PDA

View Full Version : R1b-U152 in Ural, Caucas and Middle Asia



Bulat
12-27-2015, 07:01 AM
New data:

R1b-U152:

In Ural are in -
- bashkirs (Look at https://www.familytreedna.com/public/peoples/default.aspx?section=yresults),
khants (Look at P.1021 https://www.academia.edu/19840619/BEHPS_10._945-1026_Volume_2_10_1_2_November_2015_),
komi (Look at Trofimova books).

In Caucas
- kuban nogais (Look at https://www.familytreedna.com/public/suyun/default.aspx?section=yresults)

In Middle Asia
- kazakhs.

Origin in Eurasia:
1) my opinion:
R1b-U152 in Ural at etc. - after Huns-Goths wars (3-5 centur. a.d.).

2) Volkov V.G.:
may be - R1b-U152 in Volga-Don origin.

lgmayka
12-27-2015, 08:15 PM
Frankly, nothing short of BigY/FGC will convince people.

Acque agitate
12-28-2015, 12:14 AM
New data:

R1b-U152:

In Ural are in -
- bashkirs (Look at https://www.familytreedna.com/public/peoples/default.aspx?section=yresults),
khants (Look at P.1021 https://www.academia.edu/19840619/BEHPS_10._945-1026_Volume_2_10_1_2_November_2015_),
komi (Look at Trofimova books).

In Caucas
- kuban nogais (Look at https://www.familytreedna.com/public/suyun/default.aspx?section=yresults)

In Middle Asia
- kazakhs.

Origin in Eurasia:
1) my opinion:
R1b-U152 in Ural at etc. - after Huns-Goths wars (3-5 centur. a.d.).

2) Volkov V.G.:
may be - R1b-U152 in Volga-Don origin.

According to my calculations the sample belonging to the clan Baylar (209974):
1) belongs to a subgroup of U152> L2> DF110,8689782> 17983816, which includes other samples from the border area between Poland, Slovakia and Ukraine (Lewicki, Jacszyn) in turn connected in more ancient times to other samples of Germanic origin (Fincke from Saxony);
2) He came off from this area more recently than you have assumed;

Bulat
12-29-2015, 03:48 AM
According to my calculations the sample belonging to the clan Baylar (209974):
2) He came off from this area more recently than you have assumed;

And a Gayna?

166376 Gayna Bashkir Northern Bashkir, Perm Krai, Gayna clan Russian Federation R-M269
13 24 15 11 11-14 12 12 12 13 13 30 16 9-10 11 11 26 15 19 30 15-16-17-17-17-18 11 12 19-22 15 15 18 21 37-37 12 13 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23-23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 12 12 13 10 11 12 12

tonwil61
12-29-2015, 08:21 AM
Dear Acque agitate,
I am curious about your 'calculation' regarding clan Baylar (209974), Do you have access to the SNP's???? I am one of the DF110+ cluster and would like some more info regarding origin, time-frame, etc,, of this mutation.

I am looking forward to you or any of the more learned making a comment about DF110+

Cheers

Tony Wilson (148338 Earliest Ancestor William Willsonn b 1541 Durham UK)

Acque agitate
12-29-2015, 11:14 AM
For Bulat:
Based on my calculations, I believe that the sample-Gayna does not belong to the subgroup Baylar (level probabilistic). I am not able to know if he belongs to the subgroup DF110. If so, he broke away from the sample-Gayna in ancient times (not before 5200 years ago).
In this regard I will clear that I do not share the view that now is in vogue: that R1b-U152 was formed about 4,500 years ago. I think much more likely that the R1b-U152 is born at least 6400 to 5400 years ago (not before). In fact, I believe many people are not properly estimating the average length of a male generation (which on average is much longer than the female generation).

For Tomwil61:
Given that most of the samples was subjected only to the STR testing, I analyze the STR guide of the groups that are already established (through snp tested with FGC or BigY).
I have investigated your case and I got some information but I do not think very these are reliable. The reason is that I think is very likely that within the subgroup DF110 there have been cases of regression of STR (STR Backslidden in some samples). When there will be more samples belonging to your subgroup (DF110) I'll let you know my opinion, that is what other samples (not yet tested) could belongs in your subgroup.

R.Rocca
01-01-2016, 03:09 PM
One thing that has become very clear based on ancient DNA samples is that the estimations by YFull are close within a very small margin of error. So, I don't think there is anything anyone can calculate differently that will change what ancient DNA has validated. In this case, U152 is very likely to be no older than 2,800 BC.

wombatofthenorth
03-14-2016, 07:02 AM
For Bulat:
Based on my calculations, I believe that the sample-Gayna does not belong to the subgroup Baylar (level probabilistic). I am not able to know if he belongs to the subgroup DF110. If so, he broke away from the sample-Gayna in ancient times (not before 5200 years ago).
In this regard I will clear that I do not share the view that now is in vogue: that R1b-U152 was formed about 4,500 years ago. I think much more likely that the R1b-U152 is born at least 6400 to 5400 years ago (not before). In fact, I believe many people are not properly estimating the average length of a male generation (which on average is much longer than the female generation).



National Geographic seems to think U152 originated 5500+ years ago in West Asia and they show a hot spot in the Ural Mountains.

wombatofthenorth
04-11-2016, 03:13 AM
FWIW my dad (so far we can trace his strictly paternal line to apparent serf, i.e. doesn't seem to be Baltic German, born around 1826 in Latvia) got:
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a1a2a1a2b1a1 L20/S144+
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a1a2a1a2b1a1~ L737-, L738 (not tested?), L739-, S256/Z291-, Z383+
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a1a2a1a2b1a1a~ CTS11795.2-, PF121.2+
which seems odd since my dad then tested negative for a few things supposedly upstream of PF121.2.

L20 seems very rare in the Baltics. I think only see one other person, anywhere, make the claim. Not sure what to think.