PDA

View Full Version : Evolutionary History of R1b M269 based on modern Iberian data



Angela
17-06-15, 16:05
I wanted to make sure the title emphasized that this is not ancient dna despite the bow to ancient dna discoveries.

New clues to the evolutionary history of the main European paternal lineage M269: dissection of the Y-SNP S116 in Atlantic Europe and Iberia:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2015114a.html

Abstract

"The dissection of S116 in more than 1500 individuals from Atlantic Europe and the Iberian Peninsula has provided important clues about the controversial evolutionary history of M269. First, the results do not point to an origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge, owing to the lack of sublineage diversity within M269, which supports the new theories proposing its origin in Eastern Europe. Second, S116 shows frequency peaks and spatial distribution that differ from those previously proposed, indicating an origin farther west, and it also shows a high frequency in the Atlantic coastline. Third, an outstanding frequency of the DF27 sublineage has been found in Iberia, with a restricted distribution pattern inside this peninsula and a frequency maximum in the area of the Franco–Cantabrian refuge. This entire panorama indicates an old arrival of M269 into Western Europe, because it has generated at least two episodes of expansion in the Franco–Cantabrian area. This study demonstrates the importance of continuing the dissection of the M269 lineage in different European populations because the discovery and study of new sublineages can adjust or even completely revise the theories about European peopling, as has been the case for the place of origin of M269."

It's behind a paywall so that's all I can offer. Obviously, nothing can be evaluated based on this. I'll see if at least the data tables are available.

Ed. They are, and here's the link:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg2015114s1.html

bicicleur
17-06-15, 18:50
I can't read the article either
we allready know for a long time now there is no origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge
it looks more and more like R1b was distributed in Europe with Bell Beaker folks which started in Portugal some 4500-5000 years ago
maybe that is where P312/S116 was born, TMRCA estimates fit with this time perod
anyway knowing that the mysterious Bell Beakers spread all over western Europe in a very irregular pattern, this will be a very complicated story to unravel
but with cheaper DNA testing and better knowledge of SNPs and Y-DNA pedigree a flood of data is going to come and more and more attempts will be made to do so

Angela
17-06-15, 19:44
It's difficult to judge the validity of their conclusions without being able to read the whole paper, but the information in the Supplementary Info section doesn't at all advance the discussion or prove their main point.

It's mainly a bunch of frequency distribution tables and lists of strs.

Those frequency distribution tables for Iberia could be added to the tables being kept here, so that's a plus, but how that's supposed to prove when S116 entered Iberia and from what direction is beyond me. Maybe they flesh it out in the paper.

In terms of those frequency distributions, it's interesting, and different from prior studies, I think, in that U-152 seems to be highest in Galicia and Asturias, and DF27 in Barcelona, where I would expect U-152 to be highest if U-152 is related to Urnfield.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/UrnfieldCulture.jpg/220px-UrnfieldCulture.jpg

We might expect DF-27 to be highest there and down the east coast if it moved into Iberia from Central Europe.

Sile
17-06-15, 20:56
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg2015114a.html

The dissection of S116 in more than 1500 individuals from Atlantic Europe and the Iberian Peninsula has provided important clues about the controversial evolutionary history of M269. First, the results do not point to an origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge, owing to the lack of sublineage diversity within M269, which supports the new theories proposing its origin in Eastern Europe. Second, S116 shows frequency peaks and spatial distribution that differ from those previously proposed, indicating an origin farther west, and it also shows a high frequency in the Atlantic coastline. Third, an outstanding frequency of the DF27 sublineage has been found in Iberia, with a restricted distribution pattern inside this peninsula and a frequency maximum in the area of the Franco–Cantabrian refuge. This entire panorama indicates an old arrival of M269 into Western Europe, because it has generated at least two episodes of expansion in the Franco–Cantabrian area. This study demonstrates the importance of continuing the dissection of the M269 lineage in different European populations because the discovery and study of new sublineages can adjust or even completely revise the theories about European peopling, as has been the case for the place of origin of M269.


I have not read it yet

Angela
17-06-15, 21:00
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg2015114a.html

The dissection of S116 in more than 1500 individuals from Atlantic Europe and the Iberian Peninsula has provided important clues about the controversial evolutionary history of M269. First, the results do not point to an origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge, owing to the lack of sublineage diversity within M269, which supports the new theories proposing its origin in Eastern Europe. Second, S116 shows frequency peaks and spatial distribution that differ from those previously proposed, indicating an origin farther west, and it also shows a high frequency in the Atlantic coastline. Third, an outstanding frequency of the DF27 sublineage has been found in Iberia, with a restricted distribution pattern inside this peninsula and a frequency maximum in the area of the Franco–Cantabrian refuge. This entire panorama indicates an old arrival of M269 into Western Europe, because it has generated at least two episodes of expansion in the Franco–Cantabrian area. This study demonstrates the importance of continuing the dissection of the M269 lineage in different European populations because the discovery and study of new sublineages can adjust or even completely revise the theories about European peopling, as has been the case for the place of origin of M269.


I have not read it yet

There is already a thread dedicated to it.

Sile
17-06-15, 21:09
There is already a thread dedicated to it.

thanks

delete mine please

Tomenable
17-06-15, 22:54
I am just reading Supplemental Material (doc 2,176K) from this paper:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg2015114s1.html

It seems that its authors go back to the "Paleolithic Franco-Cantabrian refuge" theory.


There is already a thread dedicated to it.

Where is it - also in Ancient DNA subforum ???

LeBrok
17-06-15, 23:02
Now the threads are merged into one.

Tomenable
17-06-15, 23:58
OK, thanks.

This is from Anthrogenica:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4723-Dissection-of-the-Y-SNP-S116-in-Atlantic-Europe-and-Iberia-Valverde-et-al-2015


This study appears to show a few caveats that are extremely interesting nonetheless, per Table-S1 one can observe the following:

1-All the R1b-M269 found in people living in the Basque Country(both Native and nonNative) and Irish people is R1b-L11+ derived.

2- The greatest frequency(92.23%) of R1b-L11 and by extension R1b-M269 is found in Rural Basques(n=193)(which are more likely to be Native Basques instead of descendants of XIX century immigrants from other parts of Spain). This is confirmed when sampling people with Basques surnames (n=230) who attain a frequency of R1b-M269 of 92.17%.

3- Notice the stark contrast between the R1b frequency of Basque natives(n=230 R1b-M269 92.17%) and residents in the Basques Country without Basques surnames(n=111 R1b-M269 62.16%). The fact that the same pattern repeats itself in the Urban(n=148 R1b-M269 69.59%) vs Rural (n=193 R1b-M269 92.23%) is further proof that Urban environments tend be misleading when it comes to haplogroup frequencies because the population might not be native to area and more often than not is not.

4-Another interesting thing is that most of the migration to the Basque Country occurred from areas that were once part of the Celtic Stronghold of Iberia(i.e. Galicia, Extremadura, Castillay Leon) yet their frequency of R1b-M269 is far lower than that found amongst Basques. This points to the fact that there might have been a substantial non-R1b component in Celtic speakers in nonBasque Iberia. Notice the frequency of R1b-M269 in Galicia(n=70) is 61.43% the second lowest in Iberia, and the lowest frequency of R1b-M269 is in Asturias(n=63) yet another Celtic Stronghold only having 57.14% R1b-M269. Though I caution the lower samples sizes might create distortion, but this is something that has been observed before(i.e. Adam.et.al.2008, Myres.et.al.2011).

5- This leads me to believe that the introduction of R1b-L11 lineages into the Basques must have happened from the North, not the South, otherwise we would see far lower frequencies of R1b-L11 in them. Now the interesting part is that French Basque actually have lower frequencies of R1b-M269+ at around 75% than Spanish Basques, but then again this could be due to low sample size in the French Basque side.

6- In sharp contrast to the Martinez-Cruz.et.al.2012 study we see no increased frequency of R1b-L21/M529 in Basques, while the frequency is indeed somewhat greater(2.17% vs 1.8%) in Native Basques than in their nonNative citizens is still falls far too short of the ~20% frequencies reported by Martinez-Cruz.et.al.2012. It could be that most of those 20%+ frequencies were drawn from samples of ~50 people, which could point to a small sample size bias. Nonetheless we see that R1b-L21 peaks in Asturias(6.35%), Galicia(7.14%) and Cantabria(6.25%) bringing up the links between those areas and the rest of Atlantic Europe during the Atlantic Bronze Age. It also worth noting that rural inhabitants of the Basque Country actually have lower R1b-L21 frequency than their Urban counterparts. Also notice the drop in R1b-L21 frequency as one moves east and south of Cantabria.

7- R1b-U152 appears to peak in Galicia and Asturias at 7.94% and 8.57%, yet it is found at frequencies above 4% in all of Iberia except for Basques and Portuguese(n=110 R1b-U152=3.64%) where the maximum frequency peaks at 2.59% in the rural inhabitants of the Basque Country or 2.17% in the Native Basques. I wonder if this is the result of Roman influence in Iberia or the result of Celtic migrations from Central Europe.

8- The greatest frequency of R1b-D27 happens in the Basque Country, and specially in rural inhabitants of the Basque Country at 71.50%, as well as Native Basques at 70.87%, however this frequency peak is by virtue of the overall frequency of R1b-M269 in the region. Here is the frequency of R1b-DF27 as a percentage of R1b-S116/P312 in all of the sample:

http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/m582/jeanlohizun/Valverde.et.al.2015_Table-S1-Modified_zpsh2bq4v3h.jpg

9-Notice that while the relative frequency of R1b-D27/R1b-S116 does have the third(After Portugal(n=110) and Madrid(n=99)) highest value in Iberia in the Basque Country, the frequency amongst rural inhabitants of the Basque Country is lower at 77.97% than their Urban counterparts at 81.25%, likewise the Native Basques have a lower frequency at 77.99% than their nonNative citizen counterparts at 82.81%. Now of interests is the frequency peaks of R1b-S116*(xDF27,U152,L21,DF19,L238) in Irish(n=146) at 23.85% and Native Basques(n=230) at 17.22%, also notice the contrast between the frequency of R1b-S116* between rural(n=193) inhabitants of the Basque Country at 17.51% and Urban(n=148) inhabitants of the Basque Country at 12.50%, likewise nonNative Basques(n=111) citizens have 10.94% R1b-S116*. Also of interest is the 0% R1b-S116* found in Galicia and Asturias though this could be due to low sample size. I'm guessing some of these R1b-S116* amongst Native Basques might be R1b-M65, anybody want to take a guess at what it might be amongst Irish and Basques? R1b-DF99????

Thoughts??

And "Paleolithic" talk:


They really missed the boat IMO when they call for a Paleolithic movement, as if they completely ignored recent ancient DNA . . .

=====

I would be a good article pre-NGS-Y full sequences without the Paleolithic nonsense error. At least we have the first complete article with Iberian DF27 proportions. We can observe in the Y Full tree that R-P312-S116 branched fastly and intensively with various minor branches, so the unresolved P312(xDF27, U152, L21, L238, DF19) results are quite expected.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-P312/

=====

Yes, kind of an anachronism, a paper reminiscent of about 2006, except now they are restricting the claim to P312 (S116) rather than to all of M269, as was once done.

=====

Given that we have no more than 3 Mesolithic Samples from West of Germany and South of Sweden, and no more than 35 Neolithic samples from France/Iberian/British Isles I would hold on onto making conclusions about the status of P312 in Western Europe. Thus I don't think the authors need to ignore ancient DNA to make any claims, because most of the Western European ancient DNA comes from a single burial in Treilles, France, thus there are vast regions that remain to be sampled.

Now what do you make of the big proportion of R1b-S116* in the Irish, DF99??

=====

R1b-M269 (and its son R1b-P312) has not been found in any site in Neolithic Western Europe. R1b-M269 appears for the first time in Bell Beaker (R1b-P312 being the majority there), Corded Ware and Battle-Axe Sweden (R1b-U106 on this case) sites. It can't be "old" as in Neolithic Europe. Furthermore, in Bell Beaker, Corded Ware and Battle-Axe Sweden an autosomal Yamnayan component was detected. Back at Yamnaya, nearly all samples have been R1b-M269 so far. It fits with the mainstream model of the spread of IE languages in Western Europe, including the timeframe.

Clearly, a 2nd "IE homeland", as Gimbutas called it, was established somewhere in Central Europe (after the steppe invasion) and from there R1b-P312 came to conquer Western Europe (the UK, France and Iberia, as well as Northern Italy).

=====

The frequencies of R1b in Iberia are rather consistent outside the Basque population at 55-65%. The higher rate among Basque may be simply due to their relative isolation and lack of immigrants to their regions. The spread of P312 and descendants almost mimics Beaker pottery to a tee. The arrival of these newcomers in the late Neolithic, and whatever their origins needs to be determined. They appear to have distinct traditions from the earlier farmers whom they supplanted and/or absorbed.

The Danish rate of R1b 37.36% is a little lower than I usually see (40-44%), but can be explained by the fact Beaker was not as influential in the north west as it was in the SW of Europe.

ADD: The higher rate of R1b can be explained in Basque if BB were almost exclusively a varied mix of P312, coupled with a lack of immigration to the region. This appears to be the case from aDNA.

=====

Yet not a single R1b-L11 derived lineage has been found east of Germany, and most of the Yamnaya samples have been R1b-Z2105 derived, which is a cousin clade to European R1b-L51 but not ancestral to it. As for the autosomal component, Corded Ware is the one that has massive amounts of Yamnaya-like ancestry and R1a majority haplogroups. The German Beaker amount of Yamnaya-like component can be easily explained with interaction with the next door neighbors who had 70%+ of the components. We know that 2000 BC Northern Iberians were still much like Neolithic farmers and Lactose Intolerant, yet 3000 BC Peripheral Basques have lactose tolerance in them.

Now I would kindly ask everybody to try to focus our attention to the thread topic which is the dissection of R1b-S116 in Iberians and to a lesser extent some Western European populations, let's leave the Paleolithic/Neolithic/Yamnaya discussion for the appropriate thread.

=====

But the Paleolithic assertion is an essential part of this paper. And not a single ancient R1b-L11 derived lineage has been found west of Germany either.

Wasn't there a paper some years ago by a group of Indian scientists that placed the origin of R1a in India? This sort of looks like an occidental version of the same sort of thing.

=====

Fair enough, but this thread is about a study that chose to ignore ancient DNA and that is IMO a major oversight. But to your point, there are plenty of active topics on ancient DNA to carry on about it here.

=====

Let me make something clear, I do am not advocating a Paleolithic/Neolithic origin of R1b-P312 in Western Europe, I'm simply mentioning that there is a great lack of ancient DNA in Western Europe, and want to add that the widespread presence of ANE/Yamnaya component in Europe, specially in Western European can be attributed to an immensely number migrations(Roman Empire, Vikings,, Celts, Germanics, etc) that have occurred in Europe since the Bronze Age. Also keep in mind that Basques who have one of the greatest(if not the greatest) frequencies of R1b-P312 in Europe have a local minimum in ANE/Yamnaya ancestry related, even lower(though not by much) than their Iberian neighbors who have far lower frequencies of R1b-M269. Yes I know we can attribute it to a founder's effect, etc, well then let's try to explain the modest R1b-U152 frequency in Sardinians and their even lower amount of Yamnaya/ANE ancestry, or how about the higher Yamnaya/ANE in Italians compared to Iberians. It's clear that R1b was not the only vector that carried ANE/Yamnaya into Southern Europe. Now I find it fascinating that the German Beaker samples are so uniformly R1b, and that the very first R1b-P312 in Europe have popped up in there, but let's wait until we get more Megalithic samples from Western Europe.

Remember a single R1b-P312 sample from Western Europe dating back to 3000 BC and looking like Neolithic farmers autosomally and lacking Yamnaya/ANE in them would throw the "R1b_L11 in Western Europe is from Steppe" theory upside down on its axis. Right now we have a 5000 BC farmer, who might or might not have been R1b-V88, let's keep an open mind.

=====

That's very true, but it seems less and less likely with each succeeding ancient y-dna result.

My mind is ready to open, but someone is going to have to knock on the door of it bearing some convincing evidence. A 7,000-year-old Neolithic farmer who was M269- and probably P297-, like those V88+ guys in Africa, doesn't do it for me.

=====

Just curious - you guys don't think Bell Beaker is relevant to this thread on origins of P312 in Iberia? http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/smilies1/tongue.gif Just throwing that out there... It's clearly not what the paper is saying, but I am using this as a counter argument.

=====

Beaker and its origins are the things that most puzzle me. Fully developed Beaker is very "kurgan" looking, but supposedly its oldest sites are in Iberia.

It's confusing. The idea that Beaker began in Iberia could be wrong (see this recent paper (http://www.academia.edu/11325848/The_dogma_of_the_Iberian_origin_of_the_Bell_Beaker _attempting_its_deconstruction) by Christian Jeunesse), or perhaps early Beaker in Iberia lacked any P312 but acquired it in Central Europe. Another possibility is the one suggested by Jean M in her "Stelae People" idea, i.e., a steppe people bearing P312 came to Iberia fairly early and became involved in the Iberian genesis of Beaker.

=====

I'm wondering if the R1b-U152 and R1b-L21 presence in Iberia is far more recent, one R1b-L21 due to Atlantic trades with the Isles and R1b-U152 due to the Romans or if they came with the original R1b-P312 population, in any case it's obvious that R1b-P312 entered Iberia from the North and diffused throughout, thus the North African entry given by Klyosov is I think highly unlikely, same thing with an origin of R1b-P312 in Iberia, it's very clear that Iberia is a recipient of R1b-P312 not a donor. As for the German Beakers it is my understanding that the only subclade of R1b-P312 found has been R1b-U152 thus far.

So some food for thought, an R1b-DF27 population enters Iberia? Or does an R1b-xDF27 population enter Iberia and R1b-DF27 is born in Iberia? Is that the very first layer of R1b-P312 in Iberia, or was there significant amount of R1b-U152/L21/others siblings? If we assume the birth of R1b-DF27 was outside of Iberia, then where?

=====

DF27 is extremely regular in almost all Iberian regions (around 40-50%) and we can observe in the YFull tree several basal DF27 Iberian individuals
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-DF27/
Only in the Basque Country DF27 is superior than 60% and rural or native Basque surnames are superior to 70%, so the concentration and the point of entrance was from the Basque Atlantic Pyrenees to the West and South. DF27 was born there or immediately adjacent because they were the main Iberian peopler and only minor branches moved to other distant places but never with a big concentration comparable with that pioneer region of distribution.

=====

The subclades of DF27 that are best known to be numerous in the modern Basque population are quite young (born a few centuries AD, not two or three millennia BC). They are found in an early Basque cemetery, but it likewise is several centuries AD. There has so far been no confirmed association of DF27, or any subclade of it, in Copper or Bronze Age Iberia. Many of the other subclades/branches of DF27 have their distribution weighted far to the north, northeast, and east of any place in Iberia, Basque or otherwise. Including the Nordic countries, Poland, Ukraine, and Armenia -- not just the nearby Isles, or Netherlands, where many have been misled into thinking their YDNA lineage is Basque. Some of the branches found in abundance elsewhere (especially Z295 and above) are the ancestors, not the descendants, of the DF27 Basques who live there now.

It is a very, very common error to equate modern population density with ancient presence in the same place. Once that idea takes hold, it is really hard to overturn with mere evidence.

So one possibility is that P312 and / or DF27 came from the steppe to Iberia very early and became involved in the Iberian genesis of Beaker.

Question is - did they already speak Indo-European when they came ???

Because P312 / DF27 could come to Iberia from the steppe, and could be Non-Indo-European speakers. We can't exclude such a possibility.

Tomenable
18-06-15, 00:03
The study also has a map:

http://r1b.org/imgs/ejhg2015114f1.jpg

Comments from Anthrogenica:


In my opinion this map is completely misleading. I believe P312 started peeling off from L11 at about the same time and place as U106. The path represented as P312 in the map I believe was likely taken by only some portion of P312, largely DF27, but again only some portion of that. The majority of L21 went northwest rather than southwest, and I think U152 split off long before P312 elements got to Spain. All subclades of P312 are well represented in Scandinavia, and I doubt very much this is due to a back migration from Iberia.


I believe this study supports the expansion of P312 in the Atlantic zone as indicated by the Hallast data.
By Atlantic, I mean the Isles, France and Iberia, with L21 and DF27 further West and U152 further East and extending into Germany.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/r1b-p312/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/iberian-dna/
My preferred route to Iberia and reflux migrations is via the Stelae People route.
It is also the shortest route either by sea or by road. If early Neolithic used boats then Bronze Age BBs could use boats and we know they were proficient coastal traders.
I am sure there was constant traffic in both directions.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/the-stelae-people/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-from-the-west/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/kemi-oba/
Remedello is noted by Allendoft as Neolithic and Bell Beaker as Bronze Age.
The pointed daggers images of late Remedello could have been adopted on early BB Stelae.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/european-bronze-age/
The expansion of DF27 appears to have happened in Iberia.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/r1b-df27/
and DF21 in the Isles
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/r1b-l21/

DF27 is a brother to U152; both descend from one of the sons of P312/S116 (and L21, from a different son of P312). The ancient U152 Bell Beaker sample in southeastern Germany 4400 ybp [RISE563] is one indicator of the route of this population into Europe. It looks neither Iberian nor Mediterranean, except to those whose presuppositions incline them to see it as a novel exception to what they have previously hypothesized (in order to fit other, non-genetically based theories).
We can say the only relatively homogeneous regularity in all the Iberian Peninsula (except in the Basques) is DF27, because all other haplogroups and SNPs will have big Iberian regional variations. Another important question is DF27 basal diversity and again we can find Iberian branches in almost all DF27 branches, including several unique individual basal Iberian only DF27 branches, so we can think DF27 was the original Iberian R1b settler in terms of diversity, size and regular distribution in all Iberia.

About the route that R1b people took when expanding westward:


The sample is still very small but going with the evidence a more northerly route looks supported than any other. We now have pre-beaker copper age samples from north Italy and southern France that are emphatically non-R1b. Also from memory some Spanish samples that date to around the time of the earliest copper age in Iberia.

IMO its looking very much a route along the Danube or through central Europe to the north of the Danube for the ancestors of P312 people. A more southern route goes against all the ancient evidence to date. Usual caveat of very small sample though.

On possible origins of DF27 in Iberia:


It depends of age. If U106 could date to 3000BC or even slightly earlier then so does P312. If P312 dates to around 3000BC then DF27 cannot have been a great deal younger. My feeling is DF27 might be a little too old to have actually originated in beaker in Iberia which having recently chewed over the dates cannot be certain to be much more than a generation older than 2700BC. I suspect personally that DF27 emerged in west central Europe and had a founder effect in Iberia.
Archaeologically an out of the Pyrenees origin for P312 is absolute gibberish with no support at all. Also judging by the age now being suggested for U106 and its presence in CW and battleaxe P312 likely existed before beaker existed and probably before even CW existed. So I think its origin is WAY to the east of what is being suggested here. I actually find it hard to make sense of a 5000 year old steppe originated lineage (as surely all L23 is) originating anywhere much west of Ukraine. Frequencies mean absolutely nothing - that is a lesson we have learned again and again.

Tomenable
18-06-15, 00:20
Speakers of Non-IE Iberian languages - who continued to live in Iberia until historic times (though they were intermingled with Celtic-speakers and with Non-Celtic IE speakers in the region, such as the Lusitanian-speakers) - could already have that R1b DF27 haplogroup.

Here are examples of already extinct, but recorded in history, Non-IE languages of Iberia:

Iberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_language
Tartessian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartessian_language
Aquitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquitanian_language
Turdetanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turdetani

Turdetanian was closely related to Tartessian.

And already extinct Non-Celtic IE languages spoken in ancient Iberia included for example:

Lusitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusitanian_language
Sorothaptic - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorothaptic_language

And of course there were also Celtic languages in Iberia, which also got extinct later:

Celtiberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtiberian_language
Gallaecian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallaecian_language

So despite having a hodge-podge of Non-IE, Celtic, and Non-Celtic IE languages, we have a surprising Y-DNA homogeneity.

In any case, it seems that DF27 is the most native of all R1b lineages in Iberia.

So it would seem that DF27 was the lineage of Non-IE speakers, and modern frequency among the Basques confirms it.

It does not mean that it did not come from the steppe, though. Question is if those were originally Indo-Europeans, or not.

Tomenable
18-06-15, 00:31
Maybe the expansion from the steppe into Europe included both IE speakers and another linguistic group ???

Or those Non-IE speakers descended from IE males who married Non-IE women and adopted their languages ???

Iberia is an interesting case because it was one of places where Non-IE languages survived for a very long time.

Non-IE languages in Iberia survived until the Roman conquest and until the adoption of Latin by its people.

Angela
18-06-15, 00:39
The major value of the paper is in providing frequency figures for R1b in Iberia from what I can see, and maybe providing some clues about gene flow within the peninsula.

I certainly don't think that data proves their map is correct or that this all happened in the Paleolithic. For that to be the case everything we know about dating and the "young" ages for L11 and down stream would have to be thrown out. I find it rather bizarre, in fact, that they make a bow to steppe dispersals and then place it in the Paleolithic. Do they think the subclades found in Samara Yamnaya people hadn't mutated in tens of thousands of years?

One thing we've learned is that modern frequency distributions may or may not have anything to do with origins and direction of gene flow. This kind of thinking seems very anachronistic.

As for Beakers, no offense to anyone, but until we get some ancient dna there will be no resolution of this issue. The question is, were the original Beaker people G2 and I2 people who brought some technology and culture to central Europe which was adopted by incoming R1b people, or did R1b people get to Iberia in time for the genesis of early Beaker and then move to central Europe. I don't know, and neither does anyone else. The only way to know is to analyze an early Beaker sample.

If I had to choose an option, I might go for what's behind door number 1, partly because from what I remember of the archaeology (the description of the pots etc) of the first German Bell Beaker it appeared more primitive than what had been produced in Iberia.

Imo, the answer to these questions isn't going to come from a province by province run down of frequency distributions of different types of R1b in modern Iberia.

Tomenable
18-06-15, 00:40
It would really be much easier if DF27 was not under M269. :)


I certainly don't think that data proves their map is correct or that this all happened in the Paleolithic. For that to be the case everything we know about dating and the "young" ages for L11 and down stream would have to be thrown out. I find it rather bizarre, in fact, that they make a bow to steppe dispersions and then place it in the Paleolithic. Do they think the subclades found in Samara Yamnaya people didn't mutate in tens of thousands of years?

DF27 looks steppe-derived during the Chalcolithic period, just like the rest of P312 and M269.

But we do know that until the very Roman conquest in Iberia there lived at least as many Non-IE speakers as IE speakers.

Does it mean that not only Indo-Europeans came from the steppe, and that not all of R1b M269 people spoke Indo-European?

Or do we really believe that all those Non-IE Iberians, Tartessians, Aquitanians and Turdetanians were Non-R1b peoples?

Angela
18-06-15, 03:35
It would really be much easier if DF27 was not under M269. :)



DF27 looks steppe-derived during the Chalcolithic period, just like the rest of P312 and M269.

But we do know that until the very Roman conquest in Iberia there lived at least as many Non-IE speakers as IE speakers.

Does it mean that not only Indo-Europeans came from the steppe, and that not all of R1b M269 people spoke Indo-European?

Or do we really believe that all those Non-IE Iberians, Tartessians, Aquitanians and Turdetanians were Non-R1b peoples?


It's definitely a puzzle, Tomenable. I don't know the answer. If anyone's figured it out, I'm all ears.:)

If some steppe R1b people did not speak Indo-European languages, then it would make sense of it all neatly, but that would be turning everything on its head. Where would they have come from that they didn't speak a form of Indo-European? If they stayed on the steppe until 3,000 BC or so how could they have avoided speaking Indo-European? Maybe they were in Cucuteni or somewhere else in the Balkans where they adopted the languages of the Neolithic farmers? Or maybe they moved to certain areas in the Balkans before Indo-European was really established and then got pushed out? This is just wild, idle speculation though, unsupported by any evidence. Then there's the question of how did they get to eastern Spain, although we could speculate it was by sea. Might they have been connected with Or were those people J2? If the ancestors of the Iberians were R1b they would presumably carried upstream clades though, yes?

Of course, there's always Koch out there who purports to think that Tartessian is Celtic, and that Celtic developed out of the Atlantic Bronze Age, but he doesn't seem to have convinced many people, and it doesn't explain all the R1b in the eastern parts of Spain.

In terms of other explanations for the route of the Celtic languages into Iberia, there does seem to be a definite "western" tilt to them,yes? So, if they came into Iberia from central Europe relatively late, did they come through the Pyrenees at the western end, or did they wind up there because the areas further east were more densely populated? Or, might the western areas have been more suited to cattle herding than the east? I don't know enough about land use in ancient Iberia to have a definite opinion, but it seems possible. Someone you quoted speculated that the high DF27 in the Basques proves that was the route. I don't see that as necessarily the case given how young the Basque clades are and the fact that this looks so much like a pretty recent founder effect.

Speaking of the Basques, Aquitanian looks as if it's related to Basque, and I've seen speculations that the Basques are descended from Aquitanians who retreated into the Pyrenees. Then supposedly men from the surrounding area, R1b men, and downstream DF27 at that, married into the community but adopted the language of their wives. It could happen, I'm sure, but we're talking about huge swathes of the Iberian peninsula where we would have to hypothesize that this happened. Of course, we don't have good data or at least extensive data from Aquitaine in France, so maybe DF7 is very concentrated there as well. If it is, then we've got a whole other large area where steppe people adopted other languages.

I don't know about Iberian either. It used to be speculated that the Ligures and the Iberians were related peoples, both being descendents of the Cardial Neolithic. Then linguists started saying the ancient Ligurian language (not the modern Ligurian variant of Italian) was an Indo-European language from before Italo-Celtic differentiated. Nothing like that is claimed for Iberian however. So perhaps it's true for both the ancient Ligurian and Iberian peoples, but the Ligurians mixed with an Indo-European group arriving from the area of modern France, and later "Celtic" speakers once again arrived in the first millenium BC, creating the documented Celt-Ligurians, and that nothing similar happened with the Iberians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligures

Maybe, until very late in the game, R1b was more frequent in the west but everything got mixed because of the planned population relocations during the Reconquista. I've always felt that given that fact it's very difficult to figure out the movement of R1b into and around the Iberian peninsula.

Arame
18-06-15, 07:36
This R1b-L11 folk seems to be related to Troy.
Troy was founded at 3000BC. And there is a theory that their language is IE Luwian related
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_language

Greying Wanderer
18-06-15, 13:16
If the first IE in Iberia were an artisan/trader minority connected to copper then they may have adopted the language of the majority population.

DF27 seems to be centered very near an ancient copper producing region in the Pyrenees

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-DF27.gif

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Aldudes,+France/@43.0771389,-1.4435804,11z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0xd50d95992853d1d:0x40665174813aea 0

(I should try and google the other two df27 peaks in Iberia to see if they have a copper connection also.)

Brittany had silver and gold mines.

Ireland, Wales and SW England had gold, silver and copper (and later tin). The western edge of Norway has copper.

The Basque country has a minority of the clade that became the Irish clade.

#

If correct I don't know if you could call these people Celtic or not. I think they likely came from the same place but if they were originally a minority they may have adopted or partially adopted the language / culture / religion of the majority.

If correct the full La Tene / Hallstatt Celts arrived from Central Europe later.

#

The gist of the argument would be during the metal ages the source regions for population expansion hopped around in a sequence from
- first farmer regions
- copper producing regions
- a subset of the above regions which had arsenic copper or copper+tin to make bronze (which regions had those???)
- iron producing regions (e.g. La Tene/Halstatt)

#

also this could explain HG resurgence as a founder effect if the miners went into remote mountain regions after copper and married local HG women and expanded dramatically later

Angela
18-06-15, 15:54
This R1b-L11 folk seems to be related to Troy.
Troy was founded at 3000BC. And there is a theory that their language is IE Luwian related
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_language

I've always leaned in that direction myself. However, the upcoming paper seems to indicate that a sample from barely a few kilometers from the site of Troy was very Neolithic farmer like indeed.

Of course, there have been many "Troys", and the inhabitants of one level were not necessarily autosomally like the inhabitants of a prior level.

Without a sample from later periods at Troy I don't know how it could be proved. I'm not totally convinced that their culture necessarily tells the tale, either. Look at some parts of the Hungarian Neolithic and Remedello.

Arame
18-06-15, 16:16
I've always leaned in that direction myself. However, the upcoming paper seems to indicate that a sample from barely a few kilometers from the site of Troy was very Neolithic farmer like indeed.

But the sample is from Late Neolithic, Troy foundation is quite late. And it could be a sudden appearance of new people. But anyway let's wait that sample and his real age.

Angela
18-06-15, 16:39
But the sample is from Late Neolithic, Troy foundation is quite late. And it could be a sudden appearance of new people. But anyway let's wait that sample and his real age.

You're absolutely right. If the sample is from Kumtepe 1 and dates to 4800 BC, we could have had population replacement in the area by the founding of even Troy 1.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31288-Coming-Soon-Neolithic-Anatolian-Genomes!!!?highlight=Neolithic+sample+northwest+An atolia

MOESAN
18-06-15, 18:49
thanks Angela; very interesting - I have some doubts concerning some conclusions of the abstract but I have to read before "challenging" .

Angela
18-06-15, 19:26
thanks Angela; very interesting - I have some doubts concerning some conclusions of the abstract but I have to read before "challenging" .

That's why your posts are always respected. Would that all our members did the same.

MOESAN
18-06-15, 19:52
Maybe the expansion from the steppe into Europe included both IE speakers and another linguistic group ???

Or those Non-IE speakers descended from IE males who married Non-IE women and adopted their languages ???

Iberia is an interesting case because it was one of places where Non-IE languages survived for a very long time.

Non-IE languages in Iberia survived until the Roman conquest and until the adoption of Latin by its people.


Not stupid at all, your points here; just concerning Lusitanian, for I red, it seems very close to Celtic languages, except the lost of p-I-Ean P-, like Ligurian and maybe, the famous but contested North-West Old I-Ean - was not Aquitanian akin to Basque? Since long enough ago I 'm wondering as you if some steppic Y-R1b people were precediing or pushed by I-Eans other Y-R1b. Basques show so many links with Northwestern Europe on more than a field, even in mtDNA, except language. but I know some of the common mtDNa could have been passed by autochtonous Iberia inhabitants at post LGM to Northern places, so?...
Is proto-Basque (or 'basquic'?) a far and already well evolved cousin of Caucasic languages present in Steppes (steppic Neolithic?), and producing the famous proto-I-Ean by mixing with a proto-Uralic language and further evolution??? only speculation, but I agree more the time passes and more I see a northern route for the MOST of Y-R1b introduction into Europe. The bit of more ANE aDNA and the bit of more 'gedrosia' aDNA and the neat more aDNA poolings linked to North Atlantic or even North Europe don't evocate to me a Mediteranea route. I don't eclude completely a South to North Caucasus road before climbing North but it's still uncertain. And I rather think early U106 broke off early enough in Europe, maybe never passing through Austria nor Baviera/Bayern before the Volker Wanderung. the most of the iberian R1b specificity seems the result of a founder effect but I could be wrong, sure; I 've to study it deeper.

MOESAN
18-06-15, 20:07
This R1b-L11 folk seems to be related to Troy.
Troy was founded at 3000BC. And there is a theory that their language is IE Luwian related
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_language

concerning language, I understood luwian has been spoken in ONE of the successive Troy's, not at the exclusion of possible other language -
but concerning Y-R1b-L11, were is the link with Troy?: perhaps I missed a post. Thanks for details if possible.

Tomenable
18-06-15, 23:41
Here also discussion about DF27 and whether they originally spoke IE or not:

From post #18 onwards:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31310-Y-DNA-and-mtDNA-frequencies-in-Proto-Indo-European-cultures?p=460181&viewfull=1#post460181

LeBrok
19-06-15, 02:13
Not stupid at all, your points here; just concerning Lusitanian, for I red, it seems very close to Celtic languages, except the lost of p-I-Ean P-, like Ligurian and maybe, the famous but contested North-West Old I-Ean - was not Aquitanian akin to Basque? Since long enough ago I 'm wondering as you if some steppic Y-R1b people were precediing or pushed by I-Eans other Y-R1b. Basques show so many links with Northwestern Europe on more than a field, even in mtDNA, except language. but I know some of the common mtDNa could have been passed by autochtonous Iberia inhabitants at post LGM to Northern places, so?...

If R1b brought steppe language to Iberia, then what language IEs had? Perhaps a farmer's language of Mykope/Caucasus, or Cucuteni-Tripolia?
Historically/statistically speaking, language flows from farmers to hunter gatherers.

Finalise
19-06-15, 02:41
There's also the possibility that R1b was brought by steppe people and late neolithic farmers simultaneously. L23*/Z2103 that is prevalent in the Balkans and Eastern Europe could have been brought by steppe invaders, while L51 could represent an Indo-Europianized Cucuteni people (who originally came from West Asia) that travelled through the Danube to Bavaria and then to Western and Northern Europe. We know very well the cultures of western Ukraine were heavily mixed between Yamna culture and farmer cultures.We have a clear dichotomy between R1a CW and R1b BB in the EBA, and this presents a major problem for IE linguistically and archaeologically, which was presumed to be one unified culture. Such a discrepancy blows a hole through this theory. The only possible way to rectify this is for one of R1a/R1b to be the original PIE speakers, and the other to be an adopted IE culture but with originally different roots.

Tomenable
19-06-15, 03:05
We really need to check autosomal DNA of Cucuteni-Trypillian people.

Did they have Near Eastern admixture similar to that found later in Yamnaya.

LeBrok
19-06-15, 03:38
We really need to check autosomal DNA of Cucuteni-Trypillian people.

Did they have Near Eastern admixture similar to that found later in Yamnaya. Judging by archaeology, we should see farmer admixture flowing from Cucuteni to West Yamnaya, and another farmer admixture flowing from Caucasus to East Yamnaya. That's what I'm expecting to see from future research, but who knows. We've been surprised many times already. Furthermore, even though Cucuteni and Caucasus farmers came from same homeland in Near East they could have been separated by 5-7 thousand years of separate cultural evolution. After such long time their languages might have been mutually unintelligible.
My point is that if West and East Yamnaya got their language from farmers, they wouldn't necessarily have spoken the same language. When East Yamnaya R1b folks started migration first they possibly didn't carry IE language.

Angela
19-06-15, 05:00
We really need to check autosomal DNA of Cucuteni-Trypillian people.

Did they have Near Eastern admixture similar to that found later in Yamnaya.


We really need to check autosomal DNA of Cucuteni-Trypillian people.

Did they have Near Eastern admixture similar to that found later in Yamnaya.

Tomenable, it's one thing to speculate that maybe some R1b men moved early into the Balkans and adopted "Neolithic farmer" languages, even though that's wild speculation.

It's something else again to say that R1b moved in the first instance from the Balkans to the steppe and there not only adopted the Indo-European language but participated in the ethnogenesis of the Yamnaya people.

The genetics are totally against that. We have a hunter gatherer R1b from Samara who was EHG. Then we have the later Yamnaya culture R1b samples who are no longer "pure" EHG. Their EHG was "diluted" by admixture with a population that was itself minority EHG and majority "Near Eastern". That "Near Eastern" was not the EEF which would have been present in the Balkans. Moreover, no European farmer has yet shown an EHG component. There was also an "eastern" South Asian related component in Yamnaya that we don't see in WHG or EEF, and that in fact doesn't show up in Europe until the coming of the Indo-Europeans.

I just don't think there's any evidence for what you're proposing, and a lot of evidence that suggests otherwise. Now, of course we have to wait and see the samples. Maybe some of the more western shifted Yamnaya people had a slice of EEF from the Balkan people moving onto the steppe, but there's none of that in the Yamnaya we have so far. That migration east just didn't reach that far.

Also, to base so much on the current distribution of subclades of R1b in Iberia isn't warranted, in my opinion. Iberia isn't like Italy. We're known since Ralph and Coop et al that there is no significant autosomal substructure of that kind in Iberia other than for the Basques. I think that may have to do with the Reconquista and with the deliberate policy of population resettlement engaged in by Spanish and Portuguese royalty. Who knows what it used to look like?

If anything, it would be more likely, I think, that R1a was north of the core area, and was Indo-Europeanized by R1b, although I think it might have been that both of them spoke it and participated in the creation of the unique Indo-European culture.

LeBrok
19-06-15, 07:10
Tomenable, it's one thing to speculate that maybe some R1b men moved early into the Balkans and adopted "Neolithic farmer" languages, even though that's wild speculation.

It's something else again to say that R1b moved in the first instance from the Balkans to the steppe and there not only adopted the Indo-European language but participated in the ethnogenesis of the Yamnaya people.

The genetics are totally against that. We have a hunter gatherer R1b from Samara who was EHG. Then we have the later Yamnaya culture R1b samples who are no longer "pure" EHG. Their EHG was "diluted" by admixture with a population that was itself minority EHG and majority "Near Eastern". That "Near Eastern" was not the EEF which would have been present in the Balkans. Moreover, no European farmer has yet shown an EHG component. There was also an "eastern" South Asian related component in Yamnaya that we don't see in WHG or EEF, and that in fact doesn't show up in Europe until the coming of the Indo-Europeans.

I just don't think there's any evidence for what you're proposing, and a lot of evidence that suggests otherwise. Now, of course we have to wait and see the samples. Maybe some of the more western shifted Yamnaya people had a slice of EEF from the Balkan people moving onto the steppe, but there's none of that in the Yamnaya we have so far. That migration east just didn't reach that far.

Also, to base so much on the current distribution of subclades of R1b in Iberia isn't warranted, in my opinion. Iberia isn't like Italy. We're known since Ralph and Coop et al that there is no significant autosomal substructure of that kind in Iberia other than for the Basques. I think that may have to do with the Reconquista and with the deliberate policy of population resettlement engaged in by Spanish and Portuguese royalty. Who knows what it used to look like?

If anything, it would be more likely, I think, that R1a was north of the core area, and was Indo-Europeanized by R1b, although I think it might have been that both of them spoke it and participated in the creation of the unique Indo-European culture.
I found this conversation about the source of proto-IE language very interesting and created a new thread dedicated to it. I'm taking a liberty to copy/past your intriguing post there, Angela.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31324-Where-did-proto-IE-language-start?p=460293#post460293

Vukodav
19-06-15, 07:46
Yeah of course Martinez Cruz et al. was wrong. The frequency of R-L21 among Basques is only 2-3% and not 20%. Obviously they had only samples from small isolated villages.

Greying Wanderer
19-06-15, 12:14
If R1b brought steppe language to Iberia, then what language IEs had? Perhaps a farmer's language of Mykope/Caucasus, or Cucuteni-Tripolia?
Historically/statistically speaking, language flows from farmers to hunter gatherers.


There was the long established Atlantic Megalith culture centered on Portugal with branches north to Scandinavia and east into the Med providing a trading link from Sardinia to Sweden. If R1bs were following the neolithic trade network they would have had existing coastal trading settlements to join as a minority. So if they adopted a different language it would seem more likely to me that it would be the language / culture of the Atlantic Megalith people rather than the local HGs.

If correct the distinction between the new arrivals and the Atlantic Megalith people which could potentially lead to R1b founder effects in certain regions could have been groups of them breaking away from the Atlantic Megalith sites to move to copper producing regions like Aldudes* in the Basque country or Ross Island in Ireland.

so theoretical sequence
R1b copper workers (from somewhere) follow the pre-existing neolithic trade routes in all directions
-> as they spread along the trade routes some groups break away to found mining colonies whenever a good new source is found
-> this leads to a localized founder effect in most places it happened but a dramatic one along the Atlantic coast because of the relatively low population density due to acid soil (caused by the leaching effect of heavy rainfall).

#

edit: actually Aldudes is more on the border of the current Basque country and Aquitaine but well within the old borders

Greying Wanderer
19-06-15, 12:22
Yeah of course Martinez Cruz et al. was wrong. The frequency of R-L21 among Basques is only 2-3% and not 20%. Obviously they had only samples from small isolated villages.

I wonder if those small isolated villages were clustered in a particular region.

MOESAN
20-06-15, 00:00
We really need to check autosomal DNA of Cucuteni-Trypillian people.

Did they have Near Eastern admixture similar to that found later in Yamnaya.

If we rely on Neolithic DNA of the Balkan Carpathian agricole area, we can say NO: at least concerning Yamnya of Samara and East, where 'mediterranean' and other 'southwest-asian' or 'red sea' seem absent - but we cannot be sure the late metallurgic Cucuteni-Tripolye were of the same facture as first ones. Maybe Y-J2 akin to S-E Caspian region had reached the Carpathians borders already then? with more 'west-asian'; and yet, the 'westasian' of the steppic ones was more 'gedrosia-like', more eastern, very less near-eastern-like...

MOESAN
20-06-15, 00:12
I had the territories of our old Europe were not as demographically saturated as nowaday in those times. We saw some ethnies tracing their ways among other ones more sedentized, without not too much mixings at first. the today archeologic discoveries of new sites ought to push us to more caution: 1- some 'snakes' moves can escape to archeologic controle and 2- we still have sites to find.
Final Cucuteni Tripolye population was surely different from the first one: integration of HGs by time (Y-I2 of any sort + some old Y-C and Y-I1?) and new kinds of southerners with metallurgy + some steppic people themselves not without ancient Hgs?... the metallurgists I suppose rich for Y-J2 had surely mixed before with a lot of Y-E-V13 and evidently former Y-G2a.

Angela
20-06-15, 02:06
I had the territories of our old Europe were not as demographically saturated as nowaday in those times. We saw some ethnies tracing their ways among other ones more sedentized, without not too much mixings at first. the today archeologic discoveries of new sites ought to push us to more caution: 1- some 'snakes' moves can escape to archeologic controle and 2- we still have sites to find.
Final Cucuteni Tripolye population was surely different from the first one: integration of HGs by time (Y-I2 of any sort + some old Y-C and Y-I1?) and new kinds of southerners with metallurgy + some steppic people themselves not without ancient Hgs?... the metallurgists I suppose rich for Y-J2 had surely mixed before with a lot of Y-E-V13 and evidently former Y-G2a.

I think this is very important. While all of the Yamnaya so far are pretty similar (we don't know about the western portion, which may be different), and Abanasievo was remarkably similar to them, Corded Ware seems pretty variable depending on the site. This shouldn't be such news because that's what the archaeolgists have been telling us. Cucuteni might be different from areas to their north as well.

Johannes
20-06-15, 18:15
I wanted to make sure the title emphasized that this is not ancient dna despite the bow to ancient dna discoveries.

New clues to the evolutionary history of the main European paternal lineage M269: dissection of the Y-SNP S116 in Atlantic Europe and Iberia:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2015114a.html

Abstract

"The dissection of S116 in more than 1500 individuals from Atlantic Europe and the Iberian Peninsula has provided important clues about the controversial evolutionary history of M269. First, the results do not point to an origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge, owing to the lack of sublineage diversity within M269, which supports the new theories proposing its origin in Eastern Europe. Second, S116 shows frequency peaks and spatial distribution that differ from those previously proposed, indicating an origin farther west, and it also shows a high frequency in the Atlantic coastline. Third, an outstanding frequency of the DF27 sublineage has been found in Iberia, with a restricted distribution pattern inside this peninsula and a frequency maximum in the area of the Franco–Cantabrian refuge. This entire panorama indicates an old arrival of M269 into Western Europe, because it has generated at least two episodes of expansion in the Franco–Cantabrian area. This study demonstrates the importance of continuing the dissection of the M269 lineage in different European populations because the discovery and study of new sublineages can adjust or even completely revise the theories about European peopling, as has been the case for the place of origin of M269."

It's behind a paywall so that's all I can offer. Obviously, nothing can be evaluated based on this. I'll see if at least the data tables are available.

Ed. They are, and here's the link:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg2015114s1.html


This is very interesting but why didn't you just put this on my thread about the Iberians? Why start a new one?

Johannes
20-06-15, 19:00
Those frequency distribution tables for Iberia could be added to the tables being kept here, so that's a plus, but how that's supposed to prove when S116 entered Iberia and from what direction is beyond me. Maybe they flesh it out in the paper.
In terms of those frequency distributions, it's interesting, and different from prior studies, I think, in that U-152 seems to be highest in Galicia and Asturias, and DF27 in Barcelona, where I would expect U-152 to be highest if U-152 is related to Urnfield.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/UrnfieldCulture.jpg/220px-UrnfieldCulture.jpg

We might expect DF-27 to be highest there and down the east coast if it moved into Iberia from Central Europe.

Its funny how you always criticize people for not staying on task or sticking to the subject yet you are doing the exact same thing. If you paid attention to my posts on my Iberian thread you would have found that the Iberians occupied all of the eastern and southern side of Iberia. And the DF-27 is very high there. The Celts never entered Iberia through Catalonia. They must have entered through the Basque Country (although the Basques did not originate there. They were located more south in Navarre and Aragon). These studies are showing more proof of what I theorized in my thread: that the Iberians were a proto-Indo-European people and that Iberians were (must have been) related to Basques.

Angela
20-06-15, 19:44
Its funny how you always criticize people for not staying on task or sticking to the subject yet you are doing the exact same thing. If you paid attention to my posts on my Iberian thread you would have found that the Iberians occupied all of the eastern and southern side of Iberia. And the DF-27 is very high there. The Celts never entered Iberia through Catalonia. They must have entered through the Basque Country (although the Basques did not originate there. They were located more south in Navarre and Aragon). These studies are showing more proof of what I theorized in my thread: that the Iberians were a proto-Indo-European people and that Iberians were (must have been) related to Basques.

This is a thread devoted to a new paper. That's what we do here: we start threads when new papers appear so people will be aware of it, so people can discuss the merits and failings of it, and so that it can easily be found later through a search engine. Every paper or discussion of Iberia does not have to be posted in your thread because it touches upon something related to Iberia. You don't have a patent on the subject. We have numerous threads on this site about Iberia and many about the Indo-Europeans and many other issues, approaching them from the vantage point of different papers or time periods or authors or any number of things. However, you can't segue off into a prolonged discussion of Turkish ethnogenesis when the topic thread is Iberia, for example. Get it?

This is elementary logic. I can't believe I have to explain these things.

As far as the content of your post number 39 is concerned, it is on topic for this thread, and so I won't delete it.

Just a word of advice for how to conduct yourself on this forum. Some of us have undoubtedly been studying these matters since probably before you were born, and at institutions of some prestige. We don't need you to tell us that the Iberian speaking peoples were predominantly located in the east. How to explain these things is another matter. We have read enough and studied enough that we know that very little is certain yet in any of this. Perhaps if you availed yourself of the search engine and read some more you would realize the same thing.

MOESAN
21-06-15, 19:43
[QUOTE=Greying Wanderer;460323]There was the long established Atlantic Megalith culture centered on Portugal with branches north to Scandinavia and east into the Med providing a trading link from Sardinia to Sweden. If R1bs were following the neolithic trade network they would have had existing coastal trading settlements to join as a minority. So if they adopted a different language it would seem more likely to me that it would be the language / culture of the Atlantic Megalith people rather than the local HGs.

If correct the distinction between the new arrivals and the Atlantic Megalith people which could potentially lead to R1b founder effects in certain regions could have been groups of them breaking away from the Atlantic Megalith sites to move to copper producing regions like Aldudes* in the Basque country or Ross Island in Ireland.

so theoretical sequence
R1b copper workers (from somewhere) follow the pre-existing neolithic trade routes in all directions
-> as they spread along the trade routes some groups break away to found mining colonies whenever a good new source is found
-> this leads to a localized founder effect in most places it happened but a dramatic one along the Atlantic coast because of the relatively low population density due to acid soil (caused by the leaching effect of heavy rainfall).


very intresting suggestions; I was trying to find out an explication for Y-R1b among Basques, male elite loosing its I-Ean language for the "dominated" one; a male modest group of prospectors accepted at the mergin and marrying locally and loosing their language by time; all the way it doesn' t explain the total overwhelming domination of Y-R1b in West! It could only occur if this vanguard of R1b was arrived earlier tha the others, otherwise they would have kept their I-Ean language, I think;
concerning ores and mining, is Basque country a hotspot in Iberia???
extra-fact, more about I-Eans than Basque question: the 'gedrosia' compared to 'caucasus' component of some runs (same run) shows clearly the very most of 'gedrosia' came from NORTH in Western Europe: clear for Iberia, clear for Italy: so Greeks I-Ean speakers were not too rich for 'gedrosia' even if they had 'caucasus' - in West, 'gedrosia' (and ANE) came with I-Eans: and basque are STILL the sameproblem here: they the richer for 'gedrosia' in Iberia, without any 'caucasus'.
basque language has its proper words for basic metals, not I-Eans: and Basque country are not the center of a BB's area...
my poor head!
a southern route for the supposed first non-I-Ean OR truly I-Ean courageous Y-R1b prospectors seems excluded - I keep nevertheless in mind your supposition concerning mining little groups, waiting more

Greying Wanderer
22-06-15, 01:49
[QUOTE=Greying Wanderer;460323]There was the long established Atlantic Megalith culture centered on Portugal with branches north to Scandinavia and east into the Med providing a trading link from Sardinia to Sweden. If R1bs were following the neolithic trade network they would have had existing coastal trading settlements to join as a minority. So if they adopted a different language it would seem more likely to me that it would be the language / culture of the Atlantic Megalith people rather than the local HGs.

If correct the distinction between the new arrivals and the Atlantic Megalith people which could potentially lead to R1b founder effects in certain regions could have been groups of them breaking away from the Atlantic Megalith sites to move to copper producing regions like Aldudes* in the Basque country or Ross Island in Ireland.

so theoretical sequence
R1b copper workers (from somewhere) follow the pre-existing neolithic trade routes in all directions
-> as they spread along the trade routes some groups break away to found mining colonies whenever a good new source is found
-> this leads to a localized founder effect in most places it happened but a dramatic one along the Atlantic coast because of the relatively low population density due to acid soil (caused by the leaching effect of heavy rainfall).


very intresting suggestions; I was trying to find out an explication for Y-R1b among Basques, male elite loosing its I-Ean language for the "dominated" one; a male modest group of prospectors accepted at the mergin and marrying locally and loosing their language by time; all the way it doesn' t explain the total overwhelming domination of Y-R1b in West! It could only occur if this vanguard of R1b was arrived earlier tha the others, otherwise they would have kept their I-Ean language, I think;
concerning ores and mining, is Basque country a hotspot in Iberia???
extra-fact, more about I-Eans than Basque question: the 'gedrosia' compared to 'caucasus' component of some runs (same run) shows clearly the very most of 'gedrosia' came from NORTH in Western Europe: clear for Iberia, clear for Italy: so Greeks I-Ean speakers were not too rich for 'gedrosia' even if they had 'caucasus' - in West, 'gedrosia' (and ANE) came with I-Eans: and basque are STILL the sameproblem here: they the richer for 'gedrosia' in Iberia, without any 'caucasus'.
basque language has its proper words for basic metals, not I-Eans: and Basque country are not the center of a BB's area...
my poor head!
a southern route for the supposed first non-I-Ean OR truly I-Ean courageous Y-R1b prospectors seems excluded - I keep nevertheless in mind your supposition concerning mining little groups, waiting more



It could only occur if this vanguard of R1b was arrived earlier tha the others, otherwise they would have kept their I-Ean language, I think;

yes, that's the only way I can imagine it happening
concerning ores and mining, is Basque country a hotspot in Iberia???

from googling, apparently there are some very old mining sites in the western pyrenees including copper from the aldudes valley near a place called Banca

http://www.inrap.fr/preventive-archaeology/Archeopages/Issues/SE01-21-22-23-2008/Issue-22/Dossier-Mines-and-quarries/p-11068-lg0-The-origins-of-mining-in-the-Western-Pyrenees-Digging-for-copper-iron-gold-and-silver.htm


Research carried out over the last few years has considerably increased our knowledge of mining and metallurgical activities at the extreme western end of the Pyrenees mountain chain. The diversity of Gallo-Roman sites found there is quite remarkable, such as the gold mines around Itxassou, the copper workings at Banca and the silver mines near the ancient city of Oiasso and in Haira Forest. Iron mines with links to farriering activities, such as the major site at Larla, have also been discovered. The mines of the Gallo-Roman period were actually started in the pre-Roman period as attested by Strabo who wrote of the flourishing gold works on the shores of the Bay of Biscay. Archaeological evidence shows that steel production began in the Late Iron Age. Geochemical and palynological studies carried out in a valley of the Western Pyrenees indicate that anthropic activities in the area were responsible for peaks in air pollution at various times in Protohistory. The first peak points to metal production in the first half of the 3rd millennium. Further to the east, in the Aspe Valley, a second peak relating to copper mining can be dated back 5,000 years and constitutes the oldest archaeological evidence available to us in the Pyrenees.

currently just inside France but part of the Basque country originally i think

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Banca,+France/@43.0087098,-1.4237371,10z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0xd50d9d3c97d27a9:0xf67590f5f93b4e 0



basque language has its proper words for basic metals, not I-Eans

That is definitely interesting (and does speak against the theory imo) - it's not that surprising as the Atlantic Megalith sites seem (to me anyway) to show a correlation with mining also (but gold and silver e.g. SW England, S. Wales, Brittany) but I feel my theory would need for Basque to have an IE word for copper even if the rest were non-IE (or two words for copper perhaps).

edit:


and Basque country are not the center of a BB's area...

Current Basque country true but didn't it used to extend all the way into Cantabria (edit: meant Gascony) with the current Basque country a refuge?

(Having said that I don't know if Gascony has any connection to BB either - but worth mentioning the Basque territory as shrunk a bit in case it's relevant.)

#

more googling, more edits

actually

http://www.buber.net/Basque/Euskara/Larry/metal.names.html


there are no indigenous Basque names recorded for any of tin, copper or bronze. Instead, we find only loan words: <eztainu> `tin', <kobre> `copper', and <brontze> `bronze'.


But there is no doubt about the native status of <burdina> `iron', <berun> `lead', <urre> `gold', and <zilar> `silver'.

that helps the theory i think

MOESAN
24-06-15, 23:13
I looked at the maps and percentages and I 'm tempted to say:
let's be cautious with upstream and downstream distributions: when a big enough population keeps on unified enough and increases, it gradually produces new SNPs: as a rule the dynamics is: decreasing of older (more upstream) SNP* , the first downstream ones growing the biggest, the too new ones staying little for a time before themselves encreases in number too; the general trend is high %s of intermediary downstream SNPs, and low %s of AND older ones AND newer ones; in this population, the variance of SNPs downstream ligneages is great. At the opposite, when the population stays relatively small, the lucky upstream SNP (the intermediary ones, numerous at the relative level butnot numerous at the absolute level in this case) keeps on being the more numerous, producing few or/and loosing new donwstream SNPs and loosing the few more upstream ones; low variance in SNPs. in very very small populations, for the most a set or a small clan separated from the majority of brethren, everything can occur to one: retain only the more numerous SNP (most often) or at the contrary loose it and favorize a less dense SNP, modest until then; at any case, very low variance.
in the case of Western Europe, we have: highest absolute %s of Y-R1b around Basque Country -(and Western Ireland, Brittany), highest % of whole-S116 in the same places - highest relative % of S116*/whole-S116 (derived) in Western Europe, the most in Ireland and around Basque Country –highest absolute % of DF27 in Basque Country decreasing by distance, but faster in West than in East –
Discussion: a higher % of S116*/whole-S116 could be the signal of population being remained in little number for a while, so possibly having received its Y-R1b from other sources: but the huge and higher absolute % of DF27 and whole-R1b compared to other excludes for me that Basque Country was in debt to an other population for it – the relative % DF27/S116 of Basque Country is strong but not very higher than in Portugal, Andalusia and Madrid, and it is lower among “true” Basques than among “false Basques”! could it signify DF27 came from the periphery or immigrants in Basque Country? It could at the contrary signify that Basques or a population akin to Basques (because the unity overspanning the Pyrenees is evident, and corresponding in some part to Historic links), remained in a small enough number for a while at a S116* level, underwent a “baby boom” (at least concerning male chromosomes) producing after mutations a DF27 dynamic source; the surroundings populations, with less absolute % of DF27 but more relative DF27/S116, are rather the tributary ones to Basque nucleus because transmission(S) of high DF 27-plus low S116* explains the loss of the few S116* - there is a relative continuity in Iberia concerning DF27 and Y-R1b as a whole, spite local variations – at first sight, Galicia, Asturias (0% S116*/whole-S116 and low enough % of DF27/whole-S116) seem having received more variated ligneages of Y-R1b and some of them (U152, U106? …) from other places not around Basque Country, perhaps later? Later and smaller groups without territorial mating continuity: better chances to loose the older SNP, S116*
Madrid sample (if valuable) shows the higher absolute % of DF27 after Basque Country, the second higher relative % DF27/whole-S116 after “false Basques” and a reasonable (middle) loss of relative % S116*/whole-S116: it could check an origin in the surroundings of Basque Country, what would correspond to History: Reconquista, people from peri-Basque places (see castellan phonetics). Places like Catalona, Alicante and Andalusia show some links to Basque genetic Y-DNA evolution but evidently with a more complicated story…Asturias, Galicia and Portugal could have had a globally same story, with a layer of DF27 from Western Pyrenees/Aquitaine areas at first, more in Portugal which shows more DF27/S116 and more S116*/whole-S116(Duro and Tajo rivers?), and different and more recently arrived Y-R1b SNPs in Galicia and Asturias in smaller spotty groups and not by global “contamination” (other Celts, Germanics).
The (possible) explanation of basque Y-DNA situation by the colonization of an almost empty land by a small group is not too evident; Atlantic shores were densely inhabited since a long enough time. So S116*, scarce at first in Western Europe, had already got strength in around France (East at first) and seemingly gave birth to L21/L527 rather in Northwest and to DF27 in Southwest (Aquitaine?). So DF27 is “basque” compared to other Iberian places but was born in a slightly more northern place. The today presence of downstream SNPs of DF27 in far places as Ireland, Britain, North Sea shores, Scandinavia, Baltic shores, Poland and Ukraina does not lead me to search an eastern place of birth to it. If Y-R1b was already present somewhere West during the last Atlantic megalithic times or the plain Atlantic Bronze, these curious geographic distribution could be easily explained, principally by maritime moves. Only an hypothesis at this stage of my picked up knowledge… A try.
All the way I have some difficulties to swallow the dates of coalescence given in this survey, according to my other readings.

Greying Wanderer
25-06-15, 04:36
The (possible) explanation of basque Y-DNA situation by the colonization of an almost empty land by a small group is not too evident; Atlantic shores were densely inhabited since a long enough time.

Just to stress I'm not suggesting that exactly. As you say the Atlantic Megalith culture was around for a long time along the Atlantic coast. I'm suggesting that if a new group showed up and moved inland to a relatively lightly populated region for a new reason e.g. copper mining, there is the possibility of a dramatic founder effect.

To me the main point is

1) the gap between the western range of LBK and the Atlantic coast
2) the way the gap seems to map onto the Atlantic coast bio-region
3) the Atlantic coast bio-region having acid soil
4) wheat not liking acid soil
5) the epicenters of some of the R1b clades seem to be centered along the Atlantic coast

My thing about copper mining is just one possible explanation. No doubt there are other, maybe better, ones.

MOESAN
25-06-15, 23:33
Just to stress I'm not suggesting that exactly. As you say the Atlantic Megalith culture was around for a long time along the Atlantic coast. I'm suggesting that if a new group showed up and moved inland to a relatively lightly populated region for a new reason e.g. copper mining, there is the possibility of a dramatic founder effect.

To me the main point is
1) the gap between the western range of LBK and the Atlantic coast
2) the way the gap seems to map onto the Atlantic coast bio-region
3) the Atlantic coast bio-region having acid soil
4) wheat not liking acid soil
5) the epicenters of some of the R1b clades seem to be centered along the Atlantic coast

My thing about copper mining is just one possible explanation. No doubt there are other, maybe better, ones.

OK; after all Basques have proper words for basic metals, not I-Eans. And I make general statements concerning ancient demography because even the scholars knowledge is still spotty and insufficient. Just that: it seems megalithic cultures had (globally) a stronger effect upon demography encrease than BB, in some places, even in Germany.
I would be glad knowing the linguistic origin of these metals words...

Greying Wanderer
27-06-15, 02:55
OK; after all Basques have proper words for basic metals, not I-Eans. And I make general statements concerning ancient demography because even the scholars knowledge is still spotty and insufficient. Just that: it seems megalithic cultures had (globally) a stronger effect upon demography encrease than BB, in some places, even in Germany.
I would be glad knowing the linguistic origin of these metals words...


Sure, maybe BB is more correlation than causation. My main point is there are clear and dramatic founder effects along the Atlantic coast which need explaining.

Johannes
04-07-15, 00:35
in the case of Western Europe, we have: highest absolute %s of Y-R1b around Basque Country -(and Western Ireland, Brittany), highest % of whole-S116 in the same places - highest relative % of S116*/whole-S116 (derived) in Western Europe, the most in Ireland and around Basque Country –highest absolute % of DF27 in Basque Country decreasing by distance, but faster in West than in East – Discussion: a higher % of S116*/whole-S116 could be the signal of population being remained in little number for a while, so possibly having received its Y-R1b from other sources: but the huge and higher absolute % of DF27 and whole-R1b compared to other excludes for me that Basque Country was in debt to an other population for it – the relative % DF27/S116 of Basque Country is strong but not very higher than in Portugal, Andalusia and Madrid, and it is lower among “true” Basques than among “false Basques”! could it signify DF27 came from the periphery or immigrants in Basque Country? It could at the contrary signify that Basques or a population akin to Basques (because the unity overspanning the Pyrenees is evident, and corresponding in some part to Historic links), remained in a small enough number for a while at a S116* level, underwent a “baby boom” (at least concerning male chromosomes) producing after mutations a DF27 dynamic source; the surroundings populations, with less absolute % of DF27 but more relative DF27/S116, are rather the tributary ones to Basque nucleus because transmission(S) of high DF 27-plus low S116* explains the loss of the few S116* - there is a relative continuity in Iberia concerning DF27 and Y-R1b as a whole, spite local variations – at first sight, Galicia, Asturias (0% S116*/whole-S116 and low enough % of DF27/whole-S116) seem having received more variated ligneages of Y-R1b and some of them (U152, U106? …) from other places not around Basque Country, perhaps later? Later and smaller groups without territorial mating continuity: better chances to loose the older SNP, S116*
Madrid sample (if valuable) shows the higher absolute % of DF27 after Basque Country, the second higher relative % DF27/whole-S116 after “false Basques” and a reasonable (middle) loss of relative % S116*/whole-S116: it could check an origin in the surroundings of Basque Country, what would correspond to History: Reconquista, people from peri-Basque places (see castellan phonetics). Places like Catalona, Alicante and Andalusia show some links to Basque genetic Y-DNA evolution but evidently with a more complicated story…Asturias, Galicia and Portugal could have had a globally same story, with a layer of DF27 from Western Pyrenees/Aquitaine areas at first, more in Portugal which shows more DF27/S116 and more S116*/whole-S116(Duro and Tajo rivers?), and different and more recently arrived Y-R1b SNPs in Galicia and Asturias in smaller spotty groups and not by global “contamination” (other Celts, Germanics).
The (possible) explanation of basque Y-DNA situation by the colonization of an almost empty land by a small group is not too evident; Atlantic shores were densely inhabited since a long enough time. So S116*, scarce at first in Western Europe, had already got strength in around France (East at first) and seemingly gave birth to L21/L527 rather in Northwest and to DF27 in Southwest (Aquitaine?). So DF27 is “basque” compared to other Iberian places but was born in a slightly more northern place. The today presence of downstream SNPs of DF27 in far places as Ireland, Britain, North Sea shores, Scandinavia, Baltic shores, Poland and Ukraina does not lead me to search an eastern place of birth to it. If Y-R1b was already present somewhere West during the last Atlantic megalithic times or the plain Atlantic Bronze, these curious geographic distribution could be easily explained, principally by maritime moves. Only an hypothesis at this stage of my picked up knowledge… A try. All the way I have some difficulties to swallow the dates of coalescence given in this survey, according to my other readings.


I sincerely doubt DF27 came or originated from the Atlantic. Its clear form the maps that it had an eastern origin because if it had an Atlantic origin it would show more massive R1b DF-27 in th western side of Iberia.