PDA

View Full Version : Up - dated overview of U106 by Iain Mcdonald.



JohnHowellsTyrfro
03-21-2016, 07:55 AM
Iain McDonald posted an up-dated over-view of U106 on the project group. I was personally interested in his speculation on Z326 with the prospect of possibly more information to come. I asked if it is ok to share and he was quite happy with that. From what I read he is just saying this is where his analysis of data currently takes him, he is not claiming to have all the answers.
He posted:-
"
Dear all,
I have updated my overview of U106, which can be found in the Files section of the forum, in the Age Analysis folder. It can also be found here:
http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~mcdonald/genetics.html
for those who don't have access.
This version tones down some of the migration and cultural assignments that the previous version did. Going forward beyond this document, I hope to bring these back as I have a chance to analyse the new data.
The document also includes:
* General testing advice that I've previously placed on the forum;
* My overview of the Y chromosome and its regions
* Detailed description of the age analysis methods I use
* An updated graphical interpretation of the U106 tree
* Updated geographical distribution of U106 clades
* Updated archeaological DNA maps
* Updated TMRCA histograms for European populations
For my next update, which likely will be some months away, I intend to expand on this last part. These will hopefully help me track some of the migrations throughout Europe that have happened throughout history. Some of these migrations also show up in the graphical interpretation, e.g. the large number of SNPs formed in the ~500 AD period within Z326 and Z2 are strongly suggestive of a Germanic origin, supported by the formation of Z326, FGC924 and Z8 around the location of the earliest Germanic tribes. Similar arguments can be used to ascribe a pre-/proto-Celtic origin to Z156 and U198. There should be more details to come on these kind of things in the future!
For now, however, I have to return to my first love: DF98!"

rms2
04-02-2016, 03:17 PM
. . . Similar arguments can be used to ascribe a pre-/proto-Celtic origin to Z156 and U198 . . .

Did he say what those arguments are?

This is just my own personal opinion, and I realize I could be wrong, but it seems extremely doubtful to me that there are any clades of U106 that have a "pre-/proto-Celtic origin". Perhaps in time ancient y-dna will prove me wrong. If it does, c'est la vie, I will admit I was wrong.

Certainly there is nothing about the modern distribution of U198/S29 that says Celtic. If one looks at the Busby results, he will see that U198 is conspicuous by its absence from all the Celtic Fringe population samples. It was also missing from the only truly western sample location in England, England Southwest (Exeter). Based on its distribution in the Isles and on the Continent, I think it looks pretty Anglo-Saxon, but, again, that's just my opinion.

I know less about Z156, but it seems to me it is fairly well represented in the Low Countries, Germany, and Scandinavia: YHRD Z156 Map (https://yhrd.org/tools/branch/R1b1a-Z156). It is the y haplogroup of the famous German Royal House of Wettin. I suppose it could be argued that the Wettins were Celtic in origin, but that would take some doing. Otherwise, given the overall distribution of U106, it seems hardly likely there was a single subclade that separated itself very early on from the great non-Celtic mass of the haplogroup and took root somewhere in the Celtic zone, alone of all U106 groups. Certainly that is possible, but it does not seem likely.

Thus far the ancient y-dna results offer no real support for Celtic subclades of U106. None of the Bell Beaker or Celtic results thus far has been derived for U106, and the most ancient U106+ result (RISE98), circa 2300 BC, comes from the Nordic Battle Axe cemetery of Lilla Beddinge in Sweden. Of course, the results are sparse thus far and don't include any U198 or Z156, but they certainly have not done anything to shake the overall view of U106 as, in the words of Dienekes, "a major lineage within the Germanic group" (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/08/r1b-founder-effect-in-central-and.html).

I don't want to start a big argument here, and I know there are a few guys who get really upset over things like this (most of them U106- themselves), but things have been pretty dull here lately. I just wanted to offer my opinion. It will either be borne out over time by ancient y-dna results or disproven by them. If it is disproven, so be it. I've been wrong about things before. It won't be a new experience. But nothing ventured, nothing gained, as they say.

can't_lurk_no_mo'
04-02-2016, 04:06 PM
Looks awesome. I'm ready to read it now.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-02-2016, 04:41 PM
Did he say what those arguments are?

This is just my own personal opinion, and I realize I could be wrong, but it seems extremely doubtful to me that there are any clades of U106 that have a "pre-/proto-Celtic origin". Perhaps in time ancient y-dna will prove me wrong. If it does, c'est la vie, I will admit I was wrong.

Certainly there is nothing about the modern distribution of U198/S29 that says Celtic. If one looks at the Busby results, he will see that U198 is conspicuous by its absence from all the Celtic Fringe population samples. It was also missing from the only truly western sample location in England, England Southwest (Exeter). Based on its distribution in the Isles and on the Continent, I think it looks pretty Anglo-Saxon, but, again, that's just my opinion.

I know less about Z156, but it seems to me it is fairly well represented in the Low Countries, Germany, and Scandinavia: YHRD Z156 Map (https://yhrd.org/tools/branch/R1b1a-Z156). It is the y haplogroup of the famous German Royal House of Wettin. I suppose it could be argued that the Wettins were Celtic in origin, but that would take some doing. Otherwise, given the overall distribution of U106, it seems hardly likely there was a single subclade that separated itself very early on from the great non-Celtic mass of the haplogroup and took root somewhere in the Celtic zone, alone of all U106 groups. Certainly that is possible, but it does not seem likely.

Thus far the ancient y-dna results offer no real support for Celtic subclades of U106. None of the Bell Beaker or Celtic results thus far has been derived for U106, and the most ancient U106+ result (RISE98), circa 2300 BC, comes from the Nordic Battle Axe cemetery of Lilla Beddinge in Sweden. Of course, the results are sparse thus far and don't include any U198 or Z156, but they certainly have not done anything to shake the overall view of U106 as, in the words of Dienekes, "a major lineage within the Germanic group" (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/08/r1b-founder-effect-in-central-and.html).

I don't want to start a big argument here, and I know there are a few guys who get really upset over things like this (most of them U106- themselves), but things have been pretty dull here lately. I just wanted to offer my opinion. It will either be borne out over time by ancient y-dna results or disproven by them. If it is disproven, so be it. I've been wrong about things before. It won't be a new experience. But nothing ventured, nothing gained, as they say.

Not that I've seen. If he has a theory, hopefully he will provide some justification in due course. Whether it stands up or not would be for people with more knowledge than me to say. :)

ArmandoR1b
04-02-2016, 04:53 PM
It's interesting that he puts the age of U106 at 2839 BC (4839 years ago). Almost exact to YFull's 4900 ybp. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-U106/

Krefter
04-02-2016, 06:06 PM
This is off.

My primary interest is in the Copper/Bronze Age occupation of Europe. Men from Asia arrived in Europe around 4000-5000 years ago. They had sons, who had sons, who had sons, etc., until their progeny today make up 40% of what most people consider the "native" populations of western Europe (and up to 90% places like Ireland).

4,000-5,000 years is a long time. That's how long there's been little genetic change in the British Isles(xEngland). Is that not native? Mexicans are considered native to Mexico, despite their complex history in the last 500 years. I'm native to Chicago because I was born here. Every region of the world constantly faces migration, usually by people who are genetically identical to the natives so it's impossible to detect with DNA. I guarantee hardly any peoples in the world have lived on the exact same plot of land for like 20,000 years ago. That's pretty much impossible.

"Men from Asia". What does Asia mean? There's no such thing as Asian DNA or Asian people. "Men from Asia" can mean a million differnt things. Most of European's ancestors lived in Asia 8,000 years ago. When people don't describe how then being from Asia 1,000s of years ago doesn't automatically make someone super exotic and make Europeans non-European, you get crappy articles like this (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjSsprKxPDLAhXEbSYKHUDYCGQQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.catholic.org%2Fnews%2Finterna tional%2Feurope%2Fstory.php%3Fid%3D66261&usg=AFQjCNEgpAJzC-U1vxYiIrl_aSt0PjuliA&sig2=2SCHhFqRmk2uUIQPziAvxw&bvm=bv.118443451,d.eWE). Those exotic "Asian nomads"(some articles call them) of Bronze age Europe, are a huge part of what European is, and for most of Europe as big a part of who they are as the people who were already living in their region of Europe were.

EastAnglian
04-05-2016, 07:30 AM
Personally I don't see why some couldn't be found amongst the native Celts, there would have been contact with continental U106 folk through trade etc. I'd say it's possible a small percentage of U106 could have made its way over in that manner.

Gravetto-Danubian
04-05-2016, 08:36 AM
I think it's a great piece of work

(Although I'm still tempted to consider if M269 could have been lurking around in north-central Europe as early as 4000 BC, in GAC; from where it spread to early Rhenish BB.
U106 then spread / stayed north; P312 did its Tri-split and moves to Britain, Iberia and back east to Central Europe)

rms2
04-05-2016, 12:00 PM
Personally I don't see why some couldn't be found amongst the native Celts, there would have been contact with continental U106 folk through trade etc. I'd say it's possible a small percentage of U106 could have made its way over in that manner.

No doubt, but two entire subclades that, as far as I can tell, really give no indication that there is anything particularly Celtic about them?

Certainly the Celts were not entirely a y-dna monolith, all one thing or another.

There is also a difference between peoples who became Celtic through some process of assimilation and those that were "pre-/proto-Celtic" as the original post characterized it.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-05-2016, 06:02 PM
I don't pretend to understand all the technicalities, but I think it's good that someone is having a go at some very big issues. I will be interested to see what else he comes up with, particularly in relation to Z326 migration (personal interest :) ) and what other peoples' views are.

EastAnglian
04-06-2016, 07:58 AM
No doubt, but two entire subclades that, as far as I can tell, really give no indication that there is anything particularly Celtic about them?

Certainly the Celts were not entirely a y-dna monolith, all one thing or another.

There is also a difference between peoples who became Celtic through some process of assimilation and those that were "pre-/proto-Celtic" as the original post characterized it.

I agree, pre-/proto-Celtic certainly not but I think later on it's possible that a small amount of male lines came over during trade (assimilation) or male children were conceived with native women during trade visits. I find the whole topic interesting as I'm from East Anglia, we have high levels of U106 and its subclades. It would be interesting to drill that down and find out when the various male lines came to England. I suspect a small percentage is pre-Roman (assimilation and trade) and Post-Roman (soldiers from the continent). The vast majority of course will be from the Early Medieval (Dark Ages) period, from the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings.

Here is a map of East Anglian U106: https://d3tije9h5o4l4c.cloudfront.net/social-photos/818812?dpr=2&fit=max&h=639&w=590 from the East Anglia DNA project.

What are your thoughts on the chronology?

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-06-2016, 08:32 AM
I agree, pre-/proto-Celtic certainly not but I think later on it's possible that a small amount of male lines came over during trade (assimilation) or male children were conceived with native women during trade visits. I find the whole topic interesting as I'm from East Anglia, we have high levels of U106 and its subclades. It would be interesting to drill that down and find out when the various male lines came to England. I suspect a small percentage is pre-Roman (assimilation and trade) and Post-Roman (soldiers from the continent). The vast majority of course will be from the Early Medieval (Dark Ages) period, from the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings.

Here is a map of East Anglian U106: https://d3tije9h5o4l4c.cloudfront.net/social-photos/818812?dpr=2&fit=max&h=639&w=590 from the East Anglia DNA project.

What are your thoughts on the chronology?

I've been pondering the origin of mine (S11136) for some time. I really don't mind how it arrived in the UK but it would be nice to have an idea. In my case given the age of the SNP roughly 500 BC I think and given it's distribution in the Benelux countries and Germany, it seems to point to a post-Roman arrival in the UK.
I would be quite surprised if there was absolutely nil pre - Roman U106 in the UK.

rms2
04-06-2016, 11:29 PM
. . .
I would be quite surprised if there was absolutely nil pre - Roman U106 in the UK.

Maybe not, but I don't think U106 got much of a foothold in the Isles prior to the Anglo-Saxons. Its distribution just matches the historical pattern of the settlement and spread of the Anglo-Saxons and their descendants, the English, too well. The real task is telling Anglo-Saxon U106 apart from Danish Viking U106.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-07-2016, 05:24 AM
Maybe not, but I don't think U106 got much of a foothold in the Isles prior to the Anglo-Saxons. Its distribution just matches the historical pattern of the settlement and spread of the Anglo-Saxons and their descendants, the English, too well. The real task is telling Anglo-Saxon U106 apart from Danish Viking U106.

or earlier ;)

EastAnglian
04-07-2016, 07:27 AM
I've been pondering the origin of mine (S11136) for some time. I really don't mind how it arrived in the UK but it would be nice to have an idea. In my case given the age of the SNP roughly 500 BC I think and given it's distribution in the Benelux countries and Germany, it seems to point to a post-Roman arrival in the UK.
I would be quite surprised if there was absolutely nil pre - Roman U106 in the UK.

Have you done the BigY?, that might help you establish whether your ancestor came over with the Anglo-Saxons, Danish or if it was before that. I found the BigY really helpful, it opened a whole new window into my ancestry. Although ancestrally I'm from East Anglia, I share SNP's with a Cornish L617 around 2,500 years ago so my ancestor was originally from Cornwall and migrated to East Anglia at some point. Currently it's thought L617 itself came into Britain (most likely Cornwall and Devon) 3,500 years ago from Iberia. I'm hoping to find some further SNP matches with L617's so I can trace the ancestral route and I can then get an idea of when my ancestor came to East Anglia.

Given the heavy U106 presence in East Anglia I wouldn't be surprised if you matched some East Anglian folk, maybe your ancestor made their way to Wales from East Anglia, genetic genealogy is full of surprises.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-07-2016, 08:06 AM
Have you done the BigY?, that might help you establish whether your ancestor came over with the Anglo-Saxons, Danish or if it was before that. I found the BigY really helpful, it opened a whole new window into my ancestry. Although ancestrally I'm from East Anglia, I share SNP's with a Cornish L617 around 2,500 years ago so my ancestor was originally from Cornwall and migrated to East Anglia at some point. Currently it's thought L617 itself came into Britain (most likely Cornwall and Devon) 3,500 years ago from Iberia. I'm hoping to find some further SNP matches with L617's so I can trace the ancestral route and I can then get an idea of when my ancestor came to East Anglia.

Given the heavy U106 presence in East Anglia I wouldn't be surprised if you matched some East Anglian folk, maybe your ancestor made their way to Wales from East Anglia, genetic genealogy is full of surprises.

I've been mulling over further tests for quite a long time, different advice and being of the "older generation" :) I'm not very clever with interpreting data and the computer technicalities of downloading and transferring files, although I would probably find a way if I get around to it. I am considering it again now, having read Iain's advice on which tests are best for individuals. With FTDNA is there an on-going subscription cost or additional costs to access data and find matches? I'm not entirely sure from what I've read so far.
I think in my own case the Y dna is probably from an Anglo/Saxon source but around the Herefordshire/Welsh borders area there was also a Norman and Norse presence, although A/S seems most likely. I would love to narrow it down. :)

EastAnglian
04-07-2016, 12:01 PM
I've been mulling over further tests for quite a long time, different advice and being of the "older generation" :) I'm not very clever with interpreting data and the computer technicalities of downloading and transferring files, although I would probably find a way if I get around to it. I am considering it again now, having read Iain's advice on which tests are best for individuals. With FTDNA is there an on-going subscription cost or additional costs to access data and find matches? I'm not entirely sure from what I've read so far.
I think in my own case the Y dna is probably from an Anglo/Saxon source but around the Herefordshire/Welsh borders area there was also a Norman and Norse presence, although A/S seems most likely. I would love to narrow it down. :)

It's a one time payment for BigY at FTDNA and no extra cost to access matches. They have a BigY matching section which should help you pin down the nationalities of people you match.

I'm uncertain as to the current cost of BigY, anyone know?

gotten
04-07-2016, 01:18 PM
I'm uncertain as to the current cost of BigY, anyone know?

$575 but at least a 12 marker YDNA STR test is required before that (although you can contact the helpdesk to skip that step).

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-07-2016, 05:55 PM
$575 but at least a 12 marker YDNA STR test is required before that (although you can contact the helpdesk to skip that step).

I've tested Chromo 2 with Cymru/Britain's DNA (quite expensive) and was under the impression I could go straight to Big Y? (sorry to ask specific personal questions but I don't want to spend more money with no real benefit).

gotten
04-07-2016, 07:39 PM
... straight to Big Y?

Only if you call their helpdesk and convince them to skip the batched STR test requirement. Otherwise the quickest/cheapest way to Big-Y is to order a 12-marker STR using the Project Pending group (https://www.familytreedna.com/group-join.aspx?Group=Project_Pending). Then, wait for the kit to arrive, test yourself, send in kit, wait for the kit to batch. When the kit is batched it enables the Big-Y purchasing option.

Ontopic:
The overview by Iain McDonald is amazing. I learned a few things about DNA in general from it.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-07-2016, 08:11 PM
Only if you call their helpdesk and convince them to skip the batched STR test requirement. Otherwise the quickest/cheapest way to Big-Y is to order a 12-marker STR using the Project Pending group (https://www.familytreedna.com/group-join.aspx?Group=Project_Pending). Then, wait for the kit to arrive, test yourself, send in kit, wait for the kit to batch. When the kit is batched it enables the Big-Y purchasing option.

Ontopic:
The overview by Iain McDonald is amazing. I learned a few things about DNA in general from it.

Thanks for the advice.

Tomenable
04-08-2016, 12:01 AM
Is this the same paper?:

http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~mcdonald/genetics/u106-geography-2015-revised.pdf

JohnHowellsTyrfro
04-08-2016, 03:29 AM
Is this the same paper?:

http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~mcdonald/genetics/u106-geography-2015-revised.pdf

The one I posted at the top of the thread is a more recent revised version I think (March 2016).