatever is most politically correct (ie anti-european). Harvard is the home of talks about "white privilege" and inflammatory race rhetoric of all kinds against europeans, what a surprise to see someone from harvard come up with a theory that paints r1b carriers as as violent invaders. Violent invaders who had a heavily matriarchal society :lol:

If that is the homeland of r1b explain why those types are still associated with germanics and italics and have nothing to do with Iberia or british isles. Oops, you can't.

Also explain how magdelenian mtdna is mostly H and comes much sooner in time than these results. Again, you can't. Because this is all pure BS made up for political reasons and has no basis in reality. This is during refugium times. Early bell beaker is almost all H as well and there's studies showing it spreading east to west.

Unless r1b killed off almost all the other males in western europe this is purely fantasy. I could buy that happening except that they also would have to do it without bringing in their own mtdna. There's also zero evidencein archaeology for this happening.

alan
02-22-2015, 11:15 AM
If L11, P312, U106 and even possibly some of their subclades are older than 3000BC which looks very likely now by SNP counting then we are possibly looking at then we have to face up to the conclusion -given the absence of M269 in the many samples pre-dating that in Europe-that there may have been a zone where all of the clades remained bottled up together until 3000BC and the patterning we are seeing is to a large extent founder effects at that time as it moved out. That is not to rule out nuance in patterning WITHIN the steppe prior to the expansion into Old Europe.

Another thing thing that I would suggest, although it at first looks paradoxical, is that WESTWARD movement from the steppes may have been in a sequence where the stuff in places like Samara came west last. We know that L23xL11 and M269xL23 is acually, in terms of living languages, they are actually more strongly linked with the later branchings off the tree like Greek and even Satemised languages like Armenian, Phrygian and Albanian. They are not linked strongly with the earliest western branchings like Celtic, Italic or Germanic which clearly seem better linked with L51. Note though that the opposite is true for eastern movements from the IE homeland. It would be much easier for the first out eastwards movement like Afansievo to come from the east end i.e. areas like Samara etc.

This of course raises the question of Anatolian. I think if it relates to a section of IE isolating itself from the rest before PIE had fully developed and we are perhaps talking about a split around 4300BC then it makes some sense that the mix would have been different. At that time both L51 and the main L23xL51 lines were young and there may have been higher levels of M269xL23 at the time.

alan
02-22-2015, 11:34 AM
Why siberia? Just because the most recent find is in siberia? Just like when it "obviously" came from the location of the previous earliest find.

To anyone sane this find totally obliterates this possibility. R1b is not even slightly associated with blonde hair, it only takes it on in places more nordic populations mix in. If it truly developed in siberia while r1a and I are known to be in the vicinity, this would not be the case.



Haha, talk about some delusions. How many times have I heard over and over how incredibly new r1b is and it only came to europe 5k years ago, and here we are with r1b now proven ALL OVER EUROPE 7500 years ago and this fairytale is not discarded but "confirmed".

It's incredibly doubtful this arose in siberia and this study has forever blown this possibility out of existence even if it had some remote possibility. Why? There was a little something called THE ICE AGE.

If we truly found a peek into the time and place where r1b arose then you would find that there was just one hanging branch off of R, and you would also UNDOUBTEDLY find mainly H and V mtdna to go along with it. Instead we found a mixture of various clades that are almost certain to have come into central europe only in recent times!

No one has pointed out the obvious that all these clades take thousands of years to form. So now instead of a "born yesterday" story for r1b we have a new fairytale to replace it - r1b immediately formed after the ice age and magically split into what amounts to all the modern clades and the presumed archaic version in an extremely short time. And not in all different places as you'd expect, but all mixed together even though today each of these clades is concentrated with a central focal point!

R1b and r1a today BARELY MIX AT ALL. An area is pretty much one or the other with only a small overlap. That is completely impossible if both r1a and r1b formed right next to each other. They had to have been separated for some time, thousands of years at least, for this to have happened without a bunch of mixing.

This is the dumbest idea in history, and finally data comes out that blows away any possibility it's true, and of course the same narrative (ie propaganda) continues on regardless. With a tiny footnote that hey we also found r1b in spain at the same time we found it in russia. But we decide it came from russia anyway, just because. Not spain, not any of the million places in between. Hell it could just as easily come from north africa at this point, any idea this is some newcomer to europe should be discarded forever the data just doesn't support that any more (if it ever did).

There's also studies to show berbers reached their level of mixture around 15k-20k years ago. If so, it means that r1b was around at least since then. These ages are just computed by looking at the oldest specimens found and comparing rate of change to looking at changes in modern times. IE they are pulled out of thin air and don't mean anything, and the data here prove this is the case (just like we know blue eyes is not a couple thousand years old now).



If we follow out of africa logic, we should now be declaring victory for an Iberian r1b origin. It's funny how they choose what data means based on whatever is most politically correct (ie anti-european). Harvard is the home of talks about "white privilege" and inflammatory race rhetoric of all kinds against europeans, what a surprise to see someone from harvard come up with a theory that paints r1b carriers as as violent invaders. Violent invaders who had a heavily matriarchal society :lol:

If that is the homeland of r1b explain why those types are still associated with germanics and italics and have nothing to do with Iberia or british isles. Oops, you can't.

Also explain how magdelenian mtdna is mostly H and comes much sooner in time than these results. Again, you can't. Because this is all pure BS made up for political reasons and has no basis in reality. This is during refugium times. Early bell beaker is almost all H as well and there's studies showing it spreading east to west.

Unless r1b killed off almost all the other males in western europe this is purely fantasy. I could buy that happening except that they also would have to do it without bringing in their own mtdna. There's also zero evidencein archaeology for this happening.

Actually its pretty well certain R arose in Siberia and due to the LGM R1 was probably trapped in Siberia around Altai. The earliest archaeological signal that might relate to Siberian movements into Europe and SW Asia dont come around until after the Younger Dryas c. 9500BC which is many thousands of years after the glacial maximum.

As for widespread, it may be widespread in trace levels but in fact only one pre-Neolithic R1b person has been found in all ancient DNA samples to date - the Samara hunter. Indeed out of the now pretty substantial amount of Neolithic samples we have found just one - dead end - guy. He was autosomally a farmer, not a relic of the local hunting population. He has to have been a P25 or V88 guy and in all likelihood was swept along from SW Asia with the Cardial culture. It is noticeable already that Cardial culture and its likely derivative later Neolithic groups along southern Europe are somewhat more mixed in yDNA than LBK with E and now a likely V88 guy. However this is not hugely surprising when you consider Cardial originated in the Levant where those clades are well known today.

rms2
02-22-2015, 01:26 PM
Why siberia? Just because the most recent find is in siberia? Just like when it "obviously" came from the location of the previous earliest find.

To anyone sane this find totally obliterates this possibility. R1b is not even slightly associated with blonde hair, it only takes it on in places more nordic populations mix in. If it truly developed in siberia while r1a and I are known to be in the vicinity, this would not be the case . . .

It would have been nice had you read all the posts in this thread so that no one would have to repeat what has gone before.

Please realize that no one has said anything about blonde hair and that autosomal traits like that have their own complex history that is nearly impossible to connect to any particular y haplogroup. I for one do not give a damn about blonde hair. It's a red herring (or a blonde herring) in this case.

The Els Trocs R1b1-M415 was probably R1b-V88, although Haak et al could not a get a read for V88. V88 is P297- and so is a brother clade to P297. It split off the stream that led to most European R1b very early, and evidently headed southwest, becoming involved in the Near Eastern Neolithic. Some of it became Chadic speaking and wound up in Africa. Some of it evidently became involved in the Cardial Ware culture, and at least one exemplar made it to Spain about 7,000 years ago. Els Trocs was V69- and V35-, and there is V88xV69,V35 in North Africa today.

Even if the Els Trocs man was V88-, he was still only R1b1-M415.

L23 arose in one place, so it is not possible for Els Trocs to be the separate y-dna ancestor of Western European R1b-L23 while those seven R1b-L23 from the Samara and Orenburg oblasts had another y-dna ancestor. Yet there in Russia is R1b-L23 from the 4th-3rd millennium BC, and nearby, near Samara, the body of a 7600-year-old R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer was recovered from a site that has also produced artifacts from the Elshanka, Samara, and Repin cultures, which preceded and contributed to Yamnaya. That R1b1 hunter-gatherer is the oldest R1b yet recovered anywhere. To the east, near Lake Baikal, 24k-year-old Mal'ta Boy was found, and he is R*.

R1b has an east-to-west phylogeography, and Western European R1b, like those seven Yamnaya men, is overwhelmingly L23+. Els Trocs cannot be the y-dna ancestor of most European R1b and is not on the same y-dna line, except in that he was descended from the same pre-P297 ancestor.



Haha, talk about some delusions . . .

This is your first post here, and how have you begun? With ill-founded and ill-informed mockery. Thanks for giving us your number right up front, though. That was a real service that saves us a lot of time who might otherwise have taken you seriously.

Webb
02-22-2015, 02:04 PM
Actually its pretty well certain R arose in Siberia and due to the LGM R1 was probably trapped in Siberia around Altai. The earliest archaeological signal that might relate to Siberian movements into Europe and SW Asia dont come around until after the Younger Dryas c. 9500BC which is many thousands of years after the glacial maximum.

As for widespread, it may be widespread in trace levels but in fact only one pre-Neolithic R1b person has been found in all ancient DNA samples to date - the Samara hunter. Indeed out of the now pretty substantial amount of Neolithic samples we have found just one - dead end - guy. He was autosomally a farmer, not a relic of the local hunting population. He has to have been a P25 or V88 guy and in all likelihood was swept along from SW Asia with the Cardial culture. It is noticeable already that Cardial culture and its likely derivative later Neolithic groups along southern Europe are somewhat more mixed in yDNA than LBK with E and now a likely V88 guy. However this is not hugely surprising when you consider Cardial originated in the Levant where those clades are well known today.

What I find interesting is that when I run my autosomal against the aDNA portion at Gedmatch, I most closely match, Clovis, Malta, Stutgart, and the three Hungarian samples. I share no segments with the Hinxton samples. I know autosomal does not relate, necessarily to Y, however in this case it might in regards to R. If R is Eurasian, and has stayed Eurasian until fairly recently, then these could be clues. I do not know the Y of the Clovis sample, however, R is found amongst some Native American groups.

R.Rocca
02-22-2015, 02:16 PM
Nobody ever said R1b was young. What was said was that 99% of European R1b is young in Western and Central Europe, which of course is 99% L23+L51+ and not some oddball upstream forms that are dead or almost dead branches in Europe. Apparently Bobo, you also failed to read the study, because within the first five pages you can find that they said the following:


R1a and R1b are the most common haplogroups in many European populations today, and our results suggest that they spread into Europe from the East after 3,000 BCE.

Given that they attribute this to a "massive migration into the heartland of Europe from it eastern periphery", there is no reason to think R1b didn't originate anywhere but northern Russia somewhere. And by the way, blonde hair has nothing to do with this conversation. European hunter-gatherers were darker skinned in the Mesolithic, and yet haplogroup I was probably the biggest benefactor. Also, there are so many examples where R1a and R1b have almost identical frequency percentages, that your bringing it up is comical and shows you are not really into the "fact finding" thing.

ArmandoR1b
02-22-2015, 02:31 PM
I do not know the Y of the Clovis sample, however, R is found amongst some Native American groups.

Clovis Anzick (Anzick-1) is Q-L54*(xM3). The R found amongst some Native American groups has not been proven to be pre-Columbian.

alan
02-22-2015, 02:35 PM
The Spanish R1b farmer guy was dated to 5100BC wasnt he. The most cautious dating papers for Cardial in Iberia put it at around 5500BC at the earliest unless this has been superseded recently. Some areas were later than others

alan
02-22-2015, 02:41 PM
Was wondering what the MRCA for all V88XV69 is. Also is there a variance map for V88

ADW_1981
02-22-2015, 02:43 PM
Why siberia? Just because the most recent find is in siberia? Just like when it "obviously" came from the location of the previous earliest find.

To anyone sane this find totally obliterates this possibility. R1b is not even slightly associated with blonde hair, it only takes it on in places more nordic populations mix in. I

I smell a troll.

Heber
02-22-2015, 03:25 PM
According to Haak, R1b would appear to have resided in the Steppes and according to Hallast the real expansion appears to have happened in the West and in particular the Atlantic zone with R1b-P312.

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/12/13/molbev.msu327.full

3825

3829

3828

Isidro
02-22-2015, 03:46 PM
R1b and r1a today BARELY MIX AT ALL. An area is pretty much one or the other with only a small overlap. That is completely impossible if both r1a and r1b formed right next to each other. They had to have been separated for some time, thousands of years at least, for this to have happened without a bunch of mixing.

Unless r1b killed off almost all the other males in western europe this is purely fantasy. I could buy that happening except that they also would have to do it without bringing in their own mtdna. There's also zero evidencein archaeology for this happening..

Also for the Els Trocs R1b1 case it does show continuity in the same location 7,000 years apart with autosomal to match with modern samples which include l23 the R1b branch found in Yamnaya and descendants of L11.

newtoboard
02-22-2015, 03:58 PM
Why siberia? Just because the most recent find is in siberia? Just like when it "obviously" came from the location of the previous earliest find.

To anyone sane this find totally obliterates this possibility. R1b is not even slightly associated with blonde hair, it only takes it on in places more nordic populations mix in. If it truly developed in siberia while r1a and I are known to be in the vicinity, this would not be the case.



Haha, talk about some delusions. How many times have I heard over and over how incredibly new r1b is and it only came to europe 5k years ago, and here we are with r1b now proven ALL OVER EUROPE 7500 years ago and this fairytale is not discarded but "confirmed".

It's incredibly doubtful this arose in siberia and this study has forever blown this possibility out of existence even if it had some remote possibility. Why? There was a little something called THE ICE AGE.

If we truly found a peek into the time and place where r1b arose then you would find that there was just one hanging branch off of R, and you would also UNDOUBTEDLY find mainly H and V mtdna to go along with it. Instead we found a mixture of various clades that are almost certain to have come into central europe only in recent times!

No one has pointed out the obvious that all these clades take thousands of years to form. So now instead of a "born yesterday" story for r1b we have a new fairytale to replace it - r1b immediately formed after the ice age and magically split into what amounts to all the modern clades and the presumed archaic version in an extremely short time. And not in all different places as you'd expect, but all mixed together even though today each of these clades is concentrated with a central focal point!

R1b and r1a today BARELY MIX AT ALL. An area is pretty much one or the other with only a small overlap. That is completely impossible if both r1a and r1b formed right next to each other. They had to have been separated for some time, thousands of years at least, for this to have happened without a bunch of mixing.

This is the dumbest idea in history, and finally data comes out that blows away any possibility it's true, and of course the same narrative (ie propaganda) continues on regardless. With a tiny footnote that hey we also found r1b in spain at the same time we found it in russia. But we decide it came from russia anyway, just because. Not spain, not any of the million places in between. Hell it could just as easily come from north africa at this point, any idea this is some newcomer to europe should be discarded forever the data just doesn't support that any more (if it ever did).

There's also studies to show berbers reached their level of mixture around 15k-20k years ago. If so, it means that r1b was around at least since then. These ages are just computed by looking at the oldest specimens found and comparing rate of change to looking at changes in modern times. IE they are pulled out of thin air and don't mean anything, and the data here prove this is the case (just like we know blue eyes is not a couple thousand years old now).



If we follow out of africa logic, we should now be declaring victory for an Iberian r1b origin. It's funny how they choose what data means based on whatever is most politically correct (ie anti-european). Harvard is the home of talks about "white privilege" and inflammatory race rhetoric of all kinds against europeans, what a surprise to see someone from harvard come up with a theory that paints r1b carriers as as violent invaders. Violent invaders who had a heavily matriarchal society :lol:

If that is the homeland of r1b explain why those types are still associated with germanics and italics and have nothing to do with Iberia or british isles. Oops, you can't.

Also explain how magdelenian mtdna is mostly H and comes much sooner in time than these results. Again, you can't. Because this is all pure BS made up for political reasons and has no basis in reality. This is during refugium times. Early bell beaker is almost all H as well and there's studies showing it spreading east to west.

Unless r1b killed off almost all the other males in western europe this is purely fantasy. I could buy that happening except that they also would have to do it without bringing in their own mtdna. There's also zero evidencein archaeology for this happening.

What difference does it make if R1a and R1b do not "mix" (whatever that means)? How does that prove they did not originate next to each other? Different subclades of R1a and R1b have not mixed with each other. Should we cast doubt on whether they are related or originate in the same general region or culture? Why would it make more sense for R1's two descendants to originate on opposite sides of the European subcontinent rather than originate on the same side with some sort of geographical feature or subsistence strategy being the reason for their separation?

vettor
02-22-2015, 05:51 PM
What difference does it make if R1a and R1b do not "mix" (whatever that means)? How does that prove they did not originate next to each other?

what are you drinking?

he is stating that if R1a and R1b where in the steppes (yamnya) at the exact period in time, they would have travelled together to the far ends of western Europe ( like R1b did ) and equally populate the west of Europe .....since they are the biggest ydna haplogroups in Europe.
Explain to me your scenario that they lived together in the steppes yet one decided to go west and the other did not!.............maybe they had a sign on their bodies stating R1b , go this way please!

The likely scenario is R1b was in yamnya in numbers far far greater than R1a was , and they ( R1b ) marched west vacating the yamnya for later migrations/invasions from the central asia or far east ( mongols and pre-mongols)

newtoboard
02-22-2015, 06:06 PM
what are you drinking?

he is stating that if R1a and R1b where in the steppes (yamnya) at the exact period in time, they would have travelled together to the far ends of western Europe ( like R1b did ) and equally populate the west of Europe .....since they are the biggest ydna haplogroups in Europe.
Explain to me your scenario that they lived together in the steppes yet one decided to go west and the other did not!.............maybe they had a sign on their bodies stating R1b , go this way please!

The likely scenario is R1b was in yamnya in numbers far far greater than R1a was , and they ( R1b ) marched west vacating the yamnya for later migrations/invasions from the central asia or far east ( mongols and pre-mongols)

I said they lived on the steppes in the exact same location. I never said they lived side by side and shared towns, villages and houses. The Pontic Caspian steppe is a massive region. We don't see homogenous populations over that type of land area anywhere.

It is called geographic separation. It is called separation based on different subsistence strategies. Numerous people have said the Don region during Yamnaya was a border. West of it you had a decent amount of farming and east of it you had full blown nomadic pastoralism. Then there is also the steppe-forest steppe border.

Did you go back and count how much R1a and R1b was in Yamnaya? Or did those results come out in the 3500 BC census? I must have missed that. Can you keep me informed?

newtoboard
02-22-2015, 06:07 PM
*I never said they lived on the steppes in the exact same location.

vettor
02-22-2015, 06:13 PM
I said they lived on the steppes in the exact same location. I never said they lived side by side and shared towns, villages and houses. The Pontic Caspian steppe is a massive region. We don't see homogenous populations over that type of land area anywhere.

It is called geographic separation. It is called separation based on different subsistence strategies. Numerous people have said the Don region during Yamnaya was a border. West of it you had a decent amount of farming and east of it you had full blown nomadic pastoralism. Then there is also the steppe-forest steppe border.

Did you go back and count how much R1a and R1b was in Yamnaya? Or did those results come out in the 3500 BC census? I must have missed that. Can you keep me informed?

your avoiding the question..........if they lived side by side or in the same vicinity at the same time, why did not R1a populate western europe like the R1b did?.......are they not the 2 biggest haplogroups in Europe!

newtoboard
02-22-2015, 06:20 PM
your avoiding the question..........if they lived side by side or in the same vicinity at the same time, why did not R1a populate western europe like the R1b did?.......are they not the 2 biggest haplogroups in Europe!

Maybe because the migrations to Western Europe came from a specific part of the steppe and not the entire steppe. Do you seriously think every single individual in the PC steppe said hey let's all move to Western Europe and forget about populating Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Do you think a migration from the PC steppe meant individuals from every single corner of the steppe moved? Do you think Italian migration to the New World meant some individuals of Swiss, Slovenian and French ancestry had to move? I can ask the same thing for R1b and Eastern Europe btw.

And ask why J did not populate Europe like G did during the Neolithic although most would agree that J and G likely did live side by side in West Asia. Wait I forgot I can't ask you. Since you think G in Europe comes from Yamnaya.

rms2
02-22-2015, 06:43 PM
.

Also for the Els Trocs R1b1 case it does show continuity in the same location 7,000 years apart with autosomal to match with modern samples which include l23 the R1b branch found in Yamnaya and descendants of L11.

No it does not. Thus far, there is no R1b in Spain between M415 (Els Trocs) about 7,000 years ago and that medieval R1b from that Basque cemetery (I forget the name of it right offhand). On top of that, by far most modern Spanish R1b is L23>L51>L11>P312, and most of that is DF27+.

So, as has been said before more than once, for Els Trocs to be the ancestor of modern Western European R1b, he would have to be the ancestor of those seven R1b-L23 Yamnaya men, as well, and they already have a better candidate in that 7600-year-old R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer from Samara.

Besides, Els Trocs was probably V88+.

As for autosomal dna, from what I can see, Els Trocs clusters with other early Neolithic farmers. Modern Europeans, including Spaniards, have WHG and ANE, as well. Our only resemblance to Els Trocs comes from the ENF contribution.

rms2
02-22-2015, 07:00 PM
From pages 76-77 of 172 in Haak et al, Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433):



It is possible that either (i) the Early Neolithic Spanish individual was a descendant of a Neolithic migrant from the Near East that introduced this
lineage to western Europe, or (ii) there was a very sparse distribution of haplogroup R1b in European hunter-gatherers and early farmers, so the lack of
its detection in the published literature may reflect its occurrence at very low frequency. The occurrence of a basal form of R1b1 in western
Europe logically raises the possibility that present-day western Europeans (who belong predominantly to haplogroup R1b1a2-M269) may trace their
origin to early Neolithic farmers of western Europe. However, we think this is not likely given the existence of R1b1a2-M269 not only in western Europe but
also in the Near East; such a distribution implies migrations of M269 males from western Europe to the Near East which do not seem
archaeologically plausible. We prefer the explanation that R-M269 originated in the eastern end of its distribution, given its first appearance in the
Yamnaya males (below) and in the Near East 17.


In the long run this won't be all that problematic, because more ancient y-dna results will clear it up.

Western Europe is overwhelmingly R1b and overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking. Further ancient y-dna results will support the idea that R1b males initiated the spread of Indo-European languages to the West.

Isidro
02-22-2015, 07:59 PM
Look I find your constant correction of my posts very annoying.
What I post and say is fairly accurate and even if it is not 100% descriptive to your liking you are over stepping your boundaries with me.

No it does not. Thus far, there is no R1b in Spain between M415 (Els Trocs) about 7,000 years ago and that medieval R1b from that Basque cemetery (I forget the name of it right offhand). On top of that, by far most modern Spanish R1b is L23>L51>L11>P312, and most of that is DF27+.

So, as has been said before more than once, for Els Trocs to be the ancestor of modern Western European R1b, he would have to be the ancestor of those seven R1b-L23 Yamnaya men, as well, and they already have a better candidate in that 7600-year-old R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer from Samara.

Besides, Els Trocs was probably V88+.

As for autosomal dna, from what I can see, Els Trocs clusters with other early Neolithic farmers. Modern Europeans, including Spaniards, have WHG and ANE, as well. Our only resemblance to Els Trocs comes from the ENF contribution.

rms2
02-22-2015, 08:27 PM
Look I find your constant correction of my posts very annoying.
What I post and say is fairly accurate and even if it is not 100% descriptive to your liking you are over stepping your boundaries with me.

Well, you were wrong.

If you are going to post things here that are misleading, and I happen to see them and have the time to respond, I will.

I try not to violate the rules of this web site when doing so, and that's the best I can do for you.

Isidro
02-22-2015, 08:34 PM
Thank you for your unwarranted help anyway. I just ask to stay on subject and try to avoid closing it.

Well, you were wrong.

If you are going to post things here that are misleading, and I happen to see them and have the time to respond, I will.

I try not to violate the rules of this web site when doing so, and that's the best I can do for you.

rms2
02-22-2015, 08:46 PM
Thank you for your unwarranted help anyway. I just ask to stay on subject and try to avoid closing it.

It has been on topic except for the occasional detour by you into snide attacks on me. If incivility closes threads around here, that has not been my doing, and it won't be my doing here.

See post #133 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=69491&viewfull=1#post69491), post #134 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=69493&viewfull=1#post69493) and, of course, post #191 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3818-Ancient-R1b-DNA-from-Spain&p=70865&viewfull=1#post70865).

I do think returning to the topic is a good idea.

Isidro
02-22-2015, 08:54 PM
I agree:
Ancient R1b DNA from Spain.


I do think returning to the topic is a good idea.

Bobo Manbuck
02-22-2015, 11:25 PM
.

Also for the Els Trocs R1b1 case it does show continuity in the same location 7,000 years apart with autosomal to match with modern samples which include l23 the R1b branch found in Yamnaya and descendants of L11.

Yes, exactly. It is not important to worry about the flavor of r1b either. No one is trying to literally say this guy is the ancestor to anyone, but the mixed up nature in the east and the fact it's basically eastern clades while the today african version is in spain shows that the basic spread had alreadytaken place. I really doubt that happened in just 1000 years or so, there must be even a bigger continuity we just haven't found it yet. I had thought that they might be still a predecessor this far back, but no it seems likely now all the modern clades already exist and are in basically the same places as now.


What difference does it make if R1a and R1b do not "mix" (whatever that means)? How does that prove they did not originate next to each other?


Because once things are mixed together, they can't unmix except through strong natural selection. Pretend it's brown eyes instead of r1a. Well, if the original people have some brown eyes, then every society they form always will. You don't suddenly get one with only blue eyes cropping up.

It's pretty obvious logic really, and it's confirmed because in genetics this idea is used constantly to track populations. Like for looking at effects of slavic expansion you always find certain clades together.



Different subclades of R1a and R1b have not mixed with each other. Should we cast doubt on whether they are related or originate in the same general region or culture? Why would it make more sense for R1's two descendants to originate on opposite sides of the European subcontinent rather than originate on the same side with some sort of geographical feature or subsistence strategy being the reason for their separation?

If you have one group of people all together with no border as is the case here, this will never happen. Going back to the eye color thing it's like saying everyone in minnesota is all the same. Then after time everyone on the west side of the state turns out to have all blue eyes. Everyone on the east side comes out to have brown eyes.

Sorry but that's just impossible. Unfortunately in anthropology a lot of the people making big papers are not real scientists at all and don't even have scientific degrees, and/or they are in it only for political reasons. Europe is infested with openly bolshevik university professors and in the USA it's getting more like that ever day. They don't have any care about finding reality they just want to point out how evil whitey is.

That's the only reason I can think of that they push on this theory so hard when it really makes no sense. I think that some white americans also push on it for similar reasons, in that they don't want to be associated with spanish people who they don't think of as white. But the darker spaniards obviously did not get that way from their r1b y-dna and H mtdna mixture anyway, that probably didn't happen til later on. But maybe not, the south of spain may have always been kind of darker.

R.Rocca
02-22-2015, 11:45 PM
Yes, exactly. It is not important to worry about the flavor of r1b either. No one is trying to literally say this guy is the ancestor to anyone, but the mixed up nature in the east and the fact it's basically eastern clades while the today african version is in spain shows that the basic spread had alreadytaken place. I really doubt that happened in just 1000 years or so, there must be even a bigger continuity we just haven't found it yet. I had thought that they might be still a predecessor this far back, but no it seems likely now all the modern clades already exist and are in basically the same places as now.



Because once things are mixed together, they can't unmix except through strong natural selection. Pretend it's brown eyes instead of r1a. Well, if the original people have some brown eyes, then every society they form always will. You don't suddenly get one with only blue eyes cropping up.

It's pretty obvious logic really, and it's confirmed because in genetics this idea is used constantly to track populations. Like for looking at effects of slavic expansion you always find certain clades together.



If you have one group of people all together with no border as is the case here, this will never happen. Going back to the eye color thing it's like saying everyone in minnesota is all the same. Then after time everyone on the west side of the state turns out to have all blue eyes. Everyone on the east side comes out to have brown eyes.

Sorry but that's just impossible. Unfortunately in anthropology a lot of the people making big papers are not real scientists at all and don't even have scientific degrees, and/or they are in it only for political reasons. Europe is infested with openly bolshevik university professors and in the USA it's getting more like that ever day. They don't have any care about finding reality they just want to point out how evil whitey is.

That's the only reason I can think of that they push on this theory so hard when it really makes no sense. I think that some white americans also push on it for similar reasons, in that they don't want to be associated with spanish people who they don't think of as white. But the darker spaniards obviously did not get that way from their r1b y-dna and H mtdna mixture anyway, that probably didn't happen til later on. But maybe not, the south of spain may have always been kind of darker.

We are not talking about Minnesota ca 2015, we are talking about the steppe ca 4000 BC. There is no reason why the area where the Karelia R1a+ hunter-gatherer lived wasn't entirely R1a and the area where the Samara R1b+ hunter-gatherer wasn't entirely R1b. These samples were what, 1000 miles apart?!? So your blue eyed example was wrong, and now your mixed population one is wrong. Should we blame the Bolsheviks for you flawed logic?

Isidro
02-22-2015, 11:56 PM
For me it's all about possibilities based on results, and there are many Ancient DNA results and more to come.
Everyone's opinion deserves respect.

Yes, exactly. It is not important to worry about the flavor of r1b either. No one is trying to literally say this guy is the ancestor to anyone, but the mixed up nature in the east and the fact it's basically eastern clades while the today african version is in spain shows that the basic spread had alreadytaken place. I really doubt that happened in just 1000 years or so, there must be even a bigger continuity we just haven't found it yet. I had thought that they might be still a predecessor this far back, but no it seems likely now all the modern clades already exist and are in basically the same places as now.

Anglecynn
02-23-2015, 12:26 AM
It seems a bit like minesweeper, but with y-DNA nomenclature instead of numbers. Of course we've just started the game, and 95% of the squares are still unturned.

Bobo Manbuck
02-23-2015, 12:34 AM
We are not talking about Minnesota ca 2015, we are talking about the steppe ca 4000 BC. There is no reason why the area where the Karelia R1a+ hunter-gatherer lived wasn't entirely R1a and the area where the Samara R1b+ hunter-gatherer wasn't entirely R1b. These samples were what, 1000 miles apart?!? So your blue eyed example was wrong, and now your mixed population one is wrong.


Blue eyes example was not debunked you didn't even mention it til now, it's just an analogy anyway to someone who obviously does not know much about anthropology since the idea is pervasive (except when inconvenient to pet theories).

Nations are relatively new thing. There's no borders on the plains. If this is the urheimet and everything spread from here, then yes they would be mixed together. As they are mixed together at the joining points today. This shows things have not changed all that much.



Should we blame the Bolsheviks for you flawed logic?

I will blame the fact you don't seem to know what you are talking about. If you think HG groups would never mix over last 7k years and one would go east and one west then you need to crack open some books at page one and go from there, and come back in a couple years. By then though I am sure this controversy will be put to rest and even david reich will stop making up BS about it.

Isidro
02-23-2015, 12:44 AM
I posted this link back in January 13 and it has a very useful link about the Cave of Els Trocs, actually it is such a broad innovative study of the flora fauna using 21st century technology way beyond the scope of many including me.


"According to yesterdays regional Aragon (Spain) newspaper Harvard University and another location are in the process of fully analyzing the genome of several Neolithic, 5000BC pastoral individuals of the Pyrenees area of Aragon.Imagine that. Below is an image shot of the paper and some extensive background on the cave Els Trocs.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3374&d=1421159391&thumb=1 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3374&d=1421159391)


Paper is all in Spanish except the abstract.

https://www.academia.edu/9825659/PAS...E_VERI_HUESCA_ (https://www.academia.edu/9825659/PASTORES_TRASHUMANTES_DEL_NEOLITICO_ANTIGUO_EN_UN_ ENTORNO_DE_ALTA_MONTA%C3%91A_SECUENCIA_CRONO-CULTURAL_DE_LA_COVA_DE_ELS_TROCS_SAN_FELI%C3%9A_DE _VERI_HUESCA_)"

R.Rocca
02-23-2015, 01:02 AM
Blue eyes example was not debunked you didn't even mention it til now, it's just an analogy anyway to someone who obviously does not know much about anthropology since the idea is pervasive (except when inconvenient to pet theories).

Nations are relatively new thing. There's no borders on the plains. If this is the urheimet and everything spread from here, then yes they would be mixed together. As they are mixed together at the joining points today. This shows things have not changed all that much.

I will blame the fact you don't seem to know what you are talking about. If you think HG groups would never mix over last 7k years and one would go east and one west then you need to crack open some books at page one and go from there, and come back in a couple years. By then though I am sure this controversy will be put to rest and even david reich will stop making up BS about it.

I gave an example of non-admixture, but there is no need for theoretical ones since we have the Samara Yamnaya as 100% R1b. Areas in 4000 BC were sparsely populated, and without a doubt some areas were almost entirely of one halpogroup. As the paper shows, over a 5000 year period, all ancient DNA samples from Russia found to date have belonged to haplogroup R. That's right, no haplogoup I or J or G. Let me repeat...100% of the same haplogroup!

So, to use a word you are fond of, the data OBLITERATES your theory.

To add, even in a population that is 50% R1a and 50% R1b, eventually someone will get the upper hand if you take into account a better fed chief with more wives, whose better fed children have a higher probability for survival, etc. We are talking about a time period when populations had to really work at surviving, not like today's societies. The examples you are bringing up are so overly simplistic, even a 5th grader can pick them apart.

And by the way, I have been at this game for many, many, years, so you can rest assured there is nothing you can put here that will surprise me, but it was a good attempt at a dig. By the way, according to the "Real Academia Espa˝ola", in Spanish, the word "Bobo" means "dumb". You see, if you stick around here long enough and pay attention, you might actually learn something.

Generalissimo
02-23-2015, 01:33 AM
R1b and r1a today BARELY MIX AT ALL. An area is pretty much one or the other with only a small overlap. That is completely impossible if both r1a and r1b formed right next to each other. They had to have been separated for some time, thousands of years at least, for this to have happened without a bunch of mixing.

Your claim is directly contradicted by the latest ancient DNA findings.

1) R1a and R1b were carried by Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers (EHG). The genomes of R1a and R1b EHG from Karelia and Samara form a clade to the exclusion of all other ancient and modern samples.

2) R1a-M198 and R1b-M269 moved west together from Eastern Europe at the same time, and showed up in Central Europe for the first time at about the same time.

So you have no argument. The lack of so called "mixing" you see between R1a and R1b today is easily explained by rapid expansions of paternal clans originating on the steppe, who basically carved up Europe between them, perhaps with agreement or maybe some disagreement, or a bit of both.

vettor
02-23-2015, 05:13 AM
Maybe because the migrations to Western Europe came from a specific part of the steppe and not the entire steppe. Do you seriously think every single individual in the PC steppe said hey let's all move to Western Europe and forget about populating Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

And ask why J did not populate Europe like G did during the Neolithic although most would agree that J and G likely did live side by side in West Asia. Wait I forgot I can't ask you. Since you think G in Europe comes from Yamnaya.

Yes , every body that could in the steppe, whatever haplogroup they where, migrated with R1b ..................they did not have a system which showed "hey you, you stay , your R1a".
The answer that R1a did not go with R1b and the others in any number, is because, they where in the steppe, at the time with only a very few in number compared to the others , which was R1b in majority.

On, J......because they where on the south side of the zargos mountains, the fertile crescent, that is why.

G in europe comes from both caucasus and north of the zargos mountains

Bobo Manbuck
02-23-2015, 05:32 AM
Your claim is directly contradicted by the latest ancient DNA findings.

no it isn't.



1) R1a and R1b were carried by Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers (EHG).


Pure BS. The fact they are together shows they are just meeting at this point in time, this is the border between them. You know, just like eastern europe is the border today. This study really shows an amazing continuity.

None of those clades found got carried west, those are all eastern r1b clades. Pure nonsense.



The genomes of R1a and R1b EHG from Karelia and Samara form a clade to the exclusion of all other ancient and modern samples.


:lol:

What a pointless statement which proves nothing, and not true either. All r1b and r1a could be said to form a clade. You must include el trocs if you include r1b and r1a together. What a joke.



2) R1a-M198 and R1b-M269 moved west together from Eastern Europe at the same time, and showed up in Central Europe for the first time at about the same time.


If they moved west at the same time, then why is there already r1b in spain at this time. Just goes on and on you guys just don't care about reality.



So you have no argument.

Nope, you have no argument, just politically based fantasies.



The lack of so called "mixing" you see between R1a and R1b today is easily explained by rapid expansions of paternal clans originating on the steppe, who basically carved up Europe between them, perhaps with agreement or maybe some disagreement, or a bit of both.

So 7500+ years ago these eastern clade r1bs that never came west, agreed with r1a that the border would be eastern europe? R1a just decided never to move far west, while r1b went west at a breakneck speed, and in fact was already in the west? And none of them ever mixed together much?

Sounds very likely.

Isidro
02-23-2015, 06:57 AM
My first interesting find in my above linked 2013 study is Boquique ceramic fragments on Trocs I, II and III, circa 5300bc, 4500bc and 3800bc.

This type of ceramic is associated I believe with Cantabrian Mesolithic (need to find source) , Neolithic and different stages of Beaker Culture, including the one in the Balearic Islands.

Trocs I, where the R1b1 was found has the most numerous, with 96 fragments of Boquique ceramic among the dominant Cardial and other styles found.
In the spoiler image of a a reference, (the book has 3) on Boquique ceramic by English archaeologist Christopher Hawkes.

The Prehistoric Foundations of Europe to the Mycenean Age - C.F.C. Hawkes - Google Books (https://books.google.com/books?id=wBAcBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT189&lpg=PT189&dq=beaker+Boquique+pottery&source=bl&ots=xG1YRAcI4l&sig=K7G0wTW4aqeL8i_-gttu2RC-Xv4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hr_qVMbAMMWWgwSElIRI&ved=0CFcQ6AEwDA)

3832

GTC
02-23-2015, 08:54 AM
All members are reminded to keep the tone of their posts civil. This thread is being monitored.

Generalissimo
02-23-2015, 09:01 AM
Yes , every body that could in the steppe, whatever haplogroup they where, migrated with R1b ..................they did not have a system which showed "hey you, you stay , your R1a".
The answer that R1a did not go with R1b and the others in any number, is because, they where in the steppe, at the time with only a very few in number compared to the others , which was R1b in majority.

Here are some R1a results from the Eurasian steppe.

Ancient DNA provides new insights into the history of south Siberian Kurgan people (http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhamagmongol.narod.ru%2Flibrary%2F keyser_2009_e.pdf&ei=levqVNqVEYaC8gWR84CgAw&usg=AFQjCNFboP-yqDi0JBXxox5Gk3frE23uKQ&sig2=QnEgBJ4_BuMXFxGaGqMjcQ&bvm=bv.86475890,d.dGc)

Strong genetic admixture in the Altai at the Middle Bronze Age revealed by uniparental and ancestry informative markers (http://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bemmann/publication/262806184_Strong_genetic_admixture_in_the_Altai_at _the_Middle_Bronze_Age_revealed_by_uniparental_and _ancestry_informative_markers/links/54666ed80cf25b85d17f621f.pdf?origin=publication_de tail)

Read these studies and get back to us. And also read the Haak et al. paper, especially the part where it says R1a came to Central Europe from Russia.

vettor
02-23-2015, 09:10 AM
Here are some R1a results from the Eurasian steppe.

Ancient DNA provides new insights into the history of south Siberian Kurgan people (http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhamagmongol.narod.ru%2Flibrary%2F keyser_2009_e.pdf&ei=levqVNqVEYaC8gWR84CgAw&usg=AFQjCNFboP-yqDi0JBXxox5Gk3frE23uKQ&sig2=QnEgBJ4_BuMXFxGaGqMjcQ&bvm=bv.86475890,d.dGc)

Strong genetic admixture in the Altai at the Middle Bronze Age revealed by uniparental and ancestry informative markers (http://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bemmann/publication/262806184_Strong_genetic_admixture_in_the_Altai_at _the_Middle_Bronze_Age_revealed_by_uniparental_and _ancestry_informative_markers/links/54666ed80cf25b85d17f621f.pdf?origin=publication_de tail)

Read these studies and get back to us. And also read the Haak et al. paper, especially the part where it says R1a came to Central Europe from Russia.

You simply do not understand the issue, the query I am making is ....if R1b and R1a where in the steppe/yamnya at the same time, why did R1a fail to enter and populate western Europe like R1b did, especailly since R1a is so great in numbers!

Haak paper is all about AuDna , you can see apart from the few new finds, and the findings of Ydna on previous ONLY mtdna finds, the other samples come from previous papers like brotherton 2013 etc

Scarlet Ibis
02-23-2015, 09:24 AM
Sorry but that's just impossible. Unfortunately in anthropology a lot of the people making big papers are not real scientists at all and don't even have scientific degrees, and/or they are in it only for political reasons. Europe is infested with openly bolshevik university professors and in the USA it's getting more like that ever day. They don't have any care about finding reality they just want to point out how evil whitey is.

That's the only reason I can think of that they push on this theory so hard when it really makes no sense. I think that some white americans also push on it for similar reasons, in that they don't want to be associated with spanish people who they don't think of as white. But the darker spaniards obviously did not get that way from their r1b y-dna and H mtdna mixture anyway, that probably didn't happen til later on. But maybe not, the south of spain may have always been kind of darker.

Nice imagination, but stop with the absurd ad homs, and irrelevant accusations.

Generalissimo
02-23-2015, 09:29 AM
You simply do not understand the issue, the query I am making is ....if R1b and R1a where in the steppe/yamnya at the same time, why did R1a fail to enter and populate western Europe like R1b did, especailly since R1a is so great in numbers!

R1a populated North-Central Europe. That's why the Corded Ware genome belonged to R1a but was very Yamnaya-like otherwise.

And this is also why the Urnfield genome belonged to R1a, and was also very Yamnaya-like.


Haak paper is all about AuDna , you can see apart from the few new finds, and the findings of Ydna on previous ONLY mtdna finds, the other samples come from previous papers like brotherton 2013 etc

The Haak paper contains plenty of new Y-DNA data and the authors clearly spell out that R1a came to North-Central Europe from Russia during the late Neolithic. How did you miss this?

Bobo Manbuck
02-23-2015, 11:22 AM
Nice imagination, but stop with the absurd ad homs, and irrelevant accusations.

nice imagination indeed, I have not used ad hominem against anyone here. Attacking a theory is not attacking a person. Try rereading.

Bobo Manbuck
02-23-2015, 11:28 AM
Yes , every body that could in the steppe, whatever haplogroup they where, migrated with R1b ..................they did not have a system which showed "hey you, you stay , your R1a".
The answer that R1a did not go with R1b and the others in any number, is because, they where in the steppe, at the time with only a very few in number compared to the others , which was R1b in majority.


But r1a has massively huge numbers as well. If they came from the same place they should have had a similar spread or at the very least they would be partially mixed together - ie there would be few or no areas where there is one but not the other, where in reality most areas have only one or the other in any significant number.... This is a ridiculous enough suggestion I can't believe that David Reich truly credits his own theory. It's a credible mistake for amateurs but impossible to believe is a mere error for geneticists.

Masiamo from eupedia pushes the same ideology hard, yet won't give any details about himself and has an obvious very stron pro european union agenda. However this data pushes back the numbers by almost twice what they originally claimed and with careful scrutiny shows this theory is completely bunk. He also writes all this as if it's established fact for years now, no indication it's a theory or whose theory it is or what his evidence may be.

R.Rocca
02-23-2015, 01:03 PM
But r1a has massively huge numbers as well. If they came from the same place they should have had a similar spread or at the very least they would be partially mixed together - ie there would be few or no areas where there is one but not the other, where in reality most areas have only one or the other in any significant number.... This is a ridiculous enough suggestion I can't believe that David Reich truly credits his own theory. It's a credible mistake for amateurs but impossible to believe is a mere error for geneticists.

Masiamo from eupedia pushes the same ideology hard, yet won't give any details about himself and has an obvious very stron pro european union agenda. However this data pushes back the numbers by almost twice what they originally claimed and with careful scrutiny shows this theory is completely bunk. He also writes all this as if it's established fact for years now, no indication it's a theory or whose theory it is or what his evidence may be.

I gave you examples of why all of your logic about mixing and not mixing together is totally false and you chose to completely ignore them. Your lack of any fact based defense (something along the lines of "No they didn't") is the only thing that is ridiculous. I hear children at the park make better arguments. And by the way, if you want to knock someone's anonymity, the least you could do is reveal your own identity.

ADW_1981
02-23-2015, 02:29 PM
G in europe comes from both caucasus and north of the zargos mountains

Actually we don't know this. The common type found in Ossetians and Georgians is much more rare in Europe - ie: G2a1**, where as European is mostly G2a2b. The European type is also found in these populations, but it is also found in Anatolia which makes more sense as a source population for Europe.

Isidro
02-23-2015, 03:03 PM
Bobo Manbuck,

You do realize that you are almost self handedly destroying this thread right?.
Who are you, what is your mission in this thread and whom are you really helping.
I think your purpose is ridicule and undermine any seriousness coming from this thread and that, sir, does sound like it does. ;)

Bobo Manbuck
02-23-2015, 04:13 PM
I gave you examples of why all of your logic about mixing and not mixing together is totally false and you chose to completely ignore them.


No you didn't. You just said it's false with no reasoning, without explaining why anything I said was wrong, and without justifying why you are supposed to be right.



Your lack of any fact based defense (something along the lines of "No they didn't") is the only thing that is ridiculous. I hear children at the park make better arguments.


You ignored all my arguments, you are the one arguing like a child.



And by the way, if you want to knock someone's anonymity, the least you could do is reveal your own identity.

I was initially thoroughly confused by this, but you mean maciamo of course. If someone is going to talk about anthropology then it is only fair to present themselves as what they are so you can see what bias there may be, ie what country they come from and their ethnic background. He claims to be a geneticist but it's pretty clear that he has a big agenda and very clear he must be somehow directly involved with the EU government, but he has concealed any real information about himself except his supposed educational background.

I mean this is a guy who champions the idea that e1b is more native to europe than r1b is, and writes extremely detailed articles about migrations of indo europeans via specific routes that may not have even occurred at all as if they are solid fact. It is not unreasonable for him to at least reveal if his clade is in fact e1b even if he is not willing to reveal himself fully to the public.

Personally I am I1, if you talk on a board like this I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to truthfully identify themselves. And when you are making in depth articles then I would expect more than that, especially when they are so controversial (and these old dates for r1b have disproved most his crap anyway).

Bobo Manbuck
02-23-2015, 04:18 PM
Bobo Manbuck,

You do realize that you are almost self handedly destroying this thread right?.
Who are you, what is your mission in this thread and whom are you really helping.
I think your purpose is ridicule and undermine any seriousness coming from this thread and that, sir, does sound like it does. ;)

I'm bringing sanity to the thread because I could not take reading through it and seeing so much ridiculousness. People can take it or leave it. Many have this idea ingrained into their head because it's been heavily propagandized, but people who are undecided should know about the many massive holes in this theory, read through, and decide for themselves. Then remember when I am shown to be correct (this is all long since solved once H's spread was determined) they can think back to this thread and realize for the future how much of this crap is all propaganda, and be more wary in the future.

Anglecynn
02-23-2015, 04:21 PM
Why would he necessarily be E1b? That's based on your assumption that Mesolithic or UP inhabitants must be better in some way, and therefore he is projecting his own identity on to them - which may not be the case.

It's evident to everyone reading that what he writes is opinion, based on his own interpretation of data which may or may not ultimately be wrong. Almost certainly the mechanics of it are wrong, as likely a lot of these ancient events don't fit into modern models which have no choice but to simplify for the sake of clarity and to deal more easily with the complexity and time depth of these events. To a certain extent that is going to be the case with all models/ideas/theories.

Anglecynn
02-23-2015, 04:23 PM
I'm bringing sanity to the thread because I could not take reading through it and seeing so much ridiculousness. People can take it or leave it. Many have this idea ingrained into their head because it's been heavily propagandized, but people who are undecided should know about the many massive holes in this theory, read through, and decide for themselves. Then remember when I am shown to be correct (this is all long since solved once H's spread was determined) they can think back to this thread and realize for the future how much of this crap is all propaganda, and be more wary in the future.

Any of us could just easily conclude that you are spouting propaganda, and be more wary henceforth.

Isidro
02-23-2015, 04:45 PM
I can see passion in your ideas and some things you post are worth considering but I realize that Anthrogenica Forums has a worldwide membership. Today's ~300 million R1b's phylogenetic tree is not going to be solved by one R1b1 from Els Trocs or by any result found as today.



I'm bringing sanity to the thread because I could not take reading through it and seeing so much ridiculousness. People can take it or leave it. Many have this idea ingrained into their head because it's been heavily propagandized, but people who are undecided should know about the many massive holes in this theory, read through, and decide for themselves. Then remember when I am shown to be correct (this is all long since solved once H's spread was determined) they can think back to this thread and realize for the future how much of this crap is all propaganda, and be more wary in the future.

Bobo Manbuck
02-23-2015, 04:50 PM
Why would he necessarily be E1b?

That's the whole point, he does not tell us what he is. If he is e1b then it confirms my idea he has some serious wishful thinking affecting his claims.




That's based on your assumption that Mesolithic or UP inhabitants must be better in some way, and therefore he is projecting his own identity on to them - which may not be the case.

Of course being the original settlers is better than being iron age savages who killed off the entire bell beaker civilization and replaced it by forcing all the women into concubinage, that's monstrous. And very unlikely to be true. But that's exactly what he (and Reich) are saying.

Of course maybe he IS r1b, though I doubt it.



It's evident to everyone reading that what he writes is opinion, based on his own interpretation of data which may or may not ultimately be wrong.


Ludicrous.



Haplogroup R* originated in North Asia just before the Last Glacial Maximum (26,500-19,000 years ago).
...

R1b-M269 (the most common form in Europe) is closely associated with the diffusion of Indo-European languages, as attested by its presence in all regions of the world where Indo-European languages were spoken in ancient times, from the Atlantic coast of Europe to the Indian subcontinent, which comprised almost all Europe (except Finland, Sardinia and Bosnia-Herzegovina), Anatolia, Armenia, European Russia, southern Siberia, many pockets around Central Asia (notably in Xinjiang, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Afghanistan), without forgetting Iran, Pakistan, northern India and Nepal. The history of R1b and R1a are intricately connected to each others.

...

Horses were first domesticated around 4600 BCE in the Caspian Steppe, perhaps somewhere around the Don or the lower Volga, and soon became a defining element of steppe culture. Nevertheless it is unlikely that R1b was already present in the eastern steppes at the time, so the domestication of the horse should be attributed to the indigenous R1a people.

...

It is not yet entirely clear when R1b crossed over from eastern Anatolia to the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

...

The first clearly Proto-Indo-European culture was Sredny Stog

...

The Yamna period (3500-2500 BCE) is the most important one in the creation of Indo-European culture and society. Middle Eastern R1b people had been living and blending to some extent with the local R1a foragers and herders for over a millennium, perhaps even two or three. The close cultural contact and interactions between R1a and R1b people all over the Pontic-Caspian Steppe resulted in the creation of a common vernacular, a new lingua franca, which linguists have called Proto-Indo-European (PIE). It is pointless to try to assign another region of origin to the PIE language. Linguistic similarities exist between PIE and Caucasian and Hurrian languages in the Middle East on the one hand, and Uralic languages in the Volga-Ural region on the other hand, which makes the Pontic Steppe the perfect intermediary region.



What, who, what? Some of this is factually false, most of it is questionable and shows he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to archaeology, others are wildly disputed and IMPOSSIBLY TO ACTUALLY KNOW and all of them are presented like they are bare facts.

That's supposed to be opinion?




Almost certainly the mechanics of it are wrong, as likely a lot of these ancient events don't fit into modern models which have no choice but to simplify for the sake of clarity and to deal more easily with the complexity and time depth of these events. To a certain extent that is going to be the case with all models/ideas/theories.

That's why you present things like THE FORMATION OF PROTO INDO EUROPEAN LANGUAGE, a minor thing like that, as a concept that is not a fact but a theory. It's only a theory that such a thing ever existed. Probably there was never really one combined homeland for it, and we will never be able to determine this for certain.

I only skimmed to pick all that crap out, the whole article is like that, and very nearly every single article is like that.


Any of us could just easily conclude that you are spouting propaganda, and be more wary henceforth.

I'm not the one making a claim, I am just debunking a thoroughly ridiculous claim someone else is making.

I think there are still many possibilities. r1b could have mainly come to W europe by boat from anatolia or africa, it may have formed in iberia, north africa or a wide range of places. But it's obvious it formed before this time, and the "mixing with r1a" for thousands of years without taking on any r1a into their society is just hilarious and sums up everything wrong with this. They mixed with them autosomally but didn't take on any of their y-dna or mtdna. Yes, that is really what this theory says. If vegas took odds on such things I would not feel any compunction about betting my last dollar against this.

And if maciamo does not have an agenda, no one on the net or in the news has an agenda. The guy reeks of it to high heaven.

R.Rocca
02-23-2015, 05:38 PM
No you didn't. You just said it's false with no reasoning, without explaining why anything I said was wrong, and without justifying why you are supposed to be right.

You ignored all my arguments, you are the one arguing like a child.

I was initially thoroughly confused by this, but you mean maciamo of course. If someone is going to talk about anthropology then it is only fair to present themselves as what they are so you can see what bias there may be, ie what country they come from and their ethnic background. He claims to be a geneticist but it's pretty clear that he has a big agenda and very clear he must be somehow directly involved with the EU government, but he has concealed any real information about himself except his supposed educational background.

I mean this is a guy who champions the idea that e1b is more native to europe than r1b is, and writes extremely detailed articles about migrations of indo europeans via specific routes that may not have even occurred at all as if they are solid fact. It is not unreasonable for him to at least reveal if his clade is in fact e1b even if he is not willing to reveal himself fully to the public.

Personally I am I1, if you talk on a board like this I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to truthfully identify themselves. And when you are making in depth articles then I would expect more than that, especially when they are so controversial (and these old dates for r1b have disproved most his crap anyway).

Here are two cases where an entire major haplogroup has been found to date in one area without admixing: Yamnaya samples from Samara are all R1b+. Zoom out and all Russian samples so far have belonged to haplogroup R over a 5000 year span.

And if you don't think populations from entire regions of Europe can't migrate en masse to another and completely overrun the locals, looks no further than the Americas, where England, Spain, France, Portugal, the Netherlands and even Sweden colonized it over a very short period of time. These were already admixed European populations, but that is because the population density of Europe was already extremely heavy ca 1500 AD, and of course ca 3000 BC Europe wan't densely populated.

But wait, a practically complete replacement of genes, of a massive stretch of land over large distances in the historical period? No, it can't be...because "Bobo" says so. Now we have two major fact based papers saying the same thing happened, but only this time from Eastern Europe to Central and Western Europe, but we should believe "Bobo" because he makes fact based statements like "no they didn't" or "yes they did". So let's have it, aside from what you think or don't think, find some scientific study that disproves how haplogroups can or can't mix or how they can or can't migrate from the same general area during the same general time frame.

Scarlet Ibis
02-23-2015, 05:45 PM
nice imagination indeed, I have not used ad hominem against anyone here. Attacking a theory is not attacking a person. Try rereading.

Re-read? Everyone has already wasted way too much time reading your nonsense ramblings. Enough already. Get lost, and go whine about Maciamo, blonde hair, and Bolsheviks somewhere else.

ADW_1981
02-23-2015, 05:51 PM
Of course being the original settlers is better than being iron age savages who killed off the entire bell beaker civilization and replaced it by forcing all the women into concubinage, that's monstrous. And very unlikely to be true. But that's exactly what he (and Reich) are saying.



You're assuming Bell Beaker is indigenous on what grounds? It's clear that it is intrusive to places like Spain and directly contrasts the earlier Neolithic civilizations there. It does look like Neolithic civilization on the male side collapsed in northern Europe. How many I2-M223, I-M26, H2, G2a2a, C-V20's are you seeing floating around today?

alan
02-23-2015, 05:52 PM
When you look at Paleolithic archaeology there is practically no connection between Siberian Mal'ta like groups and any European or SW Asian groups. It is only in the Mesolithic we see some hints of a movement from Siberian into Europe and SW Asia. I dont expect any R to be found in Europe or SW Asia before 9500BC and in many areas it would be significantly later than that. Even when those hints of Siberian influence come, they seem to be largely confined from a line between Denmark and Moldova although there could have been a trickle along the coast to the Low Countries c. 5000BC given the possible links between Ertebolle and Swifterbant. To prove this it would be nice to have some pre-9500BC European hunter genes from both the Black Sea area and the west. Even cooler would be LGM period DNA from those refugia.

alan
02-23-2015, 06:10 PM
I think the couple of recent contributions that show beaker burial even when in old collective tombs in Iberia is a clearly new distinctive individual or individualised burial tradition with cousinly links to Corded Ware of some sort pretty well provides us with the 'into Iberia' movement coinciding with the start of bell beaker- probably the actual cause of bell beaker culture - that we have all been wondering about. It kinds of solves the problem and would appear to suggest to me that the intrusion happened by 2700BC or not much earlier. I think this single burial tradition that has been obscured by re-use of older collective tombs is as close to a clear break and major cultural change in Iberia in the correct timeframe. Personally I dont believe the pre-beaker Zambujal type culture that commenced about 3100BC in Iberia were IEs or R1b associated. Seems more likely to me that they were an offshoot of other non-IE and non-R Med. copper age groups we see as early as 3600BC in Italy and later in southern France. So far the pre-beaker copper age people of the Med. and southern Alps C. 3300-2900bc are all non-R so moving with the evidence I dont see a pre-2900BC Med. route west as likely. By the period 2900-2700BC we do see groups like Corded Ware and Remedello 2 symbolism reaching the western Alps. I think those are our main options for the most westerly immediately pre-beaker cultures for which steppe influences have been suggested. I cannot see any other options so I am convinced we will find the pre-beaker P312 and/or L11 in one of them. In fact I expect L11 to be found in both of them in one form or another. I have long felt that L51xL11 bears a similarity, allowing for displacement, to Remedello and perhaps could have been a minor lineage carried among some L11 people.

vettor
02-23-2015, 06:20 PM
R1a populated North-Central Europe. That's why the Corded Ware genome belonged to R1a but was very Yamnaya-like otherwise.

And this is also why the Urnfield genome belonged to R1a, and was also very Yamnaya-like.



The Haak paper contains plenty of new Y-DNA data and the authors clearly spell out that R1a came to North-Central Europe from Russia during the late Neolithic. How did you miss this?

Clearly your avoiding the question, but the reason of the new R1b x &7 new samples in yamnya was because they where the first wave to head all the way to the extreme west of europe. There was no R1a in this first wave.

The central Europe was ENF people first, as per the paper , the G2a with T1a and any I left out.........these G2a are same age as Oetzi. These people in majority stayed and helped with other waves from yamnya to be part of corded ware......yes R1a is part of this, not the major part , but still a part

You seem to be unable to find it in you that haplogroups migrated together in many different ydna and mtdna markers, you think they travelled on their lonesome

vettor
02-23-2015, 06:27 PM
Actually we don't know this. The common type found in Ossetians and Georgians is much more rare in Europe - ie: G2a1**, where as European is mostly G2a2b. The European type is also found in these populations, but it is also found in Anatolia which makes more sense as a source population for Europe.

and G2a2a is southern balkan .................so what are you saying?.............I did not state that G did not pass through Anatolia, I stated its most likely origins. most haplogroups passed north or south of the Black sea and even like the Kaska people, through it

vettor
02-23-2015, 06:31 PM
Bobo Manbuck,

You do realize that you are almost self handedly destroying this thread right?.
Who are you, what is your mission in this thread and whom are you really helping.
I think your purpose is ridicule and undermine any seriousness coming from this thread and that, sir, does sound like it does. ;)

BTW, don't you believe the iberian R1b came via the steppe/pontic or do you believe like some ( not me )that it came via coastal N.Africa

ADW_1981
02-23-2015, 06:47 PM
and G2a2a is southern balkan .................so what are you saying?.............I did not state that G did not pass through Anatolia, I stated its most likely origins. most haplogroups passed north or south of the Black sea and even like the Kaska people, through it

You realize that massive mountain ranges act as barriers to population movement right? The spread of farming 6,000 BC had no horses, no maps... A population doesn't simply push through thousands of miles of rock in a generation or two. There was absolutely no reason to either. They could sustain their population in the mountains.

R1a and R1b on the other hand are native to north Eurasia. There is no evidence which says otherwise.

rms2
02-23-2015, 08:14 PM
I apologize for the following long post, but I think one has to look at the preponderance of the evidence. IMHO, it is pretty clear.


1. Western Europe is overwhelmingly R1b-L23 (and L51>L11).

2. R1b in Europe has an east-to-west phylogeography. It stems from and is part of Super Group K, most of which is still found together only in Asia: K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, and R. Q and R descend from P and are found together in NE Eurasia. R1a and R2 still have an eastern center of gravity, and R1b, although shifted to the west, is still found in the east together with its cousins, R1a and R2.

3. Recovered near Lake Baikal in Siberia, 24k-year-old Mal’ta Boy was R*, the earliest known instance of R* anywhere on earth. Near Samara in Russia, a 7600-year-old R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer was recovered from a site that has also produced artifacts from the Elshanka, Samara, and Repin cultures. The Samara hunter-gatherer is the oldest known R1b anywhere on earth.

4. Recovered from kurgans in the Samara and Orenburg oblasts in Russia attributed to the Yamnaya cultural horizon, the remains of seven males dated to the 4th millennium BC were found who belong to y haplogroup R1b: one of them R1b-P297, one R1b-L23, and five R1b-Z2103/Z2105.

5. None of items 2-4 is true of the western end of the European peninsula (except for R1b having an eastern origin), where the R1b is overwhelmingly R1b-L11 (and P312>DF27). There is no Super Group K root of related y haplogroups and very little Q, R1a, and R2 there. There are no instances of Paleolithic remains belonging to y haplogroup R. There are no R1b-L23 remains from the 4th millennium BC.

6. Western Europe is overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking. It got that way somehow, and the frequency of R1a in most places in Western Europe is comparatively low, much of that traceable to historical movements (e.g., Slavs, Norse Vikings, etc.).

7. Many eminent linguists locate the birthplace of the Indo-European family of languages in the Pontic-Caspian steppe in the 5th millennium BC, and a number of them, including Dr. Jim Mallory, attribute its main expansion and spread to the Yamnaya cultural horizon of the 4th-3rd millennia BC.

8. As mentioned above, now the remains of seven Yamnaya males retrieved from their 4th-millennium kurgans in the Samara and Orenburg oblasts on the Russian steppe have tested R1b (as described in item 4 above).

So, what are we to think of the Neolithic R1b1-M415 dated to about 7000 years ago from the Els Trocs site in Spain and attributed to the Cardial Ware culture? Where did he come from? What connection to most modern Western European R1b does he have, if any?

Given what we know of the phylogeography of R1b, its origin and place within Super Group K, and its descent from R and R1, we cannot imagine that R1b itself arose at the western end of the European peninsula. So apparently Els Trocs or one of his y-dna ancestors arrived in Spain from somewhere farther east and from a y line ultimately derived from the source of R1b in Eastern Europe or in Asia.

At some point in its history, a branch of R1b that was ancestral (negative) for the SNP P297 made its way into the Levant, where it became involved in the Neolithic Revolution. Part of that branch developed the SNP V88, and some of that made its way to Africa. Some of the P297- group is still classed as R1b1* to this day, that is, P25+ (or derived for one of the SNPs at that level), and ancestral or negative for all the other currently known SNPs, including V88 (naturally, this group no doubt has its own set of SNPs downstream of P25, but those SNPs have not been discovered or correctly attributed yet).

It seems likely that the Els Trocs R1b1 belongs to this P297- group, although Haak et al were unable to get reads on him for either P297 or V88, negative or positive. His y-dna line apparently got caught up in the Cardial Ware culture in the Near East and eventually made its way to Spain. That line has few if any descendants in Western Europe today.

Otherwise, one must argue that either Els Trocs himself or one of his near y-dna predecessors is the ancestor of most of European R1b, including those seven Yamnaya males from the 4th millennium BC.

Even if one attributes Els Trocs to a y-dna line established in Iberia during the Paleolithic or Mesolithic periods, one still has to bring it from the East, since that is where R1b first arose. How likely is it then that R1b spread east from Iberia so that those seven Yamnaya men of the 4th millennium are its eventual products, along with most of European R1b? And how likely is it that the supposed y-dna line leading from Iberia to the Yamnaya culture would land in an area where an R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer, about 600 years older than Els Trocs, lived, died and was buried about 7600 years ago?

Far more parsimonious and likely than such a tenuous and far-fetched scenario is the obvious conclusion that R1b arose in Eastern Europe or Western Asia, and, as R1b-L51 (a brother clade to the R1b-Z2103/Z2105 found in those Yamnaya males), became a part of the genesis of the Indo-European languages on the Pontic-Caspian steppe, ultimately coming west in the various waves of expansion of Indo-European-speaking steppe pastoralists between the 5th and 3rd millennia BC, especially as part of the Yamnaya expansion west in the 4th and 3rd millennia BC.

Summing up, we have an overwhelmingly R1b, Indo-European-speaking Western Europe, and both R1b and Indo-European have east-to-west phylogeographies traceable to the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

Conclusion: Both R1b-L23>L51 and Indo-European came to Western Europe from Eastern Europe, and they came together.

Isidro
02-23-2015, 09:18 PM
I think it would depend on a scientific acceptable amount of tested people per area to discard less successful branches pre existence in the area. Good question though. It only takes one Y-chromosome DNA mutation
for a large line and the Bell Beaker package seems more like a mosaic of cultures to me.


You're assuming Bell Beaker is indigenous on what grounds? It's clear that it is intrusive to places like Spain and directly contrasts the earlier Neolithic civilizations there. It does look like Neolithic civilization on the male side collapsed in northern Europe. How many I2-M223, I-M26, H2, G2a2a, C-V20's are you seeing floating around today?

Generalissimo
02-23-2015, 09:31 PM
Clearly your avoiding the question, but the reason of the new R1b x &7 new samples in yamnya was because they where the first wave to head all the way to the extreme west of europe. There was no R1a in this first wave.

The central Europe was ENF people first, as per the paper , the G2a with T1a and any I left out.........these G2a are same age as Oetzi. These people in majority stayed and helped with other waves from yamnya to be part of corded ware......yes R1a is part of this, not the major part , but still a part

You seem to be unable to find it in you that haplogroups migrated together in many different ydna and mtdna markers, you think they travelled on their lonesome

G2a didn't come to Europe from the steppe.

Megalophias
02-23-2015, 10:19 PM
Even if one attributes Els Trocs to a y-dna line established in Iberia during the Paleolithic or Mesolithic periods, one still has to bring it from the East, since that is where R1b first arose. How likely is it then that R1b spread east from Iberia so that those seven Yamnaya men of the 4th millennium are its eventual products, along with most of European R1b? And how likely is it that the supposed y-dna line leading from Iberia to the Yamnaya culture would land in an area where an R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer, about 600 years older than Els Trocs, lived, died and was buried about 7600 years ago?

Ah ha ha ha ha! I just thought of a way to connect them! Cardial Ware! They colonized Ukraine - maybe. Now neither the Samara forager nor the Spanish Epicardial farmer were M269+. But if you look at the distribution of M269*, it is actually kind of Mediterranean, with some in North Africa for instance, and the highest levels in the Balkans and even in Egypt and the Balearics (though none in Iberia). There is also some in Eastern Europe and West Asia too, of course. So Cardial Ware could have brought the R1b to both places, but due to founder effect R1b-M269 was the main haplogroup in the Ukrainian colonies.

And no, of course I don't think this is remotely plausible. :D

Isidro
02-23-2015, 10:22 PM
Following up on the Boquique ceramic found in a dominant Cardial residues Troc I layer.

The paper, as I posted earlier did an innovative study of the whole region not just the cave. Anyway, this is what the paper says:

Page 23: Podemos concluir...
We can conclude, therefore, that the occupation of TROCS I is integrated into the
general framework of evolution detected in the Ebro valley along the Neolithic,
but in turn shows a number of unique characteristics compared with the type of
use and documented structures that are linked to issues of social sphere and
ritual. Also, this information should make us rethink interpretations
based on the results of surveys with small area of ​​excavation,
since the detection and definition of pavements or ceramic floors
characteristic of Els TROCS would not have been possible without the realization of a wide area of
intervention.
Page 41: Es tentador analizar...
It is tempting to analyze this mobility and location of the Cova dels TROCS
(Compared to the natural steps of Las Aras and The Muria and the watershed between the
╔sera and Isßbena) (Fig. 1), in relation to the first Neolithic colonization from
southern France through these valleys, as already revealed some
authors (Utrilla and Mazo, 1994: 58; Utrilla, 2002: 203-205) to propose a way of neolitizaciˇn
for this area through the Tet and Segre. However, in
our case radiocarbon datings (Tab. I) and provenance analysis of lythic industry
(pointing outcrops of the Ebro valley) (Fig. 9), and the similarity
of ceramic decorations, show us a different direction south-north
(From the valley to the mountain) what at a slightly later time some
authors have considered "early centers of colonial succesive expansion generators
"(Baldellou and Utrilla, 1999: 226; Utrilla, 2002: 184), whose ultimate origin is not
discussed in this paper.

Jean M
02-23-2015, 10:41 PM
So, what are we to think of the Neolithic R1b1-M415 dated to about 7000 years ago from the Els Trocs site in Spain and attributed to the Cardial Ware culture?

As Haak et al 2015 says, the Els Trocs site has previously been attributed to the Epicardial, but this attribution has now been questioned. I rooted around for more. Three types of pottery have been found there, only one of which was Cardial. That is why I removed the label 'Epicardial' from the Els Trocs aDNA in my online table of European Neolithic DNA, in case anyone is wondering.

Isidro
02-23-2015, 11:38 PM
I think there is a huge gap between the steppes and Atlantic Europe with a lot of old R1b branches as we travel East coinciding with it's prolific success rate dwindled.
What happened in Northern and Southern Europe's population migrations from East to West is autosomaly different in many ways from the get go, later on clustered closer together on a South-North first and the North South later migrations.
In short, Neolithic R1b expansion through the Mediterranean including North Africa and expansion to North Europe. That is the major route IMO, the Steppe migration to Northern Europe was limited in scope to the autosomal we see today.With the possible exception of R1b-U106.



BTW, don't you believe the iberian R1b came via the steppe/pontic or do you believe like some ( not me )that it came via coastal N.Africa

newtoboard
02-23-2015, 11:58 PM
You simply do not understand the issue, the query I am making is ....if R1b and R1a where in the steppe/yamnya at the same time, why did R1a fail to enter and populate western Europe like R1b did, especailly since R1a is so great in numbers!

Haak paper is all about AuDna , you can see apart from the few new finds, and the findings of Ydna on previous ONLY mtdna finds, the other samples come from previous papers like brotherton 2013 etc

And right back at you. Why did R1b fail to populate Central Asia or Eastern Europe?

newtoboard
02-23-2015, 11:59 PM
It seems the concept of Yamnaya being a horizon is a concept that is too difficult for some people to understand.

rms2
02-24-2015, 01:51 AM
I think it is pretty clear there was no Neolithic expansion of R1b from the Mediterranean to northern Europe and that Els Trocs is a one-off that was probably R1b-V88 and thus not even on the same line as most Western Europe R1b. Haak et al cites 70 published y-dna results from Neolithic sites. Out of all of them, only one, Els Trocs, was R1b, and that one was R1b1-M415 and probably V88 (unfortunately, Haak et al did not get a read for V88 on him, positive or negative). So, if there was a Neolithic expansion of R1b from the Mediterranean which is the source of today's Western European R1b, it must have been pretty well cloaked, because it's not showing up.

On top of that, western Europeans today carry ANE and speak Indo-European languages. They acquired those somehow, and R1b derived from the Pontic-Caspian steppe is the most likely candidate.

Many eminent linguists and archaeologists attribute the spread of Indo-European languages to the Yamnaya cultural horizon. Western Europe today is overwhelmingly R1b and Indo-European speaking and - surprise! surprise! - R1b has turned up seven-for-seven in Yamnaya males. Not only that, but, as icing on the vodka-laced Russian cake, we have a 7600-year-old R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer recovered from Samara. He seems to me to be the coup de grace, a major find that anchors those seven Yamnaya males to the steppe and makes it likely that they were scions of a y-dna line that had already been on the steppe for millennia before they were born.

This strikes me as one of those rare, sledgehammer-to-the-head obvious things that it takes a certain sort of willful blindness or lack of understanding to miss.

vettor
02-24-2015, 04:49 AM
And right back at you. Why did R1b fail to populate Central Asia or Eastern Europe?

Because it did not go east it went west.........same as R1a did not go west initially............so we agree with what I say, thanks

vettor
02-24-2015, 04:53 AM
You realize that massive mountain ranges act as barriers to population movement right? The spread of farming 6,000 BC had no horses, no maps... A population doesn't simply push through thousands of miles of rock in a generation or two. There was absolutely no reason to either. They could sustain their population in the mountains.

R1a and R1b on the other hand are native to north Eurasia. There is no evidence which says otherwise.

which mountain range, the caucasus,....... if so, thats a complete 100% B.S by Eurogenes site. It's no barrier, there is always the coastal route, the sea route ( if you do not want snow on your feet )

Farmers do not need horses.

Who had maps at that time ..........find me anybody


you need to read this
http://www.science.org.ge/moambe/6-2/153-161%20Pitskhelauri.pdf

Krefter
02-24-2015, 04:54 AM
I think it is pretty clear there was no Neolithic expansion of R1b from the Mediterranean to northern Europe and that Els Trocs is a one-off that was probably R1b-V88 and thus not even on the same line as most Western Europe R1b. Haak et al cites 70 published y-dna results from Neolithic sites. Out of all of them, only one, Els Trocs, was R1b, and that one was R1b1-M415 and probably V88 (unfortunately, Haak et al did not get a read for V88 on him, positive or negative). So, if there was a Neolithic expansion of R1b from the Mediterranean which is the source of today's Western European R1b, it must have been pretty well cloaked, because it's not showing up.

On top of that, western Europeans today carry ANE and speak Indo-European languages. They acquired those somehow, and R1b derived from the Pontic-Caspian steppe is the most likely candidate.

Many eminent linguists and archaeologists attribute the spread of Indo-European languages to the Yamnaya cultural horizon. Western Europe today is overwhelmingly R1b and Indo-European speaking and - surprise! surprise! - R1b has turned up seven-for-seven in Yamnaya males. Not only that, but, as icing on the vodka-laced Russian cake, we have a 7600-year-old R1b1-L278 hunter-gatherer recovered from Samara. He seems to me to be the coup de grace, a major find that anchors those seven Yamnaya males to the steppe and makes it likely that they were scions of a y-dna line that had already been on the steppe for millennia before they were born.

This strikes me as one of those rare, sledgehammer-to-the-head obvious things that it takes a certain sort of willful blindness or lack of understanding to miss.

R1b is rare in Balto-Slavs and Indo Iranians. R1a is rare in Italics, Celts, Germans, Antolians(minus likely Ino Iranian admixture), Greeks, Thracians, other Balkan IEs. 3/3 CWC have R1a and 3/3 Bell beaker have R1b. 7/7 Samara Yamna have R1b and almost all over a dozen Bronze-Iron age central Asians have R1a.

Assuming R1b-L23(and other R1b lineages) and R1a-M417 mostly spread with IEs, it's strange that you either have alot of one and next to nothing of the other. It's an interesting trend and might have some significance, like sub families of IE?

vettor
02-24-2015, 04:57 AM
G2a didn't come to Europe from the steppe.

you keep denying this and keep claiming your theory that each haplogroup migrated solely on one path ..........;)

alan
02-24-2015, 08:41 AM
R1b is rare in Balto-Slavs and Indo Iranians. R1a is rare in Italics, Celts, Germans, Antolians(minus likely Ino Iranian admixture), Greeks, Thracians, other Balkan IEs. 3/3 CWC have R1a and 3/3 Bell beaker have R1b. 7/7 Samara Yamna have R1b and almost all over a dozen Bronze-Iron age central Asians have R1a.

Assuming R1b-L23(and other R1b lineages) and R1a-M417 mostly spread with IEs, it's strange that you either have alot of one and next to nothing of the other. It's an interesting trend and might have some significance, like sub families of IE?

There was clearly significant nuance in the distribution of R1a and b and the clades of both within the steppes and that has had an influence on the patterns. That nuance must have existed around 3000BC at the latest. In fact we know this did because obviously around Samara at 3000BC one clade dominated. Its also probably got something to do with the clan type societies these people had where the genes of a small amount of men were massively passed on at the expense of the many so clades proliferated massively. This was still going on in the high Medieval period in the Celtic fringe and it seems to me this was the basic undeveloped default kind of social structure of the R1 peoples in Europe and much of Asia. It may have become modified somewhat when more complex societies with urban settlements etc developed. That kind of super-breeder clan society tends to be resilient but inherently unstable politically with fission and faction a constant factor.

rms2
02-24-2015, 12:41 PM
R1b is rare in Balto-Slavs and Indo Iranians. R1a is rare in Italics, Celts, Germans, Antolians(minus likely Ino Iranian admixture), Greeks, Thracians, other Balkan IEs. 3/3 CWC have R1a and 3/3 Bell beaker have R1b. 7/7 Samara Yamna have R1b and almost all over a dozen Bronze-Iron age central Asians have R1a.

Assuming R1b-L23(and other R1b lineages) and R1a-M417 mostly spread with IEs, it's strange that you either have alot of one and next to nothing of the other. It's an interesting trend and might have some significance, like sub families of IE?

Yes, it is strange to us nowadays. But I think tribal groups were largely kinship based, which is why you see the preponderance of one or at most only a few y haplogroups in this tribal group or that. I think this is especially true on the y-dna side of things for tribal societies that, like the early Indo-Europeans, were patriarchal.

As you mentioned, you see these sorts of splits in the original PIE groups, R1a and R1b (and I am glad for the opportunity to reassert my own belief that R1a was the other side of the PIE coin with R1b), but you also see them happening further down the line with different subclades within R1b and R1a themselves. Witness the basic P312/U106 divide, with the Italo-Celtic tribes on the one hand and the Germanic tribes on the other. That's not to say there were no exceptions and no blurring of lines, especially at the borders, but it is generally true, I think, that the Italo-Celtic tribes were mostly P312 and the Germanic tribes were mostly U106 (in terms of R1b, that is). You see the same sort of thing within R1a, i.e., different subclades of R1a associated with different Indo-European groups.

As I said, such kinship lines were not absolute or unbreakable; they were just generally and in most cases a matter of fact. Obviously there was some mixing, with R1b in predominantly R1a tribal groups and R1a in predominantly R1b groups, etc.

One thing that I notice in looking at some of the things I write is that they don't sound sufficiently humble, like I am really 100% sure of everything. That is not true at all, and I want to add the caveat that I am merely expressing my opinions. I try to make them as informed as I can, but that does not mean I am not aware I could be wrong.

rms2
02-24-2015, 12:53 PM
There was clearly significant nuance in the distribution of R1a and b and the clades of both within the steppes and that has had an influence on the patterns. That nuance must have existed around 3000BC at the latest. In fact we know this did because obviously around Samara at 3000BC one clade dominated. Its also probably got something to do with the clan type societies these people had where the genes of a small amount of men were massively passed on at the expense of the many so clades proliferated massively. This was still going on in the high Medieval period in the Celtic fringe and it seems to me this was the basic undeveloped default kind of social structure of the R1 peoples in Europe and much of Asia. It may have become modified somewhat when more complex societies with urban settlements etc developed. That kind of super-breeder clan society tends to be resilient but inherently unstable politically with fission and faction a constant factor.

Yes, and apparently Z2103's brother clade of R1b-L51 was on the western end of the steppe, spawned L11, and went with those westward thrusts of Yamnaya into Central Europe, some up the Danube valley (IMHO the L11 line leading to P312) and some around the north side of the Carpathians (IMHO the L11 line leading to U106).

I hope they test some of the remains in those thousands of kurgans along that up-the-Danube-valley route soon.

Silesian
02-24-2015, 01:24 PM
R1b is rare in Balto-Slavs and Indo Iranians. R1a is rare in Italics, Celts, Germans, Antolians(minus likely Ino Iranian admixture), Greeks, Thracians, other Balkan IEs. 3/3 CWC have R1a and 3/3 Bell beaker have R1b. 7/7 Samara Yamna have R1b and almost all over a dozen Bronze-Iron age central Asians have R1a.

Assuming R1b-L23(and other R1b lineages) and R1a-M417 mostly spread with IEs, it's strange that you either have alot of one and next to nothing of the other. It's an interesting trend and might have some significance, like sub families of IE?

Some points to keep in mind. First age difference between the two.
For example R1b-Z2103 is 1000+/- years younger than it's R1a Karelian cousin, but 1000+/-years older than R1a Z93 and R1a Z282 or almost on par with R1a-M417+/-.


R1b-M269 7.5 (7.0-8.1)
R1b-L23 7.2 (6.7-7.7)
R1b-Z2103 6.4 (5.9-6.9)
R1b-L51 6.7 (6.2-7.2)
R1b-L11 5.7 (5.2-6.2)
R1b-P312 5.6 (5.1-6.1)
R1b-U106 5.5 (5.0-6.0)

R1a-M417 6.2 (5.7-6.7)
R1a-CTS4385 5.8 (5.3-6.3)
R1a-L664 4.8 (4.3-5.2)
R1a-Z645 5.6 (5.1-6.1)
R1a-Z93 5.4 (4.9-5.9)
R1a-Z282 5.4 (4.9-5.9


R1a1-M459 from Yuzhnyy Oleni Ostrov, Karelia, Russia, Mesolithic. 5500 - 5000 BCE
R1a1a1-M417xZ282 from Corded Ware site at Esperstedt 2473 - 2348 cal BCE
R1a1a1b1a2-Z280 from Late Bronze Age Germany, Halberstadt. 1113 -1021 cal BCE


R1b-Z2103>9219+
3839

alan
02-24-2015, 04:15 PM
Some points to keep in mind. First age difference between the two.
For example R1b-Z2103 is 1000+/- years younger than it's R1a Karelian cousin, but 1000+/-years older than R1a Z93 and R1a Z282 or almost on par with R1a-M417+/-.


R1b-M269 7.5 (7.0-8.1)
R1b-L23 7.2 (6.7-7.7)
R1b-Z2103 6.4 (5.9-6.9)
R1b-L51 6.7 (6.2-7.2)
R1b-L11 5.7 (5.2-6.2)
R1b-P312 5.6 (5.1-6.1)
R1b-U106 5.5 (5.0-6.0)

R1a-M417 6.2 (5.7-6.7)
R1a-CTS4385 5.8 (5.3-6.3)
R1a-L664 4.8 (4.3-5.2)
R1a-Z645 5.6 (5.1-6.1)
R1a-Z93 5.4 (4.9-5.9)
R1a-Z282 5.4 (4.9-5.9




R1b-Z2103>9219+
3839

That is a very good summary. It is looking pretty clear from those kind of central dates that L51 had a long history of a probably pretty much survival level demographics outside the reach of early farming. That very much matches the steppes and perhaps fringes around it It had apparently been around a long long time before Yamnaya expansion and must have existed in pre-Yamnaya guise for a long period. However the key point is it barely survived and the real R1b story is about L11 and indeed mostly about its two big branches P312 and U106.


It is telling that those dates for Z93 and Z282 placs them close to the age of P312 and U106 in R1b terms. Which means both the mega lineages of R1a and b that form the overwhelming amount of Eurasian R1 expand very much at the same time in the mid 3000sBC after a long period of incredibly unimpressive branching.

Prior to that sudden appearance of the modern branches that dominate I think we could characterise the demographic performance of the ancestors of these lines as moribund judging by the upstream branches lack of numbers today. This is strongly suggestive of subsistence without developed farming right up until the mid 3000s BC.

One question I have is that in some ways treating Z2103 as a whole is like treating L51 as a whole and misleading because in L51's case it was only really with L11 it started to do much. Is the same true for Z2103 when we refine it into branches-are the branches of it that have survived much younger than Z2103 as a whole in much the same way that most of L51 is actually L11. So, I ask, in terms of SNP counting or other dating methods what dates do we get for the main branches of Z2103 when treated separately. This is important because if we are hypothesing that Z2103 branches link to both Anatolian and later branches like Armenians, Albanian etc then we should see a pattern where one branch -the one linked to Anatolian- is significantly older. The older branch should be located more heavily in Anatolia and adjacent and perhaps younger branches in the Balkans.