P312 in "Massive migration from the steppe is a source for IE languages in Europe"

[MitchellSince1893]

Excerpts from the new paper on P312.

I0806 (Bell_Beaker_LN)
The individual was assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a1a2 based on mutation P312:22157311C→A.
Two Bell Beaker individuals from Kromsdorf, Germany were previously determined2 to belong to
haplogroup R1b.
The individual also has upstream mutations for R1 (P236:17782178C→G), R1b1
(L278:18914441C→T), R1b1a2 (F1794:14522828G→A), and R1b1a2a1 (L51:8502236G→A). Its
haplotype is ancestral for R1b1a2a1a2a1a1a (S1217:7193830C→G, Z262:16320197C→T),
R1b1a2a1a2c1a (DF49:22735599G→A), R1b1a2a1a2c1a1 (DF23:17774409G→A), R1b1a2a1a2c1f1
(L554:15022777A→G), R1b1a2a1a2c1f2 (S868:19033817T→C), R1b1a2a1a2c1i
(CTS6581:16992602T→C) and R1b1a2a1a2c1l1a1 (CTS2457.2:14313081C→T).

I0806 Bell_Beaker_LN Bell Beaker LN Quedlinburg VII 2, Germany; QLB28b, feature 19617 2296-2206 cal BCE (MAMS 22820) Germany M H1 R1b1a2a1a2

Is this the earliest confirmed P312 sample at ~4250 ybp?
My estimate, based on SNP counting method, is P312 is about 4740 years old (+/-750 years)

I0099 Halberstadt_LBA Late Bronze Age LBA Halberstadt-Sonntagsfeld, Germany; HAL36C, grave 40, feature 1114 1113-1021 cal BCE (MAMS 21484) Germany M H23 R1a1a1b1a2 337566

How doos this age and location further our understanding of P312?

[VinceT]

I0099 is R1a.

I hope they can do further testing on I0806. It would really be nice to know if he's under any of the known R-P312 sub-clades.

BTW, there are about 18 SNPs between R-P312 and R-L23.

5 at R-L51:
- PF6535
- PF6414
- L51/M412/PF6536/S167
- CTS8595/YSC0001291
- CTS10373/FGC39/PF6537

13 [or 14] at R-L11:
- FGC796/Y101/Z8159
- PF6415
- PF5856
- PF6540/YSC0000082
- S26903 [unconfirmed]
- L52/PF6541
- L151/PF6542
- PF6543/S1159/YSC0000191
- CTS7650/FGC44/PF6544
- PF6538
- L11/PF6539/S127
- P311/PF6545/S128
- P310/PF6546/S129
- CTS10353/S1175/YSC0001249

[MitchellSince1893]

I0099 is R1a.
...

Oops you are right. I will edit my original post.

BTW, there are about 18 SNPs between R-P312 and R-L23

I had 13 so the additional 5 would add about 400 years to age of L23

[rms2]

I wonder if L51, or the L23 ancestral to it, did not leave the PC steppe in one of Gimbutas' first two Kurgan waves to move west. Samara, after all, is pretty far east, and Yamnaya, if I recall correctly, was the third and final wave.

Anyway, here are a couple of images I posted on another thread that are relevant to a possible Yamnaya-Beaker connection via Vucedol (Gimbutas derived Beaker from Vucedol).

Carpathian Basin 3rd Millennium Kulcsar and Szeverenyi.jpg Carpathian Basin 3rd Millennium Kulcsar and Szeverenyi Pedestalled Bowls p 76.jpg

Those images come from the paper, Transition to the Bronze Age: Issues of Continuity and Discontinuity in the First Half of the Third Millennium BC in the Carpathian Basin.

[alan]

It always seemed likely that Kromsdorf c. 2550BC M269xU106 was either L11 or P312 to me although we cannot prove it.

[alan]

I wonder if L51, or the L23 ancestral to it, did not leave the PC steppe in one of Gimbutas' first two Kurgan waves to move west. Samara, after all, is pretty far east, and Yamnaya, if I recall correctly, was the third and final wave.

Anyway, here are a couple of images I posted on another thread that are relevant to a possible Yamnaya-Beaker connection via Vucedol (Gimbutas derived Beaker from Vucedol).

Carpathian Basin 3rd Millennium Kulcsar and Szeverenyi.jpg Carpathian Basin 3rd Millennium Kulcsar and Szeverenyi Pedestalled Bowls p 76.jpg

Those images come from the paper, Transition to the Bronze Age: Issues of Continuity and Discontinuity in the First Half of the Third Millennium BC in the Carpathian Basin.

I think if we chase the peoples/languages and accept there is huge discontinuity in geography then it reveals that both Centum languages in the west and apparently satemised Balkans branch groups like Armenian and Albanian/Dacian have/had a lot of L23xL51 and little L51 and derived. I suppose it is possible that those languages/tribes hung around the steppe longer than L51 and the reason could be that they were located around Samara and that part of the steppe rather than further west in the steppes.

We have got into the habit of thinking that L23xL51 clades are older than L51 but that may be a wrongheaded. In reality it is the earlier branching of IE - lets say the case of Tarim and Tocharian is too hypotetical to be useful- Celtic, Italic and Germanic which are clearly associated with L11 derivatives not L23xL51. The languages which tend to be associated with the latter are Balkans and Armenian languages. Indeed one centum language, Greek is also.

So, it kind of suggests a sequence of waves to me with Celtic-Italic-Germanic breaking off first and linked to L51 and the space they left being filled with L23xL51 types, some of whom broke off before Satemisation - Greek-and others of which remained on or hard against the steppes long enough to be satemised before spreading west and south -i.e. Armenian, Albanian and perhaps Thracian and Dacian. I have noticed its common to see the Greeks and perhaps Thracians as relatively late splits from the steppes.

So perhaps the more easterly L23xL51 types didnt move into the Ukraine vacuum and then the Balkans until L51/L52 had left the steppes. Contrary to commonly help opinion, with the exception of Armenians, L23xL51 is a great deal more common in the north Caucasus than the south so perhaps some of it ended up there. As for M269xL23 its common in the Balkans among Albanians and also Armenians of Ararat if we are primarily looking at IE dialects which are both satemised languages with links to the Balkan group of physically to the Balkans. So it seems to also have a similar history to L23xL51 and perhaps it also was more easterly within the steppes and therefore late arriving in the Balkans etc. This may seem counterintuitive to phylogeny but it makes perfect sense.

I think this new data and what it means for the SNP counting ages of various R1b clades from L23 to P312 is going to help us rule in and out some of the archaeological options we have been chewing over.

[alan]

Looking around the net at other sites on this paper is an incredible lesson on how pride can be very ugly and how people will argue black is white if something doesnt suit their identity. Also how seriously lacking in class some people are.

[alan]

I wonder if L51, or the L23 ancestral to it, did not leave the PC steppe in one of Gimbutas' first two Kurgan waves to move west. Samara, after all, is pretty far east, and Yamnaya, if I recall correctly, was the third and final wave.

Anyway, here are a couple of images I posted on another thread that are relevant to a possible Yamnaya-Beaker connection via Vucedol (Gimbutas derived Beaker from Vucedol).

Carpathian Basin 3rd Millennium Kulcsar and Szeverenyi.jpg Carpathian Basin 3rd Millennium Kulcsar and Szeverenyi Pedestalled Bowls p 76.jpg

Those images come from the paper, Transition to the Bronze Age: Issues of Continuity and Discontinuity in the First Half of the Third Millennium BC in the Carpathian Basin.

I have suspected that some R1b could been involved in wave I or the Suvorovo wave of Anthony. As far as I recall though, this was a very small wave with small numbers of graves having been found. So its hard to know what y lines were involved and of course the model of Anatolian passing from the steppes to the Balkans to Anatolia in this period has always been a bit light on archaeological evidence for the taste of many. Then again in archaeological terms there is no actual Yamnaya sweep across Europe but somehow the Yamnaya genes moved, presumably through intermediary cultures.

[razyn]

I had 13 so the additional 5 would add about 400 years to age of L23

I think this is the crazy part of estimating TMRCA by counting SNPs. If the SNPs don't make distinct nodes and leave separate branches, what evidence do we have that they have occurred serially? As distinguished from 13 happening to one guy, at one time and place; and all of his patrilineal descendants having that cluster of 13 mutations (at different loci) -- whether born in the very next generation, or a thousand years later? If the latter were the case for these 5 (e.g.), they would of necessity add just one generation (or birth event), not five times the observed average rate of 80 years between mutations. Which (average rate) btw gets shorter every time we have a better testing method, find another multitude of SNPs, and distribute them along the trees we have been building.

[Megalophias]

I think this is the crazy part of estimating TMRCA by counting SNPs. If the SNPs don't make distinct nodes and leave separate branches, what evidence do we have that they have occurred serially? As distinguished from 13 happening to one guy, at one time and place; and all of his patrilineal descendants having that cluster of 13 mutations (at different loci) -- whether born in the very next generation, or a thousand years later? If the latter were the case for these 5 (e.g.), they would of necessity add just one generation (or birth event), not five times the observed average rate of 80 years between mutations. Which (average rate) btw gets shorter every time we have a better testing method, find another multitude of SNPs, and distribute them along the trees we have been building.

Mutations do not accumulate at a steady rate; they happen randomly. So yes, a whole bunch can happen at once, or they can be spread over a long time. If you look at a Y haplogroup tree that shows the branch lengths, you can see that the number of mutations in a lineage from a given node to the present - a fixed amount of time - can vary wildly. You can have no SNPs at all on one line and 12 on another. If you estimated the age of the node from only one branch in these sort of cases, you'd get wildly different (and erroneous) dates.

Using an average rate just gives the most likely time, not a certain date. Most of the time the number of mutations will be close to the expected value and not an outlier, so usually your estimated date will not be too far off. If you have many branches descending from one node independently, then you can average them out and hopefully get closer to the true number that way. But it's still just a best estimate with large error bars.