PDA

View Full Version : Your opinion where oldest M269 and subclades will be found



MitchellSince1893
05-19-2016, 11:41 PM
In a few recent threads, there is often a critique of those expressing an opinion in favor of various theories e.g. Steppe vs. Atlantic origin.

But it's sometimes unclear what the critic's opposing theory is. It would be helpful to understand the thought process of others of the path from M269 to L23 to L51 to L11/L151/P310 to U106 and P312 to U152 and DF27 etc

Don't worry that someone will later quote your post and hold it against you; because I guarantee they will :biggrin1:

It's only an opinion.

So where do you think the oldest sample for the following haplogroups will be found?

Haplogroup/Yfull formed date range 95% CI
M269 / 15200-12000 ybp:
L23 / 7300-5500 ybp:
L51 / 6900-5600 ybp:
L11 | L151|P310 / 6400-5200 ybp:
U106: 5400-4500 ybp:
P312: 5400-4500 ybp:
L21: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF27: 4900-4000 ybp:
U152: 4900-4000 ybp:
L238: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF19: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF99: 4900-4000 ybp:

Even if you disagree with how they are defined below, try to use the following geographic definitions so that we all have a common understanding:
-Central Asian Steppe (Siberia and and Fomer Soviet Central Asian Republics )
-Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Moldova, Ukraine, Russia and northwestern Kazakhstan to the Ural Mountains)
-Eastern Europe (Belarus, Poland, Czech Rep, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Baltic republics, Greece, former Yugoslavia, Albania, European Turkey)
-Central Europe (Germany, Austria, Nordic Countries, Italy, Switzerland)
-Western Europe (British Isles, Low Countries, France, Iberia)
-North Africa (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya Egypt)
-Levant (Israel/Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria)
-Anatolia (Asian Turkey)
-Caucasus: (Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Dagistan, Ossetia, Chechnya etc)
-Southwest Asia: (Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, etc)

I'll be brave and go first: :P

M269: Central Asian Steppe
L23: Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Ukraine or Moldova)
L51: Eastern Europe (Romania, former Yugoslavia, Hungary)
L151: Eastern Europe (Hungary, Czech Rep, Slovakia)
U106: Eastern/Central Europe (Northern Germany, Czech Rep, Poland)
P312: Eastern/Central Europe (Southern Germany, Austria, Czech Rep)
L21: Western/Central Europe (Northern France, Low Countries, Western Germany)
DF27: Western/Central Europe (Southern Germany or Eastern France)
U152: Central Europe (Southern Germany, Czech Rep, or Austria)
L238: Central Europe
DF19: Central Europe
DF99: Central Europe

The above is obviously based on the Steppe theory. If I turn out to be wrong my ego will survive :)

Gravetto-Danubian
05-19-2016, 11:50 PM
Lets clarify that Villabruna is most likely P 297, but of course, it could be an extinct side-branch not ancestral to the M269. But then again, M269 could not have existed in 12, 000 BC.

As for the later & more relevant details, I have no real convictions. Part of me likes the idea that L51 / BB blended in Vucedol: millions of western European men having a 'secondary homeland' in the north Balkans ;)

MitchellSince1893
05-20-2016, 12:02 AM
Lets clarify that Villabruna is most likely P 297, but of course, it could be an extinct side-branch not ancestral to the M269. But then again, M269 could not have existed in 12, 000 BC.

As for the later & more relevant details, I have no real convictions. Part of me likes the idea that L51 / BB blended in Vucedol: millions of western European men having a 'secondary homeland' in the north Balkans ;)

You are well versed in the latest info..Humor me and take a shot in the dark :) think of it as a betting pool in a sporting event.

Webb
05-20-2016, 12:18 AM
In a few recent threads, there is often a critique of those expressing an opinion in favor of various theories e.g. Steppe vs. Atlantic origin.

But it's sometimes unclear what the critic's opposing theory is. It would be helpful to understand the thought process of others of the path from M269 to L23 to L51 to L11/L151/P310 to U106 and P312 to U152 and DF27 etc

Don't worry that someone will later quote your post and hold it against you; because I guarantee they will :biggrin1:

It's only an opinion.

So where do you think the oldest sample for the following haplogroups will be found?

Haplogroup/Yfull formed date range 95% CI
M269 / 15200-12000 ybp:
L23 / 7300-5500 ybp:
L51 / 6900-5600 ybp:
L11 | L151|P310 / 6400-5200 ybp:
U106: 5400-4500 ybp:
P312: 5400-4500 ybp:
L21: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF27: 4900-4000 ybp:
U152: 4900-4000 ybp:
L238: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF19: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF99: 4900-4000 ybp:

Even if you disagree with how they are defined below, try to use the following geographic definitions so that we all have a common understanding:
-Central Asian Steppe (Siberia and and Fomer Soviet Central Asian Republics )
-Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Moldova, Ukraine, Russia and northwestern Kazakhstan to the Ural Mountains)
-Eastern Europe (Belarus, Poland, Czech Rep, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Baltic republics, Greece, former Yugoslavia, Albania, European Turkey)
-Central Europe (Germany, Austria, Nordic Countries, Italy, Switzerland)
-Western Europe (British Isles, Low Countries, France, Iberia)
-North Africa (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya Egypt)
-Levant (Israel/Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria)
-Anatolia (Asian Turkey)
-Caucasus: (Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Dagistan, Ossetia, Chechnya etc)
-Southwest Asia: (Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, etc)

I'll be brave and go first: :P

M269: Central Asian Steppe
L23: Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Ukraine or Moldova)
L51: Eastern Europe (Romania, former Yugoslavia, Hungary)
L151: Eastern Europe (Hungary, Czech Rep, Slovakia)
U106: Eastern/Central Europe (Northern Germany, Czech Rep, Poland)
P312: Eastern/Central Europe (Southern Germany, Austria, Czech Rep)
L21: Western/Central Europe (Northern France, Low Countries, Western Germany)
DF27: Western/Central Europe (Southern Germany or Eastern France)
U152: Central Europe (Southern Germany, Czech Rep, or Austria)
L238: Central Europe
DF19: Central Europe
DF99: Central Europe

The above is obviously based on the Steppe theory. If I turn out to be wrong my ego will survive :)

My opinion is spot on with yours. P312 born somewhere along the Danube, moving west. U152, DF27, and DF99 born around the headwaters of the Danube. DF99 staying put while U152 and DF27 moved into there current places of concentrations around 1500 to 500 B.C.

A.D.
05-20-2016, 04:03 PM
In a few recent threads, there is often a critique of those expressing an opinion in favor of various theories e.g. Steppe vs. Atlantic origin.

But it's sometimes unclear what the critic's opposing theory is. It would be helpful to understand the thought process of others of the path from M269 to L23 to L51 to L11/L151/P310 to U106 and P312 to U152 and DF27 etc

Don't worry that someone will later quote your post and hold it against you; because I guarantee they will :biggrin1:

It's only an opinion.

So where do you think the oldest sample for the following haplogroups will be found?

Haplogroup/Yfull formed date range 95% CI
M269 / 15200-12000 ybp:
L23 / 7300-5500 ybp:
L51 / 6900-5600 ybp:
L11 | L151|P310 / 6400-5200 ybp:
U106: 5400-4500 ybp:
P312: 5400-4500 ybp:
L21: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF27: 4900-4000 ybp:
U152: 4900-4000 ybp:
L238: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF19: 4900-4000 ybp:
DF99: 4900-4000 ybp:

Even if you disagree with how they are defined below, try to use the following geographic definitions so that we all have a common understanding:
-Central Asian Steppe (Siberia and and Fomer Soviet Central Asian Republics )
-Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Moldova, Ukraine, Russia and northwestern Kazakhstan to the Ural Mountains)
-Eastern Europe (Belarus, Poland, Czech Rep, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Baltic republics, Greece, former Yugoslavia, Albania, European Turkey)
-Central Europe (Germany, Austria, Nordic Countries, Italy, Switzerland)
-Western Europe (British Isles, Low Countries, France, Iberia)
-North Africa (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya Egypt)
-Levant (Israel/Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria)
-Anatolia (Asian Turkey)
-Caucasus: (Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Dagistan, Ossetia, Chechnya etc)
-Southwest Asia: (Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, etc)

I'll be brave and go first: :P

M269: Central Asian Steppe
L23: Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Ukraine or Moldova)
L51: Eastern Europe (Romania, former Yugoslavia, Hungary)
L151: Eastern Europe (Hungary, Czech Rep, Slovakia)
U106: Eastern/Central Europe (Northern Germany, Czech Rep, Poland)
P312: Eastern/Central Europe (Southern Germany, Austria, Czech Rep)
L21: Western/Central Europe (Northern France, Low Countries, Western Germany)
DF27: Western/Central Europe (Southern Germany or Eastern France)
U152: Central Europe (Southern Germany, Czech Rep, or Austria)
L238: Central Europe
DF19: Central Europe
DF99: Central Europe

The above is obviously based on the Steppe theory. If I turn out to be wrong my ego will survive :)

I pretty much agree though I think the origin of P312 is possibly further East and any thing down stream grew quickly once settled. Having said that they'll probably be found where you said. I don't know about DF27, it seems it was very mobile and wide spread, I can't help thinking of along with horses so maybe further East or North East. That's just a real shot in the dark.

Agamemnon
05-20-2016, 04:48 PM
I expect the oldest M269 lineages to show up on the Pontic-Caspian steppe or in Central Asia, in turn I suspect the oldest L23 lineages arose on the Pontic-Caspian steppe, the earliest L51 lineages would've emerged on the steppe alongside Z2103. I also think P312 and U106 emerged in Eastern Europe, the former closer to the Pannonian Basin and the latter closer to the Polish plain. The main branches of P312, ZZ11 for instance, logically should've emerged in the Pannonian Basin. Just my 2 cents.

jeanL
05-20-2016, 05:02 PM
R1b-M269 15200-12000 ybp: Somewhere in this area:

9402

R1b-L23(xL51,Z2103): Born circa 9000-8000 ybp somewhere here:

9403

L51: Western Europe, probably somewhere in here:

9404

L151: Western Europe. probably somewhere in here:

9405

Here is what I think happened at the beginning of the Bronze Age when the Yamnaya people expanded bringing R1b-Z2103 into Europe.

9406

Basically, initially Iberian Beakers will likely carry R1b-DF27+perhaps some R1b-P312, these will have no Steppe component and will be nonIE speaking. R1b-P312(xDF27,L21,U152) gets IE in Central Europe, so does R1b-L21, and R1b-U152 in their positions shown in map above. R1b-L21 migrates to British Isles. R1b-U152 also moves around. R1b-DF27 in Iberia gets IE from maritime beaker R1b-L21, and also from moving around to the North and mixing around with other clades. Afterwards high mobility pretty much sends R1b-P312 derived clades to every corner of Europe.

MitchellSince1893
05-20-2016, 05:53 PM
....
Thanks Jean. As they say a picture is worth a thousand words. I better understand the chronology of your theory.

After I started this thread, I read these posts between Alan and you which shed more light on your thinking.

JeanL
...R1b-Z2103 does appear in low frequencies all throughout Western Europe; I said that back in 2012 over 4 years ago even before they found R1b-Z2103* and it was just labeled as R1b-L23* which you and others used as some sort of proof that it was ancestral to Western European R1b-L51; in case you seem to have forgotten. I said that there was great differentiation STR wise between the Swiss R1b-L23* and the Caucasian ones; that R1b-L23 was probably broken into two factions at the arrival of the Neolithic; one taking refuge in Western Europe; the other one in the Steppe. One went on to become R1b-L51; the other R1b-Z2103. Later the R1b-L23* folks from the Caucasus arrived and IndoEuropeanized the Western half of Europe; perhaps being pushed from the East by their R1a distant cousins.

More of my old hypothesis here from May 30; 2012:


It is likely that when the farmers first arrived to the Balkans they pushed some R1b-L23 folks Northeastwards, and hence why Romania gets a high variance. As for R1b-L51, I don’t think it existed yet, it probably emerged later on while hiding in Western Europe, the same would apply to R1b-L11, in fact neither one of those two experienced a sudden expansion, so it is likely they originated in a very small population that wasn’t that successful. As for out-reproducing the farmers, did the hunter-gatherers in the Steppe’s learn the technology from the farmers, and then conquered all of Europe. What is wrong with some of those folks that have been sitting around in Central Europe for a while learning the technology from the incoming invaders. Are hunter gatherers in Western Europe somehow dumber than those in the Steppe, such that the former can learn anything from the farmers, yet the latter manage to conquer all of Europe.

[...]

Yes meanwhile, the R1b-L23(xL51) folks that were displaced towards the Steppes by the incoming farmers become the half story of the PIE group, the other half being R1a, and they go everywhere, but apparently just as they stop abruptly in Iran-Pakistan, they do so too around Central Europe, however the fact that some R1b-L23(xL51) is still found today in Western European shows that some of them did mingle around their distant cousins, and voila that explains why some R1b-P312 bearers are nonIndoEuropean speakers, whereas others aren't. If the R1b-L23(xL51) taught PIE to their cousins in Central Europe, then you get Celtic-Italic, you name it, expansions to explain the presence of IE languages in Western Europe. Whereas if R1b-L51 is born of PIE speaker R1b-L23 coming from the steppes in the Bronze age we would have a hard time explaining why groups with 80%+ of R1b-L51+ speak a nonIndoEuropean language.

Alan
if there is a common ancestor in 4400BC between Z2103 that is later found in Yamnaya and L51 then we would need to find a common thread that fed both into Yamnaya and into wherever L51 was no earlier than 4400BC. Note also that by 4400BC some popular models suggest archaic PIE had already emerged. 4400BC also long post-dates the spread of farming.

As we have no idea where or what culture L51 was in 4400BC-2800BC then we have to work from what we know about Z2103. We know it was in Yamnaya and therefore must have been in one of a (apparently the dominant) element that went into Yamnaya. The genesis of Yamanya would appear to be Repin with Caucasus input coming up the Don and Volga. IF Z2103/its L23 ancestor wasnt in Repin then it was likely in the Caucasus. IMO if you wish to see L51 or its immediate L23 branch ancestor as pushing west from somewhere other than the steppe then the Caucasus post-4400BC. How much post-4400BC is another question because branching of a y tree does not necessarily synchonise with geographical separation. I think its fair to say that noone has ever suggested the Caucasus area as a major centre of post 4400BC expansion until the Maykop era copper age and later which is at least several centuries (exact dating still seems disputed) after that 4400BC date. So that pushes us likely to the post-4000BC era EVEN if one takes the stance that the L23 element in Yamnaya is not native steppe and owes more to Maykop etc. At the very least this would appear to indicate that movement west of L51 is very unlikely to have preceded the spread of copper west. Copper only appears in Italy around 3500BC and southern France and Iberia several centuries later.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7057-The-genetic-history-of-Ice-Age-Europe&p=155083&viewfull=1#post155083

And your response

Your whole hypothesis is based on the premised that R1b-L51 and R1b-Z2103 share a common ancestor circa 4400 BC; if this date is pushed back then the scenario I explained back in 2012 can work; otherwise if we assume that the TMRCA based on modern day mutation rates and calibrations from a few ancient genomes are spot on; then you have a point. My whole premise derives from a nonrigid assumption when it comes to TMRCA for R1b-L23. I assumed that it was born in Europe and that it splitting point happened during the arrival of farming in the region. With some going East(R1b-L23-pre-Z2103+other R1b combos) and others West (R1b-L23-preL51). Remember that EHG do have substantial amounts of WHG in them; if the WHG had R1b as one of their carrying haplogroups then it makes sense. This is why if we take the result of el Portalon as being R1b-M269 as being valid; then my prediction is that the more we sample Western Europe the more we are going to start seeing the singleton R1b lineages pop out amongst a sea of G2a and I2.

Ultimately the massive expansion of the R1b-L11 sublineages is due to the Bell Beaker culture; but I believe they were IndoEuropeanized by their neighbors in Central Europe; refluxing back into Southern Europe and Western Europe with the Steppe component in them. The fact that we also see an asymmetry when it comes to the Steppe component with areas where the R1b-L21 lineages are predominant having greater amount of the Steppe component that areas where R1b-DF27 is the majority lineage present.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7057-The-genetic-history-of-Ice-Age-Europe&p=155088&viewfull=1#post155088

So in a nutshell we have the two competing theories.

Until I read your quoted post above I was struggling to understand how the From the West theory geographically reconciled Z2103, L51, and their common ancestor L23. i.e. your answer to the valid question: if Z2103 was found in Pontic-Stepp then shouldn't L51 and L23 be nearby?

Heber
05-20-2016, 07:03 PM
This is my straw man M269 migration map and L21 defining mutations timeline.

9408

9409

The latter is adapted from several years ago so needs a little tweaking.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-21-2016, 01:42 AM
.Humor me and take a shot in the dark :)

OK ! I don't think I can add too much more discussion over what has already been sad by various learned posters here. Indeed, the phylogeny of R1b places it in the east, ultimately, so the question is how, when & why did it arrive ?

But I will make some remarks about BB culture, & the standing of our current BB sample set (Germany & Czech). I have commented on this a couple of times elsewhere (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7069-R1b-M269-L23-and-the-diffusion-of-early-metallurgy&p=154915#post154915), and I note some of the senior most members here have already had ample discussion on the topic for several years, so apologies for repeating material.
BUt a recap is worthwhile, given what we now know (& don't know) from aDNA.

First of all, we should note that most (? all) of our Germany BB samples are from eastern Germany (Kromsdorf, Quedlinburg are in Thuringia / Saxony -Anhalt, resp).
Secondly, and more importantly, is I simply fail to see a link between Yamnaya & BB to support the Danubian route, that is, from eastern Hungary to Germany via the north Alpine corridor. Rather, at present I am very much inclined to view the BB phenomenon as a fusion of middle-late Neolithic western European groups with 'new' arrivals from across the north European plain - for archaeological & genetic reasons. Gimbutas' idea that BB = Yamnaya + Vucedol finds little support these days; and there is little doubt that BB in eastern and Southeastern Europe is an intrusive phenomenon, arriving from the west "fully formed" and late during the BB horizon, c. 2200 BC.

* the western-most extent of Yamnaya ends in Hungary. West of this - along our Danube corridor - we would still find mid-Neolithic type cultures in Austria, western Hungary, southern Germany, Switzerland (baden and baden offshoots, Cham, Rivnac, Altheim cultures, etc.) The earliest possible "steppe-like" admixture probably only arrived with CWC, sometime after 2800 BC, as that is what archaeology would suggest (ie CWC eventually reached Austria/ Slovakia from the northeast (Poland), but Yamnaya (from Hungary) never did).

* we have only 2 samples from this region at this time, actually more like 1.5. A Baden culture sample ("CO1") from Hungary dating to 2800 BC (ie within the main time frame of Yamnaya in Hungary/ Balkans); and it shows no EHG admixture.
9411
9412

The 2nd sample is that Vucedol sample from Dr Nagy's PhD, but this was only SNP tested. It was R1b-M343, but not further tested, and no genomic analysis was done. It also dated to c. 2800 BC.

* If Steppe/ EHG admixture did not arrive via Hungary - Austria - Germany, then the other possibility is across northern European plain. Indeed, although still a matter of controversy, several of the non-Maritime Beaker ceramics in BB are seen to have similarities to Corded Ware and its slight predecessor - Globular Amphora. But of course, CWC is all R1a-M417 & derived.

Lets take a look at eastern Germany on "the eve of BB phenomenon"
9414

We see a dense mosaic of different cultures, many of which continue from the Middle Neolithic, & the only eastern, new arrival is GAC. If GAC has steppe admixture, then its miscegenation with MNE German groups might explain BB; otherwise it'd had to have been the slightly later CWC groups. I guess what this suggests to me is that M269 was in central Europe earlier than the Yamnaya period - arriving either from the steppe by way of something like GAC or a CWC 'vanguard', or some direct Yamnaya -> central Germany migration (no clear trail, but a couple of kurgan looking burials have been found, as if directly transplanted from Moldova). The other option is something like Jean L's diagram suggesting a yet unsampled Late Neolithic migration from southern Europe (? Balkans). Indeed, we have no real Balkan samples , but at least a couple of mtDNA studies suggest that there was a late Neolithic migration into Europe from western Asia, erasing the earlier 'classic farmers' of the Starcevo-LBK horizon, who were G2a -dominant. We should also like more samples from northern Italy & the Alpine region, as a some of the BB traditions (? copper Daggers, etc) appear to be of a proud little Alpine Copper Metallurgy tradition which survived & flourished after the major Balkan centres collapsed c. 42-4000 BC. Of course, I should not exclude the possibility that Yamnaya simply did migrate up the Danube from Hungary, but possibly bypassing the Danube littoral and going directly to Germany.

Lastly, we should be aware that as we get more DNA, and realise some of the limitations of the modelling we have up to now taken for granted, our perception of the overall picture might change. Discussions on Eurogenes have noted some differences in ancestry proportions depending on which programme is used, and which data included. It appears still to be an 'at feel' approach, although nothing too drastically will change. For example, one user arrived at this for German BB:

"Hungary_HG" 43.9
"Basal_Eurasian" 26.7
"AfontovaGora3" 13.25
"MA1" 9.75
"Bichon" 6.3
"Esan_Nigeria" 0.1
"Atayal" 0
"Villabruna" 0
"Loschbour" 0
distance=0.014126

I think it is also possible that what we have been thinking as steppe/ Yamnaya admixture is really referring to something else, or has subsumed within it a more diverse, far-reaching and older sub-stratas. I cannot but help think that once we get more aDNA from elsewhere - like Greece, Copper Aga Anatolia, early BA Armenia, Iran, etc; there will be little actual steppe admixture (? < 15%) in these regions, and that major demographic impacts came from somewhere else.

Heber
05-21-2016, 09:36 AM
This is my straw man M269 migration map and L21 defining mutations timeline.

9408

9409

The latter is adapted from several years ago so needs a little tweaking.

I have tweaked the straw man and got rid of the old migration map.

9415

9416

GoldenHind
05-21-2016, 11:21 AM
M269: Central Asian Steppe
L23: Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Ukraine or Moldova)
L51: Eastern Europe (Romania, former Yugoslavia, Hungary)
L151: Eastern Europe (Hungary, Czech Rep, Slovakia)
U106: Eastern/Central Europe (Northern Germany, Czech Rep, Poland)
P312: Eastern/Central Europe (Southern Germany, Austria, Czech Rep)
L21: Western/Central Europe (Northern France, Low Countries, Western Germany)
DF27: Western/Central Europe (Southern Germany or Eastern France)
U152: Central Europe (Southern Germany, Czech Rep, or Austria)
L238: Central Europe
DF19: Central Europe
DF99: Central Europe



I would generally agree, though I would put DF27, L238, DF19 and DF99 as Eastern/Central Europe.

Agamemnon
05-21-2016, 12:26 PM
I have tweaked the straw man and got rid of the old migration map.

9415

9416

Proto-Celtic circa ~5,000 yBP makes absolutely no sense.

jdean
05-21-2016, 01:49 PM
I have tweaked the straw man and got rid of the old migration map.

9415

9416


Proto-Celtic circa ~5,000 yBP makes absolutely no sense.

Nor does constantly insisting DF49 is Irish based on the modern distribution of one of its subclades.

MitchellSince1893
05-21-2016, 02:22 PM
Proto-Celtic circa ~5,000 yBP makes absolutely no sense.

Care to state your own theory for M269 etc? I know it's in other threads but it would be user friendly to have it here for reference.

alan
05-21-2016, 05:51 PM
process of elimination suggest they were east-marginal to Europe if in Europe at all during the Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and bulk of the Neolithic. I would rule out Anatolia and Levant too as its the source of the non-European input into the Neolithic farmers in Europe.

I would follow the ancient DNA evidence and say that, from at least the Mesolithic, M269 was hiding where we find the earliest definite M269 samples in the ancient DNA record - the European steppes.

Its been clear for some time that M269 was marginal too and didnt benefit from the first flush of farming that spread across Europe. It didnt really expand much until the Z2103 and L11 branches which are 1000s of years younger than the farming waves across the bulk of Europe. It seems to be a copper age expansion from a previously marginal group.

vettor
05-21-2016, 06:10 PM
IMO

M269 is a black sea bulgarian marker . .........not ethnic bulgarians, but the people who lived in that part of bulgaria in the ancient times.

Heber
05-21-2016, 07:11 PM
Proto-Celtic circa ~5,000 yBP makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I should have used PIE in that box. Do you agree?

9420

9421

Heber
05-21-2016, 07:18 PM
Nor does constantly insisting DF49 is Irish based on the modern distribution of one of its subclades.

I cannot show the full distribution of DF49 on a crowded map.

9422

I have further analysis here especially on Ireland which is my area of interest.

http://pin.it/a7WbpKO

YSeq (and other companies) refer to it as the North West Irish Panel.
Genographic in a published study found the highest frequency in Co. Mayo.

jdean
05-21-2016, 07:26 PM
I cannot show the full distribution of DF49 on a crowded map.

Then at least make it clear you are talking about a relatively young subclade of DF49.

icebreaker
05-21-2016, 08:03 PM
My guess

M269 Northeast Anatolia (somewhere between Rize and Trabzon to be specific)
L23 Pontic-Caspian
L51 Eastern Europe

kinman
05-21-2016, 09:51 PM
My predictions for the oldest (where they originated) tend to be further east than most predictions.
For comparison, your predictions on the left, and my predictions to the right of the arrows:

M269: Central Asian Steppe -----------------------------------------------------> eastern Pontic-Caspian (W. Kazakhstan)
L23: Pontic–Caspian Steppe (Ukraine or Moldova) ----------------------------> eastern Pontic-Caspian (W. Kazakhstan)
L51: Eastern Europe (Romania, former Yugoslavia, Hungary) ----------------> eastern Pontic-Caspian (W. Kazakhstan)
L151: Eastern Europe (Hungary, Czech Rep, Slovakia) ------------------------> western Pontic-Caspian (S. Ukraine)
U106: Eastern/Central Europe (Northern Germany, Czech Rep, Poland) -----> western Pontic-Caspian (Moldova)
P312: Eastern/Central Europe (Southern Germany, Austria, Czech Rep) -----> western Pontic-Caspian (Moldova)

U152: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------> northeastern Austria
L-2: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------> southern Germany

alan
05-29-2016, 08:38 PM
I believe it originated in the steppe but its Mesolithic (even late Palaeolithic?) age means that stray M269xL23's dead end lines could have got anywhere.

alan
05-29-2016, 08:48 PM
Actually if M269 dates to 15200-12000 years ago that makes its so old it almost certainly was impacted on by the very cold younger dryas and perhaps the older dryas and impact of the warm Allerod phase in between. These events probably had an incredible effect on human genetic distribution in northern Eurasia. I suspect M269 was is old enough to have been squashed south and westwards from either Siberia or eastern Europe in both Dryas events and lets not forget that warm phases and accompanying afforestation also spell problems for peoples used to open plains and following animals who like that environment.

So M269 is so old it may have been split into separate lines all over the place. I would suggest the Italian R1b hunter probably got there by south and westwards shunting during the major climatic oscillations. I also suspect the CHG genetics were pushed south in that period.

parasar
05-29-2016, 08:50 PM
M343: Inner Asia
L278: Italy
M269: Italy
L23: Balkans
L51: W/C Europe

alan
05-30-2016, 12:42 AM
M343: Inner Asia
L278: Italy
M269: Italy
L23: Balkans
L51: W/C Europe

problem is there is absolutely no out of Italy movements indicated in the archaeological record until the Roman era. Italy seem to have a prehistory that is mainly a reciever of outside settlement from the north/Balkans or from the maritime powers along the Med.

IMO the timing of both CHG signal in the Caucasus and the R1b hunter in Italy to c. 12000BC is suggestive of a move to those places from further north in the Older Dryas cold snap.In both cases they are epigravettian culturally (although that is an umbrella term). So either these newcomers didnt bring much of a cultural impact or (perhaps more likely) there was a third part of the epi-gravettian world that had absorbed the CHG genes and some R1b before spreading through the epigravettian world.

We know where R and ANE type genes were at the start of the LGM. Afontova Gora means we also know that some of the ANE genes remained close to central Siberia and in a position to re-expand north after the LGM. However, if CHG and even the odd R1b could be in epigravettian groups in Italy and the Caucasus by 12000BC then clearly there was some movement west and south at some point between 22000 and 12000BC.

There are not enough data points to be sure when such a move happened. Its not even clear if it was at the start of the LGM or after it. People sometimes claim the figurines might be Gravettian influence on central Siberian culture. However, I would wonder if it wasnt the other way round. There is very strong radiocarbon evidence that central Siberia was evacuated in the 24000-22000BC period of the early LGM. Some almost certainly retreated just to fringes of Siberia around Altai and close to NW China. However, the case for them being R1b people has no evidence so far. Q seems more likely. However the Rs must have gone somewhere in the early LGM. Perhaps they did move west in small numbers and were absorbed in the Gravettian groups in eastern Europe in the LGM. On the other hand AG does show genetically similar people did stay put nearby during the LGM and survived it in refugia. So it is possible that the spread of Mal'ta type Siberian genes west was post-LGM though pre-12000BC. I cant see an archaeological signal for this though. Perhaps it was a limited wave with no lasting impact and more important waves from Siberia came c. 9000BC and 6500BC linked to microblades and then pointed pottery. It may be complex.

ffoucart
05-30-2016, 12:44 AM
Difficult question. As it's only a guess:

M269: Central Asian Steppe
L23: Pontic–Caspian Steppe
L51: Pontic-Caspian Steppe
L151: Eastern/Central Europe
U106: Eastern/Central Europe
P312: Eastern/Central Europe
L21: Western/Central Europe
DF27: Western/Central Europe
U152: Central Europe
L238: Central Europe
DF19: Central Europe
DF99: Central Europe

Gravetto-Danubian
05-30-2016, 01:02 AM
problem is there is absolutely no out of Italy movements indicated in the archaeological record until the Roman era. Italy seem to have a prehistory that is mainly a reciever of outside settlement from the north/Balkans or from the maritime powers along the Med.

That is certainly my impression. Which makes me ask from whither the proto-Villabruna, U5, Y I2 dominant expanded from ? The Balkans doesn't look too dense in late UP either. I'd still bet on it, or perhaps somewhat further east : Black Sea; but the other possibility is structuring within Franco-Cantabria




We know where R and ANE type genes were at the start of the LGM. Afontova Gora means we also know that some of the ANE genes remained close to central Siberia and in a position to re-expand north after the LGM. However, if CHG and even the odd R1b could be in epigravettian groups in Italy and the Caucasus by 12000BC then clearly there was some movement west and south at some point between 22000 and 12000BC.

There are not enough data points to be sure when such a move happened. Its not even clear if it was at the start of the LGM or after it. People sometimes claim the figurines might be Gravettian influence on central Siberian culture. However, I would wonder if it wasnt the other way round. There is very strong radiocarbon evidence that central Siberia was evacuated in the 24000-22000BC period of the early LGM. Some almost certainly retreated just to fringes of Siberia around Altai and close to NW China. However, the case for them being R1b people has no evidence so far. Q seems more likely. However the Rs must have gone somewhere in the early LGM. Perhaps they did move west in small numbers and were absorbed in the Gravettian groups in eastern Europe in the LGM. On the other hand AG does show genetically similar people did stay put nearby during the LGM and survived it in refugia. So it is possible that the spread of Mal'ta type Siberian genes west was post-LGM though pre-12000BC. I cant see an archaeological signal for this though. Perhaps it was a limited wave with no lasting impact and more important waves from Siberia came c. 9000BC and 6500BC linked to microblades and then pointed pottery. It may be complex.

There apparently is. The "northeast Technocomplex" (pre-Kunda) which emerges in final UP Russia & east Baltic is said to have notable similarities to Afontova Gora et al

alan
05-30-2016, 02:20 AM
That is certainly my impression. Which makes me ask from whither the proto-Villabruna, U5, Y I2 dominant expanded from ? The Balkans doesn't look too dense in late UP either. I'd still bet on it, or perhaps somewhat further east : Black Sea; but the other possibility is structuring within Franco-Cantabria





There apparently is. The "northeast Technocomplex" (pre-Kunda) which emerges in final UP Russia & east Baltic is said to have notable similarities to Afontova Gora et al

Prob with any link between Italy and Franco-Cantabria is they are culturally very different c. 12000BC and indeed for some millennia before. Italy is epogravettian. So my suspicion is it came via another epigravettian area and this is obscuring its external origin somewhat. I do sometimes wonder what is hiding in the lost plain of the northern Adriatic which had a large river flowing north to south from it but is now underwater with just short truncated bits of feeder rivers surviving in the west Balkans and north Italy. It probably was an attractive refugium, far more so than the lands on either side of it. Its like a mini doggerland. This was lost of course as the post-LGM sealevels rose. The natural thing to me would be they retreated with the land northwards until they ended up close to the modern north Adriatic and presumably melted away by feeder rivers into the Po valley and the NW Balkans etc. If its the Villabruna in north-east Italy then that is even more interesting. Was there a refugium under the northern Adriatic that included people carrying R1b and CHG type autosomal genes? It would have been quite unlike the surviving dry land today with its remnant truncated short rivers falling from high lands into the sea. It would have been a wide plain with a large river flowing north-south down its centre and fed by many smaller rivers from what is not Italy and the west Balkans. So, nothing on land today can be used to approximate this now-flooded area.

Also worth remembering that if that area of land existed because of the LGM then pre-LGM the land wouldnt have existed either and so they had to have come from somewhere else. Personally I suspect they came from the Danube valley during the LGM but that is just a hunch.

Megalophias
05-30-2016, 02:37 AM
Prob with any link between Italy and Franco-Cantabria is they are culturally very different c. 12000BC and indeed for some millennia before.
Yes, apart from Liguria anyway. But if we go back 18 000+ years ago to the time of El Miron, who carried U5b, we have Solutrean-style cave paintings and un-Epigravettian leaf points turning up at Grotta Paglicci in Apulia - and El Miron's contemporary Paglicci71 also had U5b. I wonder if there couldn't have been gene flow from both east and west.

parasar
05-30-2016, 02:55 AM
problem is there is absolutely no out of Italy movements indicated in the archaeological record until the Roman era. Italy seem to have a prehistory that is mainly a reciever of outside settlement from the north/Balkans or from the maritime powers along the Med.

IMO the timing of both CHG signal in the Caucasus and the R1b hunter in Italy to c. 12000BC is suggestive of a move to those places from further north in the Older Dryas cold snap.In both cases they are epigravettian culturally (although that is an umbrella term). So either these newcomers didnt bring much of a cultural impact or (perhaps more likely) there was a third part of the epi-gravettian world that had absorbed the CHG genes and some R1b before spreading through the epigravettian world.

We know where R and ANE type genes were at the start of the LGM. Afontova Gora means we also know that some of the ANE genes remained close to central Siberia and in a position to re-expand north after the LGM. However, if CHG and even the odd R1b could be in epigravettian groups in Italy and the Caucasus by 12000BC then clearly there was some movement west and south at some point between 22000 and 12000BC.

There are not enough data points to be sure when such a move happened. Its not even clear if it was at the start of the LGM or after it. People sometimes claim the figurines might be Gravettian influence on central Siberian culture. However, I would wonder if it wasnt the other way round. There is very strong radiocarbon evidence that central Siberia was evacuated in the 24000-22000BC period of the early LGM. Some almost certainly retreated just to fringes of Siberia around Altai and close to NW China. However, the case for them being R1b people has no evidence so far. Q seems more likely. However the Rs must have gone somewhere in the early LGM. Perhaps they did move west in small numbers and were absorbed in the Gravettian groups in eastern Europe in the LGM. On the other hand AG does show genetically similar people did stay put nearby during the LGM and survived it in refugia. So it is possible that the spread of Mal'ta type Siberian genes west was post-LGM though pre-12000BC. I cant see an archaeological signal for this though. Perhaps it was a limited wave with no lasting impact and more important waves from Siberia came c. 9000BC and 6500BC linked to microblades and then pointed pottery. It may be complex.

Fu mentions a change, but I am not sure if or how this change incorporates a migratory movement.
"Archaeologically, it correlates with cultural transitions within the Epigravettian in southern Europe34 and the Magdalenian-to-Azilian transition in western Europe35. Thus, the appearance of the Villabruna Cluster may reflect migrations or population shifts within Europe at the end of the Ice Age"

EDIT: I now recall that Ralph and Coop had also pointed out the special position of Italy in an European context:
"A notable exception is that nearly all populations showed no significant heterogeneity of numbers of common ancestors with Italian samples, suggesting that most common ancestors shared with Italy lived longer ago than the time that structure within modern-day countries formed ... "

Gravetto-Danubian
05-30-2016, 04:04 AM
Yes, apart from Liguria anyway. But if we go back 18 000+ years ago to the time of El Miron, who carried U5b, we have Solutrean-style cave paintings and un-Epigravettian leaf points turning up at Grotta Paglicci in Apulia - and El Miron's contemporary Paglicci71 also had U5b. I wonder if there couldn't have been gene flow from both east and west.

Yes. I mentioned elsewhere, Italy wasn't particularly well inhabited during the Aurignacian. It only accelerated during the Gravettian, and it is thought though a colonization via Provence. If so, such contacts probably continued through Palaeolithic, and well into Mesolithic, with Sauveterrian & Castenovian of southern -> central Europe.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-30-2016, 04:07 AM
Fu mentions a change, but I am not sure if or how this change incorporates a migratory movement.
"Archaeologically, it correlates with cultural transitions within the Epigravettian in southern Europe34 and the Magdalenian-to-Azilian transition in western Europe35. Thus, the appearance of the Villabruna Cluster may reflect migrations or population shifts within Europe at the end of the Ice Age"

Yes, I think this was related to "EpiGravettians' from southern Europe. They impacted the Magdalenians also, it might seem.



EDIT: I now recall that Ralph and Coop had also pointed out the special position of Italy in an European context:
"A notable exception is that nearly all populations showed no significant heterogeneity of numbers of common ancestors with Italian samples, suggesting that most common ancestors shared with Italy lived longer ago than the time that structure within modern-day countries formed ... "

This has probably nothing to do with the Palaeolithic. Rather, for large parts of western Europe & Italy, the genetic structure appears to have been 'set' by the Bronze Age. Not so with eastern Europe, where numerous internal rearrangements continued until 800 AD.

Chad Rohlfsen
05-30-2016, 04:34 AM
It certainly appears so, with ElMiron being rather intermediary. I've got a paper on the Magdalenian taking two routes; one up the Atlantic and the other through Northern Italy. I'll try to track it down. I'm also looking for some pre-Butovo information. That might be useful for a link to R1 and the new relationship to Native Americans.

Italy has nothing do do with this. It's another destination and not a source.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-30-2016, 04:37 AM
It certainly appears so, with ElMiron being rather intermediary. I've got a paper on the Magdalenian taking two routes; one up the Atlantic and the other through Northern Italy. I'll try to track it down. I'm also looking for some pre-Butovo information. That might be useful for a link to R1 and the new relationship to Native Americans.

Italy has nothing do do with this. It's another destination and not a source.

Chad Ive got a solid book about pre-Butovo Russia, can scan up relevant pages for you later.

alan
05-30-2016, 10:26 AM
Chad Ive got a solid book about pre-Butovo Russia, can scan up relevant pages for you later.

This is the best I could find online http://www.phil.uni-greifswald.de/fileadmin/mediapool/histin/Ur-_und_Fruehgeschichte/Projekte/Russland/Hartz__Terberger__Zhilin_2010.pdf

alan
05-30-2016, 10:56 AM
IMO although evidence is poor, the now-flooded Adriatic was probably a major population centre in the LGM and beyond until it was all flooded. A broad plain with a major river system. The southern doggerland. Far more attractive than the mountanious Adriatic Balkans. The appearance of this new area of land at the start of the LGM and its disappearances later must have had a dramatic impact on populations of the area.

http://en.atlantida.spletnestrani.com/data/upload/.Adriatic_plain_11000BC.large.jpg

This vid is very interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Mg6Dnarx0

http://m.cdn.blog.hu/pa/pangea/image/adriatic%20sea.jpg

Gravetto-Danubian
05-30-2016, 10:58 AM
delete.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-30-2016, 11:03 AM
This is the best I could find online http://www.phil.uni-greifswald.de/fileadmin/mediapool/histin/Ur-_und_Fruehgeschichte/Projekte/Russland/Hartz__Terberger__Zhilin_2010.pdf

That's a good paper, i think we've discussed it before.
The book I was referring to was "Thinking Mesolithic.." by Stefan Kozlowski. It essentially finds the same phenomena, but the Botovo culture , was just one of several other cultures which belonged to what he classes as a 'Northeastern Technocomplex" which was rooted in the Upper Palaeolithic of Siberia (Afantova Gora, Verkholanskaia Gora, Angara valley, etc).
But the earliest it appears is 10000 BC in the Volga (as your initial hunch), so it doesn't really explain R1b in Villabruna, Italy, it would seem.


IMO although evidence is poor, the now-flooded Adriatic was probably a major population centre in the LGM and beyond until it was all flooded. A broad plain with a major river system. The southern doggerland. Far more attractive than the mountanious Adriatic Balkans. The appearance of this new area of land at the start of the LGM and its disappearances later must have had a dramatic impact on populations of the area.

http://en.atlantida.spletnestrani.com/data/upload/.Adriatic_plain_11000BC.large.jpg

This vid is very interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Mg6Dnarx0

http://m.cdn.blog.hu/pa/pangea/image/adriatic%20sea.jpg


Yep very interesting. But underwater archaeology is incipient, and unlikely to find anything Palaeolithic (rather focussing on Roman and MIddle Ages, id imagine)
The Italian authority on Palaeolithic, Mussi, argues that the north Adriatic plain was probably a swampy, with little biomass, thus unlikely to have been a significant refuge zone.
I don't know.
But there are some good Balkan late UP/ Epipalaeolithic specimens floating around (eg Croatia, Greece), i hope they get tested soon.


_______
At the moment, I suspect that R1b came from that 'other west Eurasian' lineage, collateral to ANE, but not ANE (mal'ta cluster), and from around the Black Sea- Carpathian - Balkans EpiGravettian network, which would explain why it is found in CHG also.

alan
05-30-2016, 11:45 AM
One effect that the northern Adriatic being dry would have had is it made it a hell of a lot quicker to get to Italy from the Balkans coast and also of course the Aegean to the south. The Adriatic plain could have been a natural melting pot by creating a very large area that would have been accessible from central Europe, Italy, the Balkans coast and the Aegean.

Perhaps the Aegean angle is worth exploring a bit more. It is possible that the low sea levels during the LGM and indeed for some time after permitted more southerly groups to access the ancient Adriatic Plain. The situation was also dynamic after the LGM when land was disappearing in the Aegean Sea too. So we could have had a pretty substantial population upheaval in the area. By the time the Italian R1b guy lived c. 12000BC the retreat of the Adriatic Plain was gathering a head of steam and people would have been being driven towards the head of the Adriatic. If you consider the river systems the Po is by far the largest strentch of river left after the truncation caused by the flooding of the Adriatic Plain. So I would tend to see the Po Valley and north-east Italy as the most likely place to have recieved the largest numbers of Adriatic Plain refugess. So in that regard the location of Villabruna in that area at 12000BC actually would fit very well for a refuge population form the Adriatic Plain. As far as I understand from previous reading a number of years ago, the main north-south river through the Adriatic Plain was essentially a continuation of the Po. So it would be especially easy for hunters to head that way where the Po valley presents the modern area that is closest in terms of a large river and valley to what has been lost under the Adriatic.

If this is so then the next question is of course who were these people living on the Adriatic Plain? Evidence is scarce and it would be too easy to take a couple of sites along its fringe and wrongly project uniformity. All I will say is that humans were settled before the LGM to the north in central Europe, the west in Italy, the east in the Balkans and the south-east in the Aegean area.People could have settled it from all directions as this new plain opened up as sea levels dropped. What I am curious about is the possibility that a southern route could have also been used during the LGM. There is probably a scary amount of stuff we dont know about human LGM period movements on the now-flooded lands in the Adriatic, Aegean and east Med and probably will never find archaeologically. People could have been walking round coasts from Anatolia to the Adriatic during the LGM and the early post-LGM period and we would be oblivious if nos were small and they tended to be absorbed culturally by the locals rapidly.

alan
05-30-2016, 12:13 PM
That's a good paper, i think we've discussed it before.
The book I was referring to was "Thinking Mesolithic.." by Stefan Kozlowski. It essentially finds the same phenomena, but the Botovo culture , was just one of several other cultures which belonged to what he classes as a 'Northeastern Technocomplex" which was rooted in the Upper Palaeolithic of Siberia (Afantova Gora, Verkholanskaia Gora, Angara valley, etc).
But the earliest it appears is 10000 BC in the Volga (as your initial hunch), so it doesn't really explain R1b in Villabruna, Italy, it would seem.




Yep very interesting. But underwater archaeology is incipient, and unlikely to find anything Palaeolithic (rather focussing on Roman and MIddle Ages, id imagine)
The Italian authority on Palaeolithic, Mussi, argues that the north Adriatic plain was probably a swampy, with little biomass, thus unlikely to have been a significant refuge zone.
I don't know.
But there are some good Balkan late UP/ Epipalaeolithic specimens floating around (eg Croatia, Greece), i hope they get tested soon.


_______
At the moment, I suspect that R1b came from that 'other west Eurasian' lineage, collateral to ANE, but not ANE (mal'ta cluster), and from around the Black Sea- Carpathian - Balkans EpiGravettian network, which would explain why it is found in CHG also.

It does look possible. How it got in the Carpathians-Balkans epi-Gravettians is another question. I dont think it originally belonged to that group or location. If I had to guess, perhaps a very east-peripheral group of Gravettians in the Pontic Caspian mixed a little with retreating Siberians as the LGM was taking hold. Then this group (appearing Gravettian-like) retreated further west and south into the Caucasus and the Balkans and easily reaching north Italy given most of the Adriatic didnt exist at this time. This could have brought stray R1bs to the Adriatic, Balkans, Caucasus, SW Asia and Italy and from the latter you could easily have had a few carried further west during the Cardial phase.

I am certainly more inclined to see the greater R1b family as being scattered wide in the pre-Neolithic period. It seems to me that the later Gravettians in eastern Europea and/or the Caucasus was likely to have received the influx and spread it on further west and south.

However only one line led to M269 and only one line from the late upper Palaeolithic ancestor led to L23. The current evidence for where that lineage was points towards the pontic-Caspian area where the presense of M73 also is an important indicator too the P297 hung around there even if stray R1b were scattered around.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-31-2016, 04:12 AM
Yep
We have no propper Mesol or Palaeo genomes from Greece to Ukraine
One can only imagine something interesting will show up with these

vettor
05-31-2016, 05:12 AM
One effect that the northern Adriatic being dry would have had is it made it a hell of a lot quicker to get to Italy from the Balkans coast and also of course the Aegean to the south. The Adriatic plain could have been a natural melting pot by creating a very large area that would have been accessible from central Europe, Italy, the Balkans coast and the Aegean.

Perhaps the Aegean angle is worth exploring a bit more. It is possible that the low sea levels during the LGM and indeed for some time after permitted more southerly groups to access the ancient Adriatic Plain. The situation was also dynamic after the LGM when land was disappearing in the Aegean Sea too. So we could have had a pretty substantial population upheaval in the area. By the time the Italian R1b guy lived c. 12000BC the retreat of the Adriatic Plain was gathering a head of steam and people would have been being driven towards the head of the Adriatic. If you consider the river systems the Po is by far the largest strentch of river left after the truncation caused by the flooding of the Adriatic Plain. So I would tend to see the Po Valley and north-east Italy as the most likely place to have recieved the largest numbers of Adriatic Plain refugess. So in that regard the location of Villabruna in that area at 12000BC actually would fit very well for a refuge population form the Adriatic Plain. As far as I understand from previous reading a number of years ago, the main north-south river through the Adriatic Plain was essentially a continuation of the Po. So it would be especially easy for hunters to head that way where the Po valley presents the modern area that is closest in terms of a large river and valley to what has been lost under the Adriatic.

If this is so then the next question is of course who were these people living on the Adriatic Plain? Evidence is scarce and it would be too easy to take a couple of sites along its fringe and wrongly project uniformity. All I will say is that humans were settled before the LGM to the north in central Europe, the west in Italy, the east in the Balkans and the south-east in the Aegean area.People could have settled it from all directions as this new plain opened up as sea levels dropped. What I am curious about is the possibility that a southern route could have also been used during the LGM. There is probably a scary amount of stuff we dont know about human LGM period movements on the now-flooded lands in the Adriatic, Aegean and east Med and probably will never find archaeologically. People could have been walking round coasts from Anatolia to the Adriatic during the LGM and the early post-LGM period and we would be oblivious if nos were small and they tended to be absorbed culturally by the locals rapidly.

There are many rivers running from the alps through north-east Italy to the adriatic sea or the Po river..............these are Adige, Brenta, Sil, Piave, Baccigilione, Tagliamento, Bottiniga , Cagnan, Livenza and many many more. The adriatic plains would have risen via the ice melting north of the black sea which caused a breakthrough into the Mediterranean and from the Ice melting in the alps ( to a degree). there was no black sea- Mediterranean sea union until these ice melted. ( they where separated)

R.Rocca
05-31-2016, 03:32 PM
I think the OP's question may have different answers depending on the specifics of the question. For example, M269 itself is one of 82 SNPs that make up a single subclade. It could've taken thousands of years for the one single male lineage to survive until it reached the fully formed M269 et al subclade. What that means is that we may find some of these SNPs anywhere as one-offs, but they may not amount to much. We should be especially cautious when we find an ancient R1b sample alongside haplogroups that are statistically irrelevant in Europe today, or disappear from the record in subsequent periods.

alan
06-01-2016, 01:18 AM
I think the OP's question may have different answers depending on the specifics of the question. For example, M269 itself is one of 82 SNPs that make up a single subclade. It could've taken thousands of years for the one single male lineage to survive until it reached the fully formed M269 et al subclade. What that means is that we may find some of these SNPs anywhere as one-offs, but they may not amount to much. We should be especially cautious when we find an ancient R1b sample alongside haplogroups that are statistically irrelevant in Europe today, or disappear from the record in subsequent periods.

I agree with that. M269 has existed since the late upper Palaeolithic but L23 prob only occurred in the copper age. So a tray M269* could appear in ancient DNA as early as the Palaeolithic but completely mislead us.

rms2
06-01-2016, 11:30 AM
I agree with that. M269 has existed since the late upper Palaeolithic but L23 prob only occurred in the copper age. So a tray M269* could appear in ancient DNA as early as the Palaeolithic but completely mislead us.

And of course Villabruna isn't even derived for P297, let alone M269. I wouldn't be surprised if an R1a of roughly the same age showed up in Italy.

Gravetto-Danubian
06-01-2016, 12:00 PM
one thing worth highlighting is that, broadly, P297 groups have a long history in or near Europe. By the late Palaeolithic R1 is found from Italy to Russia. Although further evidence might change this, Siberia must have been predominantly Q.
Also considering: the group which admixed into CHG and WHG is distinct from ANE.

This suggests to me that Bronze Age R1b didn't come from too far away

rms2
06-01-2016, 08:20 PM
one thing worth highlighting is that, broadly, P297 groups have a long history in or near Europe. By the late Palaeolithic R1 is found from Italy to Russia. Although further evidence might change this, Siberia must have been predominantly Q.
Also considering: the group which admixed into CHG and WHG is distinct from ANE.

This suggests to me that Bronze Age R1b didn't come from too far away

Of course, Europe extends eastward to the Urals. The real question right now is where did R1b-L51 come from and when. We await more ancient y-dna that will hopefully shed light on that.

alan
06-02-2016, 03:47 PM
Of course, Europe extends eastward to the Urals. The real question right now is where did R1b-L51 come from and when. We await more ancient y-dna that will hopefully shed light on that.

well L23 is not much upstream from L51 and L23 is copper age in date so until we find L51 the only rational answer is 'close to where the other L23 derived people are first noted'. I think its best to go with the evidence and that IMO leads to L23 being somewhere around the Pontic-Caspian where Z2103 has been found. This is also where we find other P297 /M73 in ancient samples.

When in doubt I was taught to always work from what you know to what you dont know. So the key fact is P297 in the Pontic-Caspian steppes from the Mesolithic and L23 derived people in the same area in the kurgans. Its hard not to conclude L23 is ultimately descended from M269 Mesolithic hunters in the same area even if we havent found an M269 hunter. They havent exactly gone to town sampling Mesolithic people in the Pontic-Caspian but its pretty remarkable that 1 out of 1 is P297 on the M73 branch.

What I wouldnt rule out though is the possibility that these P297 derived hunters were late Mesolithic arrivals from central Asia. There are ceramic and flint technology links between that whole Elshanka pot phase of the Russian Samara Mesolithic and the east Caspian area c. 6000BC. So it is possible the Samara hunter P297 comes from hunters in that area. Its hard to say if they were hunters there from the end of the Palaeolithic or if they arrived in the late Mesolithic.

Its immaterial though as we do know P297 hunters were present in the Pontic-Caspian steppe area over 2000 years before the rise of Yamnaya with its L23 links. Basically there is no mystery why M269xL23 or early L23 or early L51xL11 or even early L11 hasnt been found yet. They simply havent sampled the European steppes area in the period 2000 year period between the Samara hunter and the Yamnaya period and they havent sampled Ukraine at all.

alan
06-02-2016, 05:40 PM
one thing worth highlighting is that, broadly, P297 groups have a long history in or near Europe. By the late Palaeolithic R1 is found from Italy to Russia. Although further evidence might change this, Siberia must have been predominantly Q.
Also considering: the group which admixed into CHG and WHG is distinct from ANE.

This suggests to me that Bronze Age R1b didn't come from too far away


good point. The indications seem to be that hunters with R1b were in a position to trickle into Europe in small nos since the late upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic from Russia to Italy and again a small drop of V88 managed to get picked up on the Cardial Neolithic path somewhere along the Med. (though not necessarily at the Cardial origin point). Small nos of R1b has been able to intrude into Europe several times in before the steppe wave although none seem to have had any long term impact until the copper age clades. So the geography indicates that by 12000BC R1b was either in or within striking distance of Europe and this was remained true shown by sporadic appearance in the Mesolithic and Neolithic.

This contrasts with the Americas where Q was the main P derived clade and it has never been shown that early branches of R1b were sent into the Americas. I read that the form of Q is closest to Altai which was indeed an important refugium during the ice age. The Italian R1b dude c. 12000BC, the similarity to CHG in the same sort of date together with the lack of R in the Americas does seem to suggest R1 headed west prior to 12000BC and didnt descendants behind in central Siberia, Altai etc.

I am still gobsmacked that I just cannot see evidence of a migration west by Mal'ta boy's R relatives in the archaeology record before 9500BC and am at a loss to explain how R is present in Italy c 12000BC and has links to CHG - both in an epigravettian cultural context. All you can say is present date suggests R was still in central Siberia c. 22000BC early in the LGM but it doesnt appear to still be there after the LGM although Afontova Gora 2 shows autosomal relatives did survive - probably Q people. There are several possible explanations though:

1. It is possible that traces of an LGM R1 refugium on the east Caspain or Aral Sea shores has been destroyed by the post-glacial temporary mega-expansion of that sea eastwards before retreating again.

2. It is possible that there was some LGM refugium nestled in the stan mountains of Inner Asia just south of the cold desert belt which ran from the Capsian to Altai. After all improbable looking places in dry cold mountanous areas like Altai did form ice age refugia due to microclimate/microenvironment.

3. Maybe they moved south-west from Mal'ta boy's area but didnt make it all that far and ended up as a micropopulation living around some oasis of food in the cold arid desert zone like Lake Balkhash during the LGM.

rms2
06-02-2016, 06:25 PM
well L23 is not much upstream from L51 and L23 is copper age in date so until we find L51 the only rational answer is 'close to where the other L23 derived people are first noted'. I think its best to go with the evidence and that IMO leads to L23 being somewhere around the Pontic-Caspian where Z2103 has been found. This is also where we find other P297 /M73 in ancient samples . . .

That is my thinking, too, given the timing, if the SNP counting dates aren't too far off. It's well to remember that as of yet we don't have any ancient steppe y-dna from west of the Don and none from Yamnaya in the Carpathian basin. So, when you think about it, we don't have any ancient y-dna from the Pontic steppe. The only ancient steppe y-dna we have comes from the Caspian steppe.

For me a big clue is the presence of L51 in Bell Beaker, which is pretty obviously a kurgan culture.

kinman
06-03-2016, 01:03 AM
Hi all,
Speaking of P297 and M269, does anyone else have a CTS623 grouping between P297 and M269 on their FTDNA haplotree? I'm not sure if this just a mistake, or if FTDNA has new information that moves this CTS623 grouping upstream from M269.
-------------Ken
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


well L23 is not much upstream from L51 and L23 is copper age in date so until we find L51 the only rational answer is 'close to where the other L23 derived people are first noted'. I think its best to go with the evidence and that IMO leads to L23 being somewhere around the Pontic-Caspian where Z2103 has been found. This is also where we find other P297 /M73 in ancient samples.

When in doubt I was taught to always work from what you know to what you dont know. So the key fact is P297 in the Pontic-Caspian steppes from the Mesolithic and L23 derived people in the same area in the kurgans. Its hard not to conclude L23 is ultimately descended from M269 Mesolithic hunters in the same area even if we havent found an M269 hunter. They havent exactly gone to town sampling Mesolithic people in the Pontic-Caspian but its pretty remarkable that 1 out of 1 is P297 on the M73 branch.

What I wouldnt rule out though is the possibility that these P297 derived hunters were late Mesolithic arrivals from central Asia. There are ceramic and flint technology links between that whole Elshanka pot phase of the Russian Samara Mesolithic and the east Caspian area c. 6000BC. So it is possible the Samara hunter P297 comes from hunters in that area. Its hard to say if they were hunters there from the end of the Palaeolithic or if they arrived in the late Mesolithic.

Its immaterial though as we do know P297 hunters were present in the Pontic-Caspian steppe area over 2000 years before the rise of Yamnaya with its L23 links. Basically there is no mystery why M269xL23 or early L23 or early L51xL11 or even early L11 hasnt been found yet. They simply havent sampled the European steppes area in the period 2000 year period between the Samara hunter and the Yamnaya period and they havent sampled Ukraine at all.

rms2
06-03-2016, 11:05 AM
Hi all,
Speaking of P297 and M269, does anyone else have a CTS623 grouping between P297 and M269 on their FTDNA haplotree? I'm not sure if this just a mistake, or if FTDNA has new information that moves this CTS623 grouping upstream from M269.
-------------Ken
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do. I'm showing it in red for "Tested Negative". Hmm.

Here's a screenshot.

9598

kinman
06-03-2016, 01:06 PM
Yes, mine is in red as well. It sticks out like a very sore thumb.
I think it must be a mistake, but wonder how long it will take for them to fix it. ISOGG has CTS623 as part of the R-M269 clade.
-----------Ken
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I do. I'm showing it in red for "Tested Negative". Hmm.

Here's a screenshot.

9598

David Mc
06-03-2016, 11:30 PM
It shows positive for me...

Huntergatherer1066
06-04-2016, 12:13 AM
I think it is only showing negative for BigY tested people, Geno 2.0 are showing positive (judging by comparing myself with my brother). The ancestral/derived values were probably were inadvertantly flipped in one of the BigY database tables.

David Mc
06-04-2016, 12:22 AM
I tested for both, so I suppose it's possible Geno 2.0 supplied what the Big Y lacked, coverage-wise for CTS623.

kinman
06-04-2016, 11:11 PM
If it was caused by inadvertent flipping of ancestral/derived values, it must have happened to 7 SNPs. I am not only shown as negative for CTS623, but also negative for 6 other SNPs (when you click on "More"): PF6469 PF6470 PF6477 PF6479 PF6520 CTS10834.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I think it is only showing negative for BigY tested people, Geno 2.0 are showing positive (judging by comparing myself with my brother). The ancestral/derived values were probably were inadvertantly flipped in one of the BigY database tables.

rms2
06-05-2016, 02:20 AM
My dad, who had the Geno 2.0, is showing a green CTS623 for "tested positive".

Here's the screenshot for those who are not inclined to just believe me.

9635

GoldenHind
06-05-2016, 11:12 AM
FWIW, it appears in green on my haplotree page, and it is also listed as CTS623+ in the results at the bottom of the page. This must have come from my Geno 2 test (earlier version).

rms2
06-05-2016, 02:13 PM
I wonder if it's worth the trouble of contacting FTDNA about it.

kinman
06-05-2016, 10:38 PM
I don't know, they are usually pretty slow to respond. However, Alex Williamson will be back from vacation this week, so maybe he can shed some more light and insight about what is going on with CTS623, etc.


I wonder if it's worth the trouble of contacting FTDNA about it.