New paper: R1b1b2 Arrived in Europe During the Neolithic

[how yes no 3]

Another aspect that should be mentioned is that most of Western European R1b is indeed member of R1b-L51, which is the main subclade of R1b-M269. In turn R1b-L51 is dominated by R1b-L11 (aka R1b-P310), which is rarely found outside of western Europe. This is consistent with the above mentioned scenario of a founder effect. You can see this clearly from this map of R1b-M269 without R1b-L11 (xL11):

I find this picture very interesting

it suggests me that R1b - L11 could have been dominant haplogroup of Goths (also of some other Germanic and non-Germanic people)

why?
light areas (more L11) in east Europe match roughly maximal spread of Goths

and in Asia minor it may be related to Gutians who destroyed Akkadian empire thus staying roughly in light area...

also there are historic claims that Ostrogoths were never big in numbers in south Italy only in north one... and Visigoths would explain dominance of L11 in Spain...darker spot is in most south area where Vandals and Alans were holding positions for a while... so area not initially settled by Goths..

rule of thumb is that latest arrival makes biggest genetic impact... so Goths cannot be explained with low in frequency I1 in genetic map of Spain...

 

[sparkey]

it suggests me that R1b - L11 could have been dominant haplogroup of Goths (also of some other Germanic and non-Germanic people)

To say that most Gothic R1b was L11+ is a really non-controversial suggestion. Why would we expect Goths to have a lot of R1b L11-? Older forms of R1b along the cline toward Western Europe, like L11- L51+, really don't extend that far North or West. And the only particularly common one anywhere in Europe is R1b-ht35, which is very much Southeastern European (and may have expanded out of a different population than R1b-L11 to begin with).

The only thing I'd point out is that the Goths may have had comparable levels of I1 and R1a.

Visigoths would explain dominance of L11 in Spain...

This is a much more controversial suggestion. You're saying that Goths brought the R1b-Z196 to Spain? The diversity and distribution really doesn't allow for that. I'd limit Gothic R1b in Spain to mostly just R1b-U106.

 

[how yes no 3]

The only thing I'd point out is that the Goths may have had comparable levels of I1 and R1a.

i don't think it was comparable level. Otherwise, we would see much more of R1a and I1 in lands that were eventually settled by Goths (north Italy, south France and especially Spain).

This is a much more controversial suggestion. You're saying that Goths brought the R1b-Z196 to Spain? The diversity and distribution really doesn't allow for that. I'd limit Gothic R1b in Spain to mostly just R1b-U106.

I say that Goths brought some, not all, of R1b-L11 in Spain. But enough to make a difference between role of L11 in areas settled by Goths and south most areas where Vandals and Alans were resisting when Goths settled most of Spain. Vandals probably had more R1a and R1b x L11 as they came from lands that were likely more influenced by R1a and R1b xL11. So the darker spot on the south of Spain (core of Andalusia named by Vandals) in the map above should also have more R1a than the rest of the Spain. Visigoths did eventually took over that part as well, but the strongest genetic impact is made in the places that are initially (and thus most heavily) settled, and not in the places that were later annexed. That is comparable to Herzegovina that was the place where Serbs (and Croats?) initially settled in Balkans giving rise to a peak in I2a2-Din.

I think that some other germanic tribes such as Suebi and Franks probably also had significant R1b-L11. And some of it is probably due to previous Celtic settlements. We can also see darker spot roughly in area of France where Burgundians have initially settled indicating that they perhaps had less of R1b-L11.

 

[sparkey]

i don't think it was comparable level. Otherwise, we would see much more of R1a and I1 in lands that were eventually settled by Goths (north Italy, south France and especially Spain).

How much more? Wilhelm earlier posted estimates of the different typically Germanic haplogroup subclades in Spain as follows:

Well, the subclade I1b2 is also considered Germanic, and parts of Spain, like Castille has 19% or Cadiz(Andalusia) 10.7%, and Cantabria has 8% of R1a. But besides this, for germanic influence (since Visigoths were not the only the Germanics here, there were also Vandals, Suevi, Franks, etc) I would make :

Q + I1 + I2b + R1a + R1b-U106 = 0.28 + 3.35 + 2.24 + 2 + 7.7 = 15.25

Those look reasonable to me, and considering that the Suebi and Franks (higher R1b-U106 and I2, but maybe lower I1 and more certainly lower R1a and Q) also settled in Spain significantly, it looks to me like the Goths contributed I1 and R1a at comparable levels as R1b-U106. I mean, if we take R1a+Q as basically Gothic in this context and "I2b" as basically West Germanic in this context, we have 2.24 + 0.28 = ~2.5% unique Gothic contribution and ~2.5% unique West Germanic contribution, so R1b-U106 from the Goths is about ~3.75%, only a little higher than apparently Gothic I1 and R1a in Spain. And these all have big error bars.

I say that Goths brought some, not all, of R1b-L11 in Spain. But enough to make a difference between role of L11 in areas settled by Goths and south most areas where Vandals and Alans were resisting when Goths settled most of Spain.

OK, so you agree that the low single digit percentage of R1b-U106 in Spain brought there by Goths isn't really on the same scale as the R1b-Z196 that dominates northeastern Spain?

I think that some other germanic tribes such as Suebi and Franks probably also had significant R1b-L11. And some of it is probably due to previous Celtic settlements.

They probably had a ton of R1b-U106, yes, and maybe a non-trivial amount of R1b-U152, accounting for a lot of the R1b-U106 in particular in Spain. But is there any evidence that R1b-Z196 dates to anything after the Bronze Age in Spain?

 

[Taranis]

How much more? Wilhelm earlier posted estimates of the different typically Germanic haplogroup subclades in Spain as follows:



Those look reasonable to me, and considering that the Suebi and Franks (higher R1b-U106 and I2, but maybe lower I1 and more certainly lower R1a and Q) also settled in Spain significantly, it looks to me like the Goths contributed I1 and R1a at comparable levels as R1b-U106. I mean, if we take R1a+Q as basically Gothic in this context and "I2b" as basically West Germanic in this context, we have 2.24 + 0.28 = ~2.5% unique Gothic contribution and ~2.5% unique West Germanic contribution, so R1b-U106 from the Goths is about ~3.75%, only a little higher than apparently Gothic I1 and R1a in Spain. And these all have big error bars.



OK, so you agree that the low single digit percentage of R1b-U106 in Spain brought there by Goths isn't really on the same scale as the R1b-Z196 that dominates northeastern Spain?



They probably had a ton of R1b-U106, yes, and maybe a non-trivial amount of R1b-U152, accounting for a lot of the R1b-U106 in particular in Spain. But is there any evidence that R1b-Z196 dates to anything after the Bronze Age in Spain?

There's an interesting question: how much of I2a2 (old I2b) was actually spread by the Germanic migrations. I mean, I find the case rather convincing that most or all of I1 was exclusively spread by the Germanic migrations, but does this really hold true for I2a2 as well? For one, it would appear that I2a2 as a whole is older.

Regarding R1b-11, I'd like to remind that the map I re-posted displays R1b-M269 without L11, not L11 without it's major subclades U106 and P312.

 

[sparkey]

There's an interesting question: how much of I2a2 (old I2b) was actually spread by the Germanic migrations. I mean, I find the case rather convincing that most or all of I1 was exclusively spread by the Germanic migrations, but does this really hold true for I2a2 as well? For one, it would appear that I2a2 as a whole is older.

The thing about I2a2 (old I2b) is that it is apparently very ancient in Central Europe, with a couple of ancient branches in Britain and an ancient branch that extends into Eastern Europe. Of these, the most common ("Roots" and "Cont" in Nordtvedt's haplotype terminology) appear to have been absorbed into West Germanic populations more than anything, but also extend beyond that. In the context of Spain, I think most of the I2a2 is West Germanic, but there could also be some that is of Celtic (especially any I2a2b there, I don't think it's common though) and East Germanic origin.

Either way, I'm just using it as a rough approximation for relative concentrations in my analysis above, you can try another route for determining the West vs. East Germanic input in Spain.

Regarding R1b-11, I'd like to remind that the map I re-posted displays R1b-M269 without L11, not L11 without it's major subclades U106 and P312.

I think we took it that way, or at least I did. It basically ends up being a map of the most common M269+ L11- subclade in Europe (R1b-ht35).

I really like the power of combining the geographic results at the R1b-ht35 Project (which also contains all the other M269+ L11- subclades) with Maciamo's R1b tree. When starting at L150, it shows a cline from the Near East to Europe that you don't see by analyzing L11 alone, and also indicates that ht35, which is L150-, split a bit earlier from that cline (hence my speculation that it didn't necessarily come into Europe via the same population/migration).

 

[how yes no 3]

How much more?

that is hard to estimate from this data.

OK, so you agree that the low single digit percentage of R1b-U106 in Spain brought there by Goths isn't really on the same scale as the R1b-Z196 that dominates northeastern Spain?

whether contribution of Goths to R1b-u106 in Spain is a single digit or around 30% or 50% or most of it is hard to tell. Take into account that Goths were last settlement wave in Spain, that they have massively settled the area, and that their impact therefore cannot be minimal.

and it is not just R1b-u 106 that was probably contributed by Goths
e.g. i would also not exclude that Goths carried substantial R1b-P312... maps from family tree dna can be misleading in that respect, as west europe is in their database heavily sampled but east europe is hardly sampled giving illusion that R1b-p312 is almost absent in east europe
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/atlantic-r1b1c/default.aspx?section=ymap

of course it would be ridiculous to claim that all R1b-p312 in Spain come from Goths as there are branches of R1b-P312 that only exist in Spain, but some of it (no clue how much) might be..

my point was that the difference in the genetic makeup of Goths and Vandals+ Alans is probably to be accounted for the difference between light colored and dark colored areas in map of R1bxL11 in Spain and that impact of Goth settlements is cause for light colored areas in some other areas of the map.

also note that northeast Spain was settled by Suebi and only sparsely by Goths..

Regarding R1b-11, I'd like to remind that the map I re-posted displays R1b-M269 without L11, not L11 without it's major subclades U106 and P312.

yes, but it is compared to other R1b not compared to frequency of total R1b xL11 in the areas, which means that the light colored areas are where R1b-L11 is more dominant R1b clade.