Study:More EEF than EBA in most modern Brits

Ralphie Boy

Regular Member
Messages
249
Reaction score
116
Points
43
Y-DNA haplogroup
I2a-Y18331-Y66192
Study: More EEF than EBA in most modern Brits

Abstract

Present-day people from England and Wales harbour more ancestry derived from Early European Farmers (EEF) than people of the Early Bronze Age1. To understand this, we generated genome-wide data from 793 individuals, increasing data from the Middle to Late Bronze and Iron Age in Britain by 12-fold, and Western and Central Europe by 3.5-fold. Between 1000 and 875 BC, EEF ancestry increased in southern Britain (England and Wales) but not northern Britain (Scotland) due to incorporation of migrants who arrived at this time and over previous centuries, and who were genetically most similar to ancient individuals from France. These migrants contributed about half the ancestry of Iron Age people of England and Wales, thereby creating a plausible vector for the spread of early Celtic languages into Britain. These patterns are part of a broader trend of EEF ancestry becoming more similar across central and western Europe in the Middle to Late Bronze Age, coincident with archaeological evidence of intensified cultural exchange2–6. There was comparatively less gene flow from continental Europe during the Iron Age, and Britain’s independent genetic trajectory is also reflected in the rise of the allele conferring lactase persistence to ~50% by this time compared to ~7% in central Europe where it rose rapidly in frequency only a millennium later. This suggests that dairy products were used in qualitatively different ways in Britain and in central Europe over this period.
 
Last edited:
Ralphie Boy: Thanks for posting that abstract was going to do so myself. Here is another paper just published today on Ancient British Isle DNA. Other than my interest in ancient DNA, not my lane obviously, but this one looks interesting as well and has a really good research team on it (i.e. Chris Fowler, Olade, Reich, etc) and should be of interest again to everyone who follows ancient DNA research and of course folks whose ancestors are from the British Isles in particular. Maybe this 2nd paper by Fowler et al 2021 deserves its own separate thread if the Moderators think so.

A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb: Nature 2021 by Fowler et al


Abstract

To explore kinship practices at chambered tombs in Early Neolithic Britain, here we combined archaeological and genetic analyses of 35 individuals who lived about 5,700 years ago and were entombed at Hazleton North long cairn1. Twenty-seven individuals are part of the first extended pedigree reconstructed from ancient DNA, a five-generation family whose many interrelationships provide statistical power to document kinship practices that were invisible without direct genetic data. Patrilineal descent was key in determining who was buried in the tomb, as all 15 intergenerational transmissions were through men. The presence of women who had reproduced with lineage men and the absence of adult lineage daughters suggest virilocal burial and female exogamy. We demonstrate that one male progenitor reproduced with four women: the descendants of two of those women were buried in the same half of the tomb over all generations. This suggests that maternal sub-lineages were grouped into branches whose distinctiveness was recognized during the construction of the tomb. Four men descended from non-lineage fathers and mothers who also reproduced with lineage male individuals, suggesting that some men adopted the children of their reproductive partners by other men into their patriline. Eight individuals were not close biological relatives of the main lineage, raising the possibility that kinship also encompassed social bonds independent of biological relatedness.




Cheers
 
Ralphie Boy: Thanks for posting that abstract was going to do so myself. Here is another paper just published today on Ancient British Isle DNA. Other than my interest in ancient DNA, not my lane obviously, but this one looks interesting as well and has a really good research team on it (i.e. Chris Fowler, Olade, Reich, etc) and should be of interest again to everyone who follows ancient DNA research and of course folks whose ancestors are from the British Isles in particular. Maybe this 2nd paper by Fowler et al 2021 deserves its own separate thread if the Moderators think so.

A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb: Nature 2021 by Fowler et al


Abstract

To explore kinship practices at chambered tombs in Early Neolithic Britain, here we combined archaeological and genetic analyses of 35 individuals who lived about 5,700 years ago and were entombed at Hazleton North long cairn1. Twenty-seven individuals are part of the first extended pedigree reconstructed from ancient DNA, a five-generation family whose many interrelationships provide statistical power to document kinship practices that were invisible without direct genetic data. Patrilineal descent was key in determining who was buried in the tomb, as all 15 intergenerational transmissions were through men. The presence of women who had reproduced with lineage men and the absence of adult lineage daughters suggest virilocal burial and female exogamy. We demonstrate that one male progenitor reproduced with four women: the descendants of two of those women were buried in the same half of the tomb over all generations. This suggests that maternal sub-lineages were grouped into branches whose distinctiveness was recognized during the construction of the tomb. Four men descended from non-lineage fathers and mothers who also reproduced with lineage male individuals, suggesting that some men adopted the children of their reproductive partners by other men into their patriline. Eight individuals were not close biological relatives of the main lineage, raising the possibility that kinship also encompassed social bonds independent of biological relatedness.




Cheers

Interesting and strange as well. Were they talking about the children of the lineage fathers being adopted by the non-lineage fathers? If so, was it perhaps because of the death of the lineage fathers, i.e. were those children older? Or was it a sort of droit de seigneur? I wonder if the children of the mothers with lineage male individuals were higher status?
 

Interesting and strange as well. Were they talking about the children of the lineage fathers being adopted by the non-lineage fathers? If so, was it perhaps because of the death of the lineage fathers, i.e. were those children older? Or was it a sort of droit de seigneur? I wonder if the children of the mothers with lineage male individuals were higher status?

Glad to know I'm not the only person who found this interesting


Would be interesting to figure out if offspring of women with men other than the founder were born before, during (with or without his knowledge), or after their offspring with him. This would have major implications but hard to tell from genetic data!

Link to Reich's site, where the paper as well as the Supplementary tables and pdf are available.
Publications | David Reich Lab (harvard.edu)

































Iosif Lazaridis


@iosif_lazaridis

















Would be interesting to figure out if offspring of women with men other than the founder were born before, during (with or without his knowledge), or after their offspring with him. This would have major implications but hard to tell from genetic data!


 
Glad to know I'm not the only person who found this interesting


Would be interesting to figure out if offspring of women with men other than the founder were born before, during (with or without his knowledge), or after their offspring with him. This would have major implications but hard to tell from genetic data!

Link to Reich's site, where the paper as well as the Supplementary tables and pdf are available.
Publications | David Reich Lab (harvard.edu)



































Iosif Lazaridis


@iosif_lazaridis

















Would be interesting to figure out if offspring of women with men other than the founder were born before, during (with or without his knowledge), or after their offspring with him. This would have major implications but hard to tell from genetic data!



Angela: Here is an article that has some quotes from both Reich and Fowler. It has some thoughts on the question that you were asking that might provide additional insight. Paragraph 8 is provides some nice detail on the question.

https://phys.org/news/2021-12-ancient-dna-reveals-world-oldest.html

Early Buon Natale to you and your family.
 
Angela: Here is an article that has some quotes from both Reich and Fowler. It has some thoughts on the question that you were asking that might provide additional insight. Paragraph 8 is provides some nice detail on the question.

https://phys.org/news/2021-12-ancient-dna-reveals-world-oldest.html

Early Buon Natale to you and your family.

Thank you and the same to you.

Well, one thing is clear from the paper. Steppe men weren't the only ones to have "harems".

As to the question of these "adopted" sons, if there were some way to identify which of the women's sons were "older", then things would be clearer. It's easy to imagine a man taking as a partner a woman (and "adopting"her sons) whose first partner had died or been killed (perhaps even by him). If the "adopted" children are close in age to the patrilineal ones, then what to make of it? Infidelity? It can't be a man from the settlement, because the dna would show it. Were women perhaps "loaned out" to guests, as the Eskimos, among other groups, supposedly did? I can't see a scenario where the "adopted" sons are much younger than the patrilineal sons because where are the biological fathers?

Very interesting, anyway. After Christmas I have to comb through the paper more carefully to see if there was any difference in status.
 
Ralphie Boy: Thanks for posting that abstract was going to do so myself. Here is another paper just published today on Ancient British Isle DNA. Other than my interest in ancient DNA, not my lane obviously, but this one looks interesting as well and has a really good research team on it (i.e. Chris Fowler, Olade, Reich, etc) and should be of interest again to everyone who follows ancient DNA research and of course folks whose ancestors are from the British Isles in particular. Maybe this 2nd paper by Fowler et al 2021 deserves its own separate thread if the Moderators think so.

A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb: Nature 2021 by Fowler et al


Abstract

To explore kinship practices at chambered tombs in Early Neolithic Britain, here we combined archaeological and genetic analyses of 35 individuals who lived about 5,700 years ago and were entombed at Hazleton North long cairn1. Twenty-seven individuals are part of the first extended pedigree reconstructed from ancient DNA, a five-generation family whose many interrelationships provide statistical power to document kinship practices that were invisible without direct genetic data. Patrilineal descent was key in determining who was buried in the tomb, as all 15 intergenerational transmissions were through men. The presence of women who had reproduced with lineage men and the absence of adult lineage daughters suggest virilocal burial and female exogamy. We demonstrate that one male progenitor reproduced with four women: the descendants of two of those women were buried in the same half of the tomb over all generations. This suggests that maternal sub-lineages were grouped into branches whose distinctiveness was recognized during the construction of the tomb. Four men descended from non-lineage fathers and mothers who also reproduced with lineage male individuals, suggesting that some men adopted the children of their reproductive partners by other men into their patriline. Eight individuals were not close biological relatives of the main lineage, raising the possibility that kinship also encompassed social bonds independent of biological relatedness.




Cheers

this is the kind of structures that would possibly explain the turnover of Y-DNA after the so-called invasion of steppe peoples

but it appears this kind of structures were allready in place in MN Western Europe
 
In the vast majority of human cultures, in some ways men are always men.
 
I've been a bit out of the loop with new papers (home and family obligations), but this one does intrigue me. It also makes sense considering the higher amount of LBK modeled for France and England:

Retg3c2.jpg


So does this mean that Scotland (and Ireland) are more related to the original Steppe people that invaded the British Isles?

Based on what I have seen from other studies, Hungarian seems to be a good proxy for other central European countries, like Germanics. Could they Anglo-Saxons have brought more EEF, that re-enforced the LBA migration from France?
 
I've been a bit out of the loop with new papers (home and family obligations), but this one does intrigue me. It also makes sense considering the higher amount of LBK modeled for France and England:

Retg3c2.jpg


So does this mean that Scotland (and Ireland) are more related to the original Steppe people that invaded the British Isles?

Based on what I have seen from other studies, Hungarian seems to be a good proxy for other central European countries, like Germanics. Could they Anglo-Saxons have brought more EEF, that re-enforced the LBA migration from France?

I don't think much LBK was left in France.
They were displaced by people with a Cardial Ware signature during the MN (Michelsberg and megalithic cultures).
But these people had DNA that was very similar to LBK.
So LBK remains as a proxy.
 
In the vast majority of human cultures, in some ways men are always men.

the Red Hot Chili Peppers were asked once during an interview why each of them had another girl friend every week
their answer was straigth and simple : 'because we can'

and these girls were not even forced or pushed
they probably were proud to have dated the Red Hot Chili Peppers

the circumstances may have been different in older times
 

This thread has been viewed 4157 times.

Back
Top