R1b in Iberian Peninsula, France and the British Islands

[Taranis]

Moesan, for say that you said. Better read something before, about the European Phenotypes, acording to the haplogroups. Later, you could recognize the phenotype of an R1b carrier

Ziober, sorry but this really doesn't make sense. The point is that the Y-Haplogroup tells you absolutely nothing about the phenotypical appearance of a person. Let's take some very geographically extreme examples in terms of carriers of R1b to visualize this:

Welsh (~85% R1b):



Hausa (~40% R1b):



Bashkirs (~47% R1b):



How do you recognize the phenotype of an R1b carrier? You don't, because Y-DNA has no effect on the phenotype. Autosomal DNA is what determines the phenotype.

[Knovas]

People is really confused when start learning genetics. Taranis is right Ziober, I told you before: Haplogroups trace back to ONE ancestor who lived thousands of years ago. It doesn't reflect anything, you must take into account ALL ancestors (autosomal test).

[GloomyGonzales]

Bashkirs (~47% R1b):

Of these guys only the one in the middle is bashkir the rest are just russians dressed in bashkir traditional clothes. Bashkirs have very clear asiatic mongoloid traits.

Below pictures of Bashkirs from Gaina tribe (those famous bashkirs with R1b-U152)

05.jpg5.jpg12.jpgd4f8c65acd83.jpgx_aa439688.jpg

[Ziober]

Ziober, sorry but this really doesn't make sense. The point is that the Y-Haplogroup tells you absolutely nothing about the phenotypical appearance of a person. Let's take some very geographically extreme examples in terms of carriers of R1b to visualize this:

We are talking about R1b in Atlantic Europe. Taranis, we are seeing how you are trying to distract by the meanings of some words. But as i said, here we are talking about atlantic R1b, That is one branch leaving R1b1a2a1a1b (if the tree is correct).

Any way, i have been talking how most of british and irish people cames from iberia, and r1b is the genetic marker. I don't want to enter in labyrinths.

[Taranis]

We are talking about R1b in Atlantic Europe. Taranis, we are seeing how you are trying to distract by the meanings of some words. But as i said, here we are talking about atlantic R1b, That is one branch leaving R1b1a2a1a1b.

I am not distracting from anything. I've merely pointed out that Y-chromosomal DNA has no effect on the phenotype, and to visualize this I picked geographically extreme examples of populations which are known bearers of R1b. It does not matter if you are talking about R1b as a whole, or subclades of R1b in the Atlantic region. The statement remains the same.

[Ziober]

Egyptian mummies predate the Greeks. Can you read?

Parts of Eastern Europe lack R1b completely. I would believe a dual migration of R1b from Anatolia through the Caucuses, as well from Northern Africa, through the Iberian Peninsula. As for the statement, which you appear to make with hostility, that Iberian and English R1b is the same - we agree upon. The consideration should be made as to the origin of the haplogroup. It's known that Northern Africa was light skinned, and and only became mixed with slaves when Egyptian civilization collapsed.

I think so.

[Ziober]

I am not distracting from anything. I've merely pointed out that Y-chromosomal DNA has no effect on the phenotype, and to visualize this I picked geographically extreme examples of populations which are known bearers of R1b. It does not matter if you are talking about R1b as a whole, or subclades of R1b in the Atlantic region. The statement remains the same.

If you think that R1b has no effect on the phenotype, i have nothing to tell you...

[Taranis]

If you think that R1b has no effect on the phenotype, i have nothing to tell you...

Well, remember that R1b is an Y-Haplogroup. This means we are only talking about DNA on the Y-chromosome. Women have no Y-chromosome. If there was some phenotypical feature that was defined by the Y-chromosome, then obviously women wouldn't have it.

[Ziober]

Well, remember that R1b is an Y-Haplogroup. This means we are only talking about DNA on the Y-chromosome. Women have no Y-chromosome. If there was some phenotypical feature that was defined by the Y-chromosome, then obviously women wouldn't have it.

I agree it's only Y-crhomosome, but r1b has relationship with alleles carried on different chromosomes in the same individual wich brings to it phenotypics characters.

[Knovas]

Another example are African American males. You can find thousands of them carrying the most common R1b branches in Europe, and they look no way European. Haplogroups are helpful to trace ancient migrations, but they cannot tell about the full inheritance (hence, no phenotypical information could be extracted).

[MOESAN]

Shit! I lost the post I had written with all my hart (and my brain) to support the poor Ziober -
I 'll do it again tomorrow, just I say: your logic, Knovas and Taranis, appears to me basic and somewhat distorded about chromosoms (Y, autosomals) and mt DNA links...

[MOESAN]

"my heart" (gast ar hast! sorry)

Knovas and Taranis, you are right at first sight; it is true that mt DNA HGs, Y DNA HGs and autosomal genes are not linked one together by themselves, being on different chromosomes (Y, autosomals) or in cells (mt) - even for autosomals, they are dispersed on a lot of chromosomes, so for an indiviual, no link OK - but there is a statistical link (even if elastic) between all these genes at a collective level -

the only ways that a previous distributions of all these genes could drastically change in a population are:
hazard drift in a small population (founder effect), the case of ancient small families or tribes : it can have a strong result on Y-DNA, very less on the autosomals as a whole – less effect in today big populations – this is well shown by some african tribes and Bashkirs, I think -
social-political drift linked to male elites taking wives outside of their ethny leading to an over-representation of some Y-HGs : it seams it could have played a heavy enough role in « barbarians » times, more than today, but in what proportions ? This could be too a part of the explanation for Africans Y-R1b and Bashkirs, joined to the hazard cause of drift ? -
natural environmental selection (pressure) : it can not change all the genome and if it played surely an evident role at the sunrise of modern humanity it does not modify the external phenotypical genes to much in the present times (i do not expect a too big evolution about skin colour in future, by instance, but by « racial » crossings, and partially, by social classes selection – we know that Cro-Magnon was not the better equipped type for survive in cold climate and nevertheless they took the advantage on better fitted Neanderthals, according to scientists, so adaptation capacity by intelligence is not too new for Man -
about Y-DNA providing advantages or disadvantages, I wait knowing more (not only newly written papers « scooplike ») – these effect could affect the Y-DNA pool distribution more than the external phenotypes


it is true that in South Western Europe, the autosomals could have been changed at a noticeable level by a constant flow of genes by females of the Mediterranean shores (some surveys, outdated maybe, said that) between final Paleo and Neolithic , flow that could be very difficult to discover by archeology: some evolution of metric means on Mesolithic skeletons that show considerable gracilization and oter modifications of face and body could be the result of South and Eastern demic influences (contacts) upon the previous cromagnoid stock and not only the effect of internal mutational evolution... ? (I keep the capellids or brünns elements aside for their influences by crossing seam to me very evident and not confusing with evolution) - I confess I need more detailed and up-to-date well sampled surveys about mt-DNA in these areas (I have not too much money to purchase all the papers edited today) – nevertheless some evident phenotypical links appear within Iberians and Atlantic european shores, hard to evaluate very precisely but evident yet – less evident for more continental regions of Western Europe –
a bet : my present thought is that spite of some drift due to social male domination (the Steppes people showed social tendencies I link to that) the western dominating pool of Y-DNA in Europe is ancient in place (without speaking about later internal movements in closer times of History) – I see no reason for far coming Steppes tribes could overflow an already well developped population (about demographics) of neolithic peoples and neolithicized mesolithic ones. So if the western european males are european for a long time, I understand the phenotypical differences between regions without an only strictly female stocks explanation -

[Taranis]

Moesan, you have a point about autosomal and mitochondrial DNA, yes. But that doesn't change anything about the fact that:

1) there is no such thing as an "R1b race".

2) the origins of Y-Haplogroup R1b are clearly outside of Europe.

3) the modern dominance of R1b in Western Europe is the result of a founder effect during the late(st) Neolithic / early Bronze Age (again, Moeasan, if we are looking at mitochondrial/autosomal DNA, the picture is a very different one).

4) R1b in Western Europe (the clade R1b-L51 and it's "son" clades) is phylogenetically tied with other subclades of R1b found in Anatolia (L584) and the Balkans (ht35). By what route R1b entered Western Europe is unclear as of the moment.

5) the hypothesis that the distribution of R1b can be tied with the expansion from the Iberian Glacial Refuge at the end of the ice age has been thoroughly debunked at this point. Who claims otherwise, and I am very sorry that I have to say this, must be either unaware of the research results of the past four or so years (which, I hope, shouldn't be the case anymore after reading this), or wishes to consciously ignore these research results (for whatever reason).

[Ziober]

"my heart" (gast ar hast! sorry)

Knovas and Taranis, you are right at first sight; it is true that mt DNA HGs, Y DNA HGs and autosomal genes are not linked one together by themselves, being on different chromosomes (Y, autosomals) or in cells (mt) - even for autosomals, they are dispersed on a lot of chromosomes, so for an indiviual, no link OK - but there is a statistical link (even if elastic) between all these genes at a collective level -

the only ways that a previous distributions of all these genes could drastically change in a population are:
hazard drift in a small population (founder effect), the case of ancient small families or tribes : it can have a strong result on Y-DNA, very less on the autosomals as a whole – less effect in today big populations – this is well shown by some african tribes and Bashkirs, I think -
social-political drift linked to male elites taking wives outside of their ethny leading to an over-representation of some Y-HGs : it seams it could have played a heavy enough role in « barbarians » times, more than today, but in what proportions ? This could be too a part of the explanation for Africans Y-R1b and Bashkirs, joined to the hazard cause of drift ? -
natural environmental selection (pressure) : it can not change all the genome and if it played surely an evident role at the sunrise of modern humanity it does not modify the external phenotypical genes to much in the present times (i do not expect a too big evolution about skin colour in future, by instance, but by « racial » crossings, and partially, by social classes selection – we know that Cro-Magnon was not the better equipped type for survive in cold climate and nevertheless they took the advantage on better fitted Neanderthals, according to scientists, so adaptation capacity by intelligence is not too new for Man -
about Y-DNA providing advantages or disadvantages, I wait knowing more (not only newly written papers « scooplike ») – these effect could affect the Y-DNA pool distribution more than the external phenotypes


it is true that in South Western Europe, the autosomals could have been changed at a noticeable level by a constant flow of genes by females of the Mediterranean shores (some surveys, outdated maybe, said that) between final Paleo and Neolithic , flow that could be very difficult to discover by archeology: some evolution of metric means on Mesolithic skeletons that show considerable gracilization and oter modifications of face and body could be the result of South and Eastern demic influences (contacts) upon the previous cromagnoid stock and not only the effect of internal mutational evolution... ? (I keep the capellids or brünns elements aside for their influences by crossing seam to me very evident and not confusing with evolution) - I confess I need more detailed and up-to-date well sampled surveys about mt-DNA in these areas (I have not too much money to purchase all the papers edited today) – nevertheless some evident phenotypical links appear within Iberians and Atlantic european shores, hard to evaluate very precisely but evident yet – less evident for more continental regions of Western Europe –
a bet : my present thought is that spite of some drift due to social male domination (the Steppes people showed social tendencies I link to that) the western dominating pool of Y-DNA in Europe is ancient in place (without speaking about later internal movements in closer times of History) – I see no reason for far coming Steppes tribes could overflow an already well developped population (about demographics) of neolithic peoples and neolithicized mesolithic ones. So if the western european males are european for a long time, I understand the phenotypical differences between regions without an only strictly female stocks explanation -

Thanks Moesan.

[Ziober]

http://ifc.dpz.es/recursos/publicaci.../54/26koch.pdf

[Ziober]

R1b can be used as marker about celtic expansion. I'll try to explain the common characteristics in Red Nordic ethnicity (the most important ethnicity in celt people). Not only we must look at hair or eyes colour. There are some important features...



- Pheomelanin produces red skin in ancestrial ones, rosy and bloody skin, in mixes with other ethnicities, the bloody appearance tends to retreat to the face, and in the face, to cheeks, ears, in rest of body is voiced in parts where the bones are next to surface. People with a tendency to blush, have Red Nordic contributions.

- head; high and vertical frontal bone with prominent forebrains and prominent temporal bones. Larger cranial capacity (frontal bone) and sideward (temporal bones).

- Small pupils, dark blue colour in pure individuals (the dark green is by mixing whit brown eyed ancestors, light green needs the ice blue colour of I haplogroup)

- Strong jaw, squared, broad and robust jaw. Prominent and sharp chin, which seems to end in a fleshy ball

- Small mouth with extremely thin and narrow lips. The outline of the lips is not clearly defined, nor differenced from the rest of the skin.

- Others; Accelerated metabolism. Neoteny: very youthful look. Higher lactose and alcohol tolerance than any other ethnicities. Armenized RN have their orange hair get darker, turning to red and then auburn, while when mixed with White Nordids they have a sandy, somewhat flaming hair colour.

even if every thing is linked in Man (and other problems too, very often) - as do Taranis I find that this last discussion concerns more a classical anthropologic one - just an answer: under some lightings even a black haired Asiat or negroid African could show some reddish hues: you prove only if you do it that some dark haired european have not true black hue - nothing new, there are a lot of variants in homozygotic and more in heterizygotic human people colours from the almost white blond to the very jet dark colour... but here the topic is primarily "Y-R1b"!
no offense!

Those aren't hues. I had seen all him coat burning in front of me. It can be show under halogen lights too.

[Ziober]

In spite of that, i don't want to center my explanations in phenotypes. i'll talk about celt expansions. I have noticed that mostly people only talk about one route of celt expansion... Why don't 2 or 3 or...

branches from a proto-protocelt populations, wich were divided in protocelts populations before their knowledge culminate in what is now known as Celtic culture. Such knowledge would evolve toward the same destination, they had a common base of knowledge.

If not, i suspect that proto-celt core is in SW iberia. By mounds of evidence.

[MOESAN]

Moesan, you have a point about autosomal and mitochondrial DNA, yes. But that doesn't change anything about the fact that:

1) there is no such thing as an "R1b race".

2) the origins of Y-Haplogroup R1b are clearly outside of Europe.

3) the modern dominance of R1b in Western Europe is the result of a founder effect during the late(st) Neolithic / early Bronze Age (again, Moeasan, if we are looking at mitochondrial/autosomal DNA, the picture is a very different one).

4) R1b in Western Europe (the clade R1b-L51 and it's "son" clades) is phylogenetically tied with other subclades of R1b found in Anatolia (L584) and the Balkans (ht35). By what route R1b entered Western Europe is unclear as of the moment.



5) the hypothesis that the distribution of R1b can be tied with the expansion from the Iberian Glacial Refuge at the end of the ice age has been thoroughly debunked at this point. Who claims otherwise, and I am very sorry that I have to say this, must be either unaware of the research results of the past four or so years (which, I hope, shouldn't be the case anymore after reading this), or wishes to consciously ignore these research results (for whatever reason).

I never said there was a specific Y-R1b "race" (the same for whatever Y-DNA big HG or subHG and any "race") - I think just that at a time point of History, a dominant Y-HG % can be associated with dominant phenotypic (among the autosomals) % or a steady enough admixture and that for centuries the propagation og this Y-HG can go along with the propagation of this admixture, even if in detail the %s can fluctuate - sure things change but not passing from 100% to 0% or the contrary in an wink - ma first aim was to say: it is almost naive believing and saying that "there is NO link and there HAS BEEN NEVER any link between some HGs and some autosomals genes (and too with some mt HGs)" -
long time ago I 've agreed ('accepted' would be better said because I 'm not a molecular DNA studies searcher)
that Y-R1b came from Asia - It changes nothing in the problem of dates we have here -
I would be very glad if it was proved that R1b came with I-E people at the Bronze Age (linguistically it would fit better to my believings) but even if I do not reject the possible I-E origin for our occidental R1bs I am still VERY AMAZED BY SO A DISTRIBUTION IN WESTERN EUROPE CAUSED BY A FOUNDER EFFECT PRODUCING IN A SO SHORT TIME A SO RICH BUNCH OF SUB-HGs, taking the strong side over Y-I through SOUTH AND NORTH at the same time or almost- so I feal pushed to think that maybe the I-E arrival or the Y-R1b (independantly) arrival could have found place earlier than thought by the most of people now...I said the scenario of R1b propagation could suit more than a period - I am a modest hobbyist and I never said the truth was with me: it is just a fealing in front of some geographical an demographic facts - I 'm not trying to do adepts! + As I already said I have a poor confidence in STRs datations -
concerning mtDNA, it seams to me that the distribution of mt HGs is disconnected from the other genes for a long time and surely from almost all the Y-DNA HGs... not by the fact that there would not be any statistical link but by the fact that the mutation rates are very different; we could consider that mtDNA (mother mediated) would be steadier, less quickly mixed with other mt populations but we see exactly the contrary: a level distribution in the whole Europe, or almost... mt DNA seams even more disconnected from autosomals

to conclude, I ALMOST agree with you but I wait facts that can make this theory less amazing concerning demography - founder effects need some conditions to be produced (low densities of population by instance and great dispersal ) even the male elite theory (very valid indeed) can not explain total reaplacement of male genetic pools -
with all my respect

[sparkey]

R1b can be used as marker about celtic expansion.

Don't you want to narrow that down to subclades? Because a cursory glance at the few R1b P25- samples we have shows that R1b as a whole isn't Celtic.

- Small pupils, dark blue colour in pure individuals (the dark green is by mixing whit brown eyed ancestors, light green needs the ice blue colour of I haplogroup)

OK, even after ignoring all of your phenotypes that you like to associate with R1b, this doesn't make much sense. The spread of blue eyes into Europe maps pretty poorly with R1b... to me, it matches more closely to certain subclades of R1a+N1c, and I1. Since I1 has a young TMRCA, and probably didn't really expand until it was absorbed into a population that also contained R1a, that makes me think that the spread of blue eyes into Europe is probably linked to an R1a-dominant population. But even if I'm wrong, and, say, blue eyes are older than the westward spread of R1a, then R1b is still a poor match with the spread of blue eyes.

In spite of that, i don't want to center my explanations in phenotypes. i'll talk about celt expansions. I have noticed that mostly people only talk about one route of celt expansion... Why don't 2 or 3 or...

branches from a proto-protocelt populations, wich were divided in protocelts populations before their knowledge culminate in what is now known as Celtic culture. Such knowledge would evolve toward the same destination, they had a common base of knowledge.

If not, i suspect that proto-celt core is in SW iberia. By mounds of evidence.

Don't get your hopes up for a "single-origin-out-of-SW-Iberia" theory. I do, however, think that Celtic peoples are more ancient to the Atlantic region than the "purely-Halstatt/La-Tene" theory would suggest. So I think you're getting at an important point, at least, when you mention that there were probably multiple important routes of Celtic expansion. My initial thought is that Celtic languages evolved somewhere in Central or Western Europe from a common proto-Italo-Celtic, which had drifted from rather farther east. (I know that's not very specific, but it's tough to get more specific than that for now.) And after that, an Atlantic spread and a later Alpine Iron Age spread were both important. That's my guess for now, anyway... I think it fits nicely with the modern distributions of R1b-P312 and its subclades, as well as what we know about the Celtic languages and their complex familial relationships to one another.

[sparkey]

to conclude, I ALMOST agree with you but I wait facts that can make this theory less amazing concerning demography - founder effects need some conditions to be produced (low densities of population by instance and great dispersal ) even the male elite theory (very valid indeed) can not explain total reaplacement of male genetic pools -
with all my respect

On the contrary, I think that genetic drift is often underrated, at least on the Y-line. Keep in mind that most ancient European cultures (and most ancient worldwide cultures for that matter) encouraged polygyny, but not polyandry. I think that's why we see rapid drift on the Y line, but not the mtDNA line.

Think about it this way: If a culture encourages an average of just under 2 wives per man, then we can expect about 1/2 of men every generation to pass on their Y line, with many more (say 9/10) women passing on their mtDNA line. So, in a generation of 200, we can expect the next generation of 200 to have 90 of the original mtDNA lines, but only 50 of the original Y lines. After 5 generations, 22 of the original Y lines have survived. After 10, 14 have. After 50, 4 have. Compare to the mtDNA line, which has 65 of the original lines after 5 generations, 48 after 10, and 16 after 50.

[Goga]

But even if I'm wrong, and, say, blue eyes are older than the westward spread of R1a, then R1b is still a poor match with the spread of blue eyes.

According to this study: "Haplogroup R1a as the Proto Indo-Europeans and the Legendary Aryans as Witnessed by the DNA of Their Current Descendants" (you can find .pdf file on google) R1a existed in Europe 10,000 - 9,000 years ago.

When R1a (and R1b) migrated into Europe, R1* had a West Asian / Gedrosia aDNA identity / character . Later it mixed with the local European population and it transformed into an unique European identity.


That's why NorthWest European and West Asian aDNA are very very close to each other.

[Goga]

It's even possible that R1a was in Western Europe even before R1b or that R1a and R1b migrated into Europe from NorthWest Iranian Plateau ( / Kurdistan) at the same time.

[Taranis]

If not, i suspect that proto-celt core is in SW iberia. By mounds of evidence.

I must second what Sparkey said: do not get your hopes high for such an idea.

This is a map that was published by Alexander Falileyev of the University of Aberystwyth in Wales. It shows the distribution of (Continental) Celtic place names inside the domain of the Roman Empire. As you can easily see from it, Celtic place names are most abundant in the north of the Iberian peninsula, rather than the southwest. How likely is it then that the Celtic-speaking peoples originated in the Southwest and then migrated across half of Europe from there?

According to this study: "Haplogroup R1a as the Proto Indo-Europeans and the Legendary Aryans as Witnessed by the DNA of Their Current Descendants" (you can find .pdf file on google) R1a existed in Europe 10,000 - 9,000 years ago.

When R1a (and R1b) migrated into Europe, R1* had a West Asian / Gedrosia aDNA identity / character . Later it mixed with the local European population and it transformed into an unique European identity.


That's why NorthWest European and West Asian aDNA are very very close to each other.

Goga, the idea R1a = Indo-Europeans is quite a bit of a simplification of the matter, and the meme "one Haplogroup = one ethnic group" is certainly wrong.

Also, R1* as the original Indo-European Haplogroup is certainly wrong, as it vastly predates the presumed age of the Indo-European languages (regardless of which scenario you prefer) by many millennia.

[Goga]

Goga, the idea R1a = Indo-Europeans is quite a bit of a simplification of the matter, and the meme "one Haplogroup = one ethnic group" is certainly wrong.

Also, R1* as the original Indo-European Haplogroup is certainly wrong, as it vastly predates the presumed age of the Indo-European languages (regardless of which scenario you prefer) by many millennia.

Exactly! It's even possible that R1a folks got Indo-Europised by R1b & J2a folks from the Balkans.

Or that those folks (R1b & J2) were first part of the West-Asian Maykop culture and influenced and Indo-Europised Yamnaya folks in the Steppes. So that makes R1b (together with J2a) the original speakers of a Proto-Indo-European language.

I'm starting to believe that proto-Indo-Europeans were hg. R1b, J2 and & G2 folks involved somewhere around the Caucasus..

[Degredado]

I always get the impression that R1a guys on internet forums tend to be very protective about their "exclusive" "Indo-Europeanness"...