Page 1 of 14 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 139

Thread: Thoughts on what autosomal component was originally linked with R1b (M269 and down)

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,011
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Thoughts on what autosomal component was originally linked with R1b (M269 and down)

    I personally think the north-south division with European R1b is at least largely demonstrating that the austosomal DNA was not dictated by the R1b-R1a divide which is more east-west. I personally think that R1b anyway probably had a minor impact autosomally. Kromsdorf confirmed a long standing hypothesis that the beaker people were exogenous in terms of marriage. They surely had to form strong alliances with local people to build up trust and marriage would have been one of the primary tools of doing this. They have had to be a small minority in the beaker period because there was simply not enough time since the first P312 man c. 2500BC for a group to spread across much of Europe within a century or so to be anything other than a thinly spread tiny minority. In fact a lineage that seemed very able to thinly penetrate vast areas of Europe in a very short space of time (possible just a couple of centuries from Mr P312 to covering most of Europe) simply had to work that way.

    So the way I look at it P312 would have had a period where it was intermarrying locals in any given locality for a while before P312 people perhaps started to intermarry with each other. So I would guess P312 in any locality experienced a period of significant autosomal DNA dilution initially before P312 lineages grew to the sort of size in a given locality that they may have started to intermarry among themselves (and therefore slowed down the autosomal dilution by recombining autosomal genes with each other). I think to actually have realistic marriage options with daughters of other P312 men and avoid inbreeding they would have had to do that for at least 2 or 3 generations for numbers to built up (and possibly avoid near cousin taboos) which is enough to reduce the autosomal component of P312 groups to at least an eighth of that which they had on arrival. They may have after a while started to network with other non-local beaker people to form long distance alliances. So a lid may have been put on the dilution at about the 'one eight' level. Even if P312 experienced continous growth and largely married into other beaker people locally and at distance (alliance marriages), the dilution of all beaker groups in the first few generations would not be undone. So I would tend to guess at an impact of around 10% maximum.

    The best educated guess at the moment is that P312 had roots in copper age groups who migrated to the Alps from the circumpontic zone c. 3500BC and spread through the Alps to France and Iberia c. 3000BC with the marriage of beaker pot and P312 coming somewhere between west central of western Europe. I do think there is likely a link with CMP metallurgists in the cirumpontic zone and the most likely correlate with such a movement is the spilling of groups from the western steppes into Eastern Europe c. 3500BC or earlier (the process had begun by 4200BC). There seem to be few alternatives because there is no out of Anatolia movement in this period. I suspect this connection between R1b and CMP metalurgy has roots in lineages involved in some way with Maykop or Maykop influenced peoples in the north Black Sea area. If that was the case it is important to consider that a long period where early Maykop was in the north Caucasus in an area where steppe, Mesopotamian farmer and Iranian metallugists possibly mixed. That is probably where the baseline autosomal mix of Maykop was former. It then probably hoovered up further autosomal DNA by intermarrying with steppe peoples in the Crimea, Lower Danube as it quickly passed into those areas etc before it reached the river route to the Alps. However, that phase of spread out of the Maykop core through the north Black Sea southern steppe fringe would appear to me to have been rapid so the additional autosomal DNA picked up may have not been too dramatic.

    Anyway does anyone have any ideas about what, if any autosomal component (I would guess around the 10% mark) may have been associated with this group. I am thinking of the component that was originally called north Caucasus is the most likely signature. Dienekes for some weird reason decided to call it SW Asian but he has been heavily criticised for this because it is seem as an attempt by him to pull it away from the steppes or steppe fringe and into SW Asia to suit his IE theories which are anti-steppic. Others have said that the original terms is closer to the truth as it is centred on the north Caucasus (which touch the steppe) and is more compatible with the steppe IE theory. I am not very up on this but I have heard names like north Caucasus, Dagestan etc used for this component.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Posts
    13,888
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-Z253>BY93500
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Two things come to mind: lactase persistence and the percentage of Beaker Folk who were brachycephalic.

    Personally, I think autosomal dna is just too tricky and treacherous: dominant and recessive traits, contributed willy-nilly by both males and females, combine and recombine in a complex dance to form the ultimate human Gordian Knot.

    But I guess you're looking for one of Dienekes' named autosomal components. I'm not sufficiently up to speed on those to venture even a guess.
    Last edited by rms2; 06-14-2013 at 11:17 AM.

  3. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,011
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    This is apparently a map of north Caucasus component on Eupedia

    http://www.eupedia.com/images/conten...-admixture.gif

    I would bare in mind that the drop in the circumpontic distribution in south Ukraine may well be an illusion caused by incredible population replacement there in the last few centuries. It does bare something of a resemblance to L23XL51 in the circumpontic zone. It is apparently a component that only entered Europe in the copper age. It is absent among Basques and Finns I believe so it has been seen as one of the possible spreaders of IE. I think it cannot be emphasised enough that there is a lack of any evidence of a movement out of Anatolia in the period being discussed but a lot of evidence of spread from the north Black Sea area. For an Anatolian angle we need to go back in time to the advanced pastoralism that arose in NW Anatolia in 6000s and had spread into Bulgaria by 5200BC. At the moment that seems too early for M269. The alternative is its linked to the CMP network and the latter may have spread into Europe from Maykop in the north Caucasus via southern Urkaine Maykop derived cultures. This better fits its date. However, it is important to bare in mind that even Maykop groups and their derivatives are a result of a complex mix of pre-Maykop steppe peoples, pre-Maykop farmers from the south, Iranian and possibly late Uruk peoples that then would have got further steppe mixing and also mixing with the Old European groups that were disperesed c. 4000BC or so from the west Ukraine and north Balkans/Lower Danube. Some of them clearly settled the Balkans (and Antatolia) and others could have headed west as an offshoot up the Danube towards the Alps (L51?) they had a very complex mix of inputs. As described above they also would have experienced a complex of further local inputs as they spread into central, western and northern Europe. The question is whether a minority core of autosomal DNA remained with R1b groups as they spread through Europe. The best of the bunch I have read about is the component on the map I produced and it is in the sort of perecentages I would expect (except the southern Ukraine). Clearly though (given the Caucasus didnt experience farming settlements until 6000BC in the south and later in the north) the component is a composite and elements that went into making it up must have a history before it got to the Caucasus.

  4. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,011
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    Two things come to mind: lactase persistence and the percentage of Beaker Folk who were brachycephalic.

    Personally, I think autosomal dna is just too tricky and treacherous: dominant and recessive traits, contributed willy-nilly by both males and females, combine and recombine in a complex dance to form the ultimate human Gordian Knot.

    But I guess you're looking for one of Dienekes' named autosomal components. I'm not sufficiently up to speed on those to venture even a guess.
    The skull aspect is complicated though. It was apparently rare in Europe, Anatolia and SW Asia before 4000BC. It seems to first appear in the Balkans and North Italy in the copper age in terms of Europe. It was not even in the beaker culture in its first few centuries. It seems like a trait picked by beaker from other groups in central Europe. There is a general spread of this cranial trait in this period that is hard to link to a culture. It just seems to appear from nowhere. The same thing happened in the Medieval period in Europe for no apparent reason to do with population movement. Some say it may relate to climate. The one thing I can think off is the fact that metallurgical groups were concentrated in serious mountain areas because that is where most of the ore was (Caucasus, mountains of Iran, Carpathians, Alps etc). They may have grown up experiencing high altitude cold weather. I knoww in some of the old books the round skull tends to be associated with those who like up mountains. So ther could be a link to this and metals and mountains or the connection. After all one of the terms for a round skull is 'Alpine'. Whether this was an adaption that acted locally on all mountain groups or it was spread by one mountain group is another questions. It does seem that skull shape quickly changes in the offspring of those who change enviroment (American study).

  5. #5
    Banned
    Posts
    13,888
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF41>FGC36981
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2c3a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-Z253>BY93500
    mtDNA (P)
    K1a1a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    The large-frame-and-round-head does seem to be a mark of the Beaker Folk in the Isles, especially when contrasted with the dolichocephaly and smaller stature of the Neolithic long barrow people.

  6. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,011
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    The large-frame-and-round-head does seem to be a mark of the Beaker Folk in the Isles, especially when contrasted with the dolichocephaly and smaller stature of the Neolithic long barrow people.
    True but the early beaker folk in Iberia, southern France and even those newly arrived into the western Alps do not seem to have been of this type. That type was only picked up by the beaker culture at a later stage.

    I should probably have added that broad headedness as well as being upland associated also has a tendency to pick up to a lesser degree in extreme Atlantic areas like north Spain, Brittany, Kerry. It might be an adoption to harsh cold conditions in the typical upland or rocky exposed areas where metals are often won. That said I am not saying this was always an in-situ adaptation. It could have spread with movements of people too.

    I wonder if there are other aspects that could encourage broad headeness in the lifestype of beaker people. As well as living in rocky areas when seeking metal they had the actuall processes involved in mining and processing. They also seem to have been major travellors and its clear they spend a fair bit of time in boats (rowing?) and probably horses/wagons. They may have had a very elements-exposed lifestyle and one that may have tended to make them need to be strong and healthy robust sorts! Rounder heads are meant to be the best shape for conserving heat I understand. I even read somewhere that in modern times the plano-occupital head shape was seen as a sign of a tough life and tends to change when the environment is more comfortable.

    Babies skull shape is also to a large degree dictated by how they sleep, positions they sleep in and what they sleep on. I even read that the anti-cot death recommendations of recent decades that babies lies on their backs is moving the populations to a more mesocephaic shape compared to the alternating side sleeping that was the norm until the last couple of decades and procuded longer head shapes. A mobile group is far more likely to have the child lying or strapped in some way on its back IMO. So, there could be a whole raft of lifestyle changes associated with when metallurgical focussed groups live a mobile lifestyle in colder harsher area. I tend to think it is telling us something more about the environment, society and lifestyle of these groups than an actual genetic trait.
    Last edited by alan; 06-14-2013 at 12:07 PM.

  7. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,011
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    The large-frame-and-round-head does seem to be a mark of the Beaker Folk in the Isles, especially when contrasted with the dolichocephaly and smaller stature of the Neolithic long barrow people.
    In Ireland the lack of beaker burials make this hard to show BUT in the later beaker period (when in Ireland people were using beaker pottery domestically but burying with food vessels in death) the broad headed tall type seems to have been the norm. There is an old article in the Ulster Journal of Archaeology where someone did a multivariate scatter diagram using the skull dimensions of Neolithic and Bronze burials and the group completely split alomng the classic lines with no overlap. A group of late Iron Age and Early Christian period skulls looked like a mesocephalic hybrid. I know Coon reckoned that although broad headed they were a slighly different type to the British on the whole and similar to a German beaker related group (Adleberg or something like that). I am not sure if that would still stand up to modern scrutiny though. Regardless they were very different from the norm of western European farming and were probably a hybrid created by =a century or more of mixing between beaker elements and locals.

    In fact when those food vessels burials are combined with some of the bog bodies of the Iron Age (there is little in the way of burials otherwise c. 1800BC-0AD that was not cremated) the number of people over 6ft is really amazing. I have read that the Irish early bronze age unburnt food vessel type burials are the tallest in Europe. Also, there are only a handful of well preserved Iron Age bog bodies and of them one from Galway was something like 6ft 3 and the Old Croghan man more recently found was said to be something like 6ft 5!! (although Clontycavan man with the mowhawk was a real shorty). There was clearly an element in Ireland in the Bronze and Iron age that was extremely tall for the period. Interestingly army records show that the Irish were the tallest in Europe in the 18th century AD and only lost this in the famine.

    As well as the beaker intrusion, the beaker people did arrive at a time of particularly good climate in north Atlantic Europe (after a bad downturn) and there was a major upturn in agriculture as well as a more wide spectrum diet (including hunting) that probably suited the climate more than the early Neolithic farming strategy. That in itself probably contributed towards the taller more robust types.
    Last edited by alan; 06-14-2013 at 12:27 PM.

  8. #8
    Mediterranean imo. There is a correlation between Mediterranean and R1b in Asia and Europe to some degree.

  9. #9
    J Man
    Guest
    The strongest genetic division in Europe when it comes to autosomal genetics is a north-south one. There is also an easy-west one but it is not as pronounced as the north-south one. Anyways I think that R1b tends to correlate fairly well at least in Europe with the Mediterranean component that both Davidski and Dienekes have found in their various ADMIXTURE analysis.

  10. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,426
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by J Man View Post
    The strongest genetic division in Europe when it comes to autosomal genetics is a north-south one. There is also an easy-west one but it is not as pronounced as the north-south one. Anyways I think that R1b tends to correlate fairly well at least in Europe with the Mediterranean component that both Davidski and Dienekes have found in their various ADMIXTURE analysis.
    J Man, can you point me to where Dienekes is associating R1b with the Mediterranean component?

Page 1 of 14 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Was I2a-Din originally Finno-Ugric (not Slavic)?
    By Tomenable in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 107
    Last Post: 07-30-2019, 03:53 AM
  2. Irish Bog Butter 1500 Years Older Than Originally Thought
    By slievenamon in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-14-2019, 04:31 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-31-2016, 03:53 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-28-2014, 02:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •