PDA

View Full Version : Z18, Z381 and L48 in Flanders - New Paper



R.Rocca
05-21-2013, 02:39 AM
...can be found here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers&p=6501&viewfull=1#post6501

TigerMW
05-21-2013, 05:31 PM
...can be found here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers&p=6501&viewfull=1#post6501



Here is a map of the regions of Belgium to make it easier to visualize.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Belgium_RegProv.png
....
Speaking of U106, if U106 is much heavier than I1 and R1a this might be further evidence that U106 is not from Scandinavia.

Richard R posted some frequencies that included U106 at this post. http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?943-L21-in-Flanders-New-Paper&p=6521&viewfull=1#post6521

The graphs at the bottom of that post show R1b-L48 in the genalogical data set as about
17% in West Flanders
12% un East Flanders
11% in Belgian Brabant
8% in Limburg

Richard also commented.

In the genealogical dataset, I1 and I1c are a combined 10-16%. It is strongest in the west and lowest in the north and east. R1a is low in most areas (3-4%) and only shows up higher in the east (8.0%). It is very low in the north (1.5%) and on the coast (0.9%). Directionally, R1a would seem to have come from the east and not the north or the coast with I1 clearly coastal. U106 seems to be much stronger in the north and the west and blows the doors off of I1+R1a in terms of frequency.

What do you make of the higher U106 frequency compared to I1 and R1a? with I1 being coastal focused?

Probably this isn't new news but it seems likely much of the Low Countries and probably then the neck of the Jutland were U106 focused. In other words, of the three commonly thought of Germanic subclades of Northern Europe, I1, R1a and U106, U106 is the southern partner and I1 perhaps the more sea oriented.

I just want to get some perspectives of U106 expanded and migrated. It also relates to where L11 may have come from at some point back in time.

alan
05-22-2013, 10:57 PM
This is probably the best place to comment on the fact that once again U106 or its subclades dramically fall off at the Germanic-Romance/Celtic boundary while L21 drops sharly off where U106 comes into play. The conclusions in this report for Flanders could equally apply to England:

1. L21 was pre-Germanic predominantly
2. U106 arrived west of the Rhine with Germanic speakers and was very rare among Celts
3. A minority substrate remained among the Germanic speakers who overlaid Celtic or Latin speakers.

I would love to comment on the other details but I have not been able to see the paper (no sign of it in the 'library').

Is there a similar study for Switzerland's Romance-German boundary showing U106 drop off sharply?

dartraighe
05-23-2013, 10:59 AM
U106 is a subclade that is older than the German language.It is at least 6000 ybp.



This is probably the best place to comment on the fact that once again U106 or its subclades dramically fall off at the Germanic-Romance/Celtic boundary while L21 drops sharly off where U106 comes into play. The conclusions in this report for Flanders could equally apply to England:

1. L21 was pre-Germanic predominantly
2. U106 arrived west of the Rhine with Germanic speakers and was very rare among Celts
3. A minority substrate remained among the Germanic speakers who overlaid Celtic or Latin speakers.

I would love to comment on the other details but I have not been able to see the paper (no sign of it in the 'library').

Is there a similar study for Switzerland's Romance-German boundary showing U106 drop off sharply?

R.Rocca
05-23-2013, 12:11 PM
This is probably the best place to comment on the fact that once again U106 or its subclades dramically fall off at the Germanic-Romance/Celtic boundary while L21 drops sharly off where U106 comes into play. The conclusions in this report for Flanders could equally apply to England:

1. L21 was pre-Germanic predominantly
2. U106 arrived west of the Rhine with Germanic speakers and was very rare among Celts
3. A minority substrate remained among the Germanic speakers who overlaid Celtic or Latin speakers.

I would love to comment on the other details but I have not been able to see the paper (no sign of it in the 'library').

Is there a similar study for Switzerland's Romance-German boundary showing U106 drop off sharply?

There is a very sharp drop in U106 between German speaking NE Switzerland (18.8%) and French speaking NW Switzerland (3.7%) as per Myres data.

rms2
05-24-2013, 12:58 PM
There is a very sharp drop in U106 between German speaking NE Switzerland (18.8%) and French speaking NW Switzerland (3.7%) as per Myres data.

Taken together with the data from this new paper on Flanders, and the distribution of U106 versus L21 in the Isles, that leads one inexorably to conclude that U106 has been closely associated with Germanic-speakers for a long long time and owes its distribution in part to the expansion of the Germanic tribes since 200 BC, especially in the closing years of the Roman Period (4th-5th centuries A.D.).

Dienekes summed things up pretty well awhile back:



The existence of R-U106 as a major lineage within the Germanic group is self-evident, as Germanic populations have a higher frequency against all their neighbors (Romance, Irish, Slavs, Finns). Indeed, highest frequencies are attained in the Germanic countries, followed by countries where Germanic speakers are known to have settled in large numbers but to have ultimately been absorbed or fled (such as Ireland, north Italy, and the lands of the Austro-Hungarian empire). South Italy, the Balkans, and West Asia are areas of the world where no Germanic settlement of any importance is attested, and correspondingly R-U106 shrinks to near-zero.


http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/08/r1b-founder-effect-in-central-and.html

R.Rocca
05-24-2013, 02:10 PM
Taken together with the data from this new paper on Flanders, and the distribution of U106 versus L21 in the Isles, that leads one inexorably to conclude that U106 has been closely associated with Germanic-speakers for a long long time and owes its distribution in part to the expansion of the Germanic tribes since 200 BC, especially in the closing years of the Roman Period (4th-5th centuries A.D.).

Dienekes summed things up pretty well awhile back:



http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/08/r1b-founder-effect-in-central-and.html

I still think there is a subset of U106 that needs to be detailed out to fully understand its history. Unfortunately us "P312 guys" aren't qualified to answer what that is, and the U106 intelligentsia seems to be relegated to the U106 Yahoo group. The fact that L48 is so coastal compared to other U106 lineages is probably a very important indicator in the migratory history of U106.

TigerMW
05-24-2013, 04:26 PM
I still think there is a subset of U106 that needs to be detailed out to fully understand its history. Unfortunately us "P312 guys" aren't qualified to answer what that is, and the U106 intelligentsia seems to be relegated to the U106 Yahoo group. The fact that L48 is so coastal compared to other U106 lineages is probably a very important indicator in the migratory history of U106.

I'm on that yahoo group. Although I'm not U106 I maintain a file of U106 haplotypes. There is a great bunch of folks on that forum. I usually don't post speculations on there as I don't want to infringe (and they'll tell me if they I'm wild.) We have had U106 origin discussions. There are at least two major camps with smart people on both sides. One is the Austrian(ish) out of the south expansion and the other is the out of the east/northern European plains. I would not say there is a consensus. As far as L48 specifically, I don't recall such a discussion.

I don't recall anyone over there saying that the U106 lineage reached the Baltic by sea (from/through the North Sea and the Atlantic) as L11* and then was born there along the Baltic Coast of Europe. That would account for a fit with Bell Beakers.

For coastal purposes, we might want to focus in on Z8. It is the true subclade that Ken Nordtvedt labeled "Frisian."

... then Z8 was discovered two years ago and we finally learned that Ken's "Frisian" label referred to that subclade, not all of either U106 or L48
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b1c_U106-S21/message/13220

I think we have Raymond W & Clinton P over here already....

razyn
05-24-2013, 04:48 PM
I don't recall anyone over there saying that the U106 lineage reached the Baltic by sea (from/through the North Sea and the Atlantic) as L11* and then was born there along the Baltic Coast of Europe. That would account for a fit with Bell Beakers.

I don't recall having read that about U106; but I've repeatedly suggested that route (in the opposite direction) for DF27 (or some of its subclades), and have been regarded as insane. Perhaps criminally so.

But if somebody could use that bit of ocean, during Bell Beaker days, I guess anybody could have. In either direction. So... gosh, Mike, what a great theory!

[[[ Moderator/Mikewww on 5/24/2013: Let's stick to this paper and U106 on this thread, please. ]]]

R.Rocca
05-24-2013, 05:51 PM
I'm on that yahoo group. Although I'm not U106 I maintain a file of U106 haplotypes. There is a great bunch of folks on that forum. I usually don't post speculations on there as I don't want to infringe (and they'll tell me if they I'm wild.) We have had U106 origin discussions. There are at least two major camps with smart people on both sides. One is the Austrian(ish) out of the south expansion and the other is the out of the east/northern European plains. I would not say there is a consensus. As far as L48 specifically, I don't recall such a discussion.

Do you have any links to those discussions? I'd love to read them. In the meantime, mark me down for the Austrian/Bavarian/Bohemian/Moravian origin. :D


I don't recall anyone over there saying that the U106 lineage reached the Baltic by sea (from/through the North Sea and the Atlantic) as L11* and then was born there along the Baltic Coast of Europe. That would account for a fit with Bell Beakers.

I don't think anyone would propose that because Bell Beakers barely made it to the east coast of Germany. I don't know if any BB material exists in coastal Poland.


For coastal purposes, we might want to focus in on Z8. It is the true subclade that Ken Nordtvedt labeled "Frisian."

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b1c_U106-S21/message/13220

I think we have Raymond W over here already....

Since L48 is several layers above Z8 and the paper found L48 "All" to be coastal, I would say that L48 "All" is still relevant. Perhaps Z8 was just a successful founder in a Frisia but surrounded by L48+ Z8- clans???

TigerMW
06-01-2013, 02:11 PM
Do you have any links to those discussions? I'd love to read them. In the meantime, mark me down for the Austrian/Bavarian/Bohemian/Moravian origin. :D
The discussions on those Yahoo groups are a little hard to follow due to the formatting and way responses can get "lost" from their threads. This limits the depth of the discussions so I don't think there was one solid discussion that I can point to.

Black Taylor
06-04-2013, 06:58 PM
As an L48 myself I do tend to hunt around for more information on this subject. A common thread in L48 distribution may be Flemish settlement in various other parts of Europe. For instance my father's family comes from the Blackburn area of Lancashire, where there was heavy medieval settlement of Flemish weavers and other "woolen cloth industry experts" that supported the establishment of that industry in the 1200's. I know I'm L48+, L47 (and series to L45) negative from my 23andme results. I have only one exact match within L48 that I can see in the FTDNA U106 project, an L48+ fellow negative for both the L47 to L45 and Z series SNP progressions. He's from Bohemia (Czech Republic), another area with known medieval Flemish cloth/weaving related settlement. My guess is that while U106 may have had a central European origin, L48 itself expanded heavily on the western, coastal section of U106's distribution. Whether this is related to Frankish or German immigration in late antiquity or earlier in-situ development of the "Nordwestblock" (neither Celtic nor Germanic, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock) culture (which would better fit the estimated age of L48) is an open question.