New haplogroup I2a map

[how yes no 2]

hey, how yes no could you psot the exact percentages of all haplogroups found in serbia and montenegro from that study you posted as i cant read it... need to pay for it

I can access the article...

But if you do not trust data I have put here, you can use supplementary tables (those everyone can access) and calculate yourself percentage... it is fairly easy calculation (just counting number of samples belonging to certain haplogroup and dividing it with total number of samples)... pay attention that rows are not per sample but per exact value for markers, and thus in front of every row is a number showing how many samples with this exact set of markers are found... thus if number is 2 that row needs to be counted twice...

edit:
I just realized that data is not actually posted on this topic, and that you wanted to see it...

haplogrroup____Serbia____Montenegro
I1_____________7.8%_____6.2%
I2b1___________1.67%___1.73%
I2a2 __________38.5% ___29.2%
E1b1b _________ 17.3%___27.0%
R1a____________14.5%____7.4%
R1b____________ 4.5%____9.4%
J1______________0.6% ___0.5%
J2a ____________3.3%____4.7%
J2b ____________1.7% ___4.5%
G2a____________2.2%____2.5%
N ______________3.3% ___1.5%
Q _____________1.7%____2.0%
H______________2.2% ___1.5%
L_______________0.6%____1.2%

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21235/suppinfo

 

[MichaelOH]

Jean Manco's online 'The Peopling of Europe' conjectures that this fairly rare, intermediate I2a2a-Disles was brought to Britain and Ireland as a 'fellow traveller' with Yamnaya bands.

As yet, there is no SNP which defines 'Disles' but it is slightly closer to I2a2a-Dinaric than to the L161 positive, I2a2b-Isles.

I agree with you regarding a Danube Basin origin for the common ancestor of I2a2a-Dinaric and I2a2b-Isles. The 'Isles' mutation L161 probably occurred in northern Germany.

As I understand it, the sparsity of I2a2a-Disles in west continental Europe, together with TMRCA for 'Disles' being roughly 1500 years, leads to the conclusion that the origin of this type is in pre-Roman north Britain, from which it then spread outward back to the continent and to Ireland. It appears to have evolved from the I2a2a-Dinaric which arrived in Britain long after I2a2b arrived there.

We don't always have to assume that because one type appears to be intermediate it must therefore be the missing link between the earlier and later forms.

 

[Bogdan]

I can access the article...

But if you do not trust data I have put here, you can use supplementary tables (those everyone can access) and calculate yourself percentage... it is fairly easy calculation (just counting number of samples belonging to certain haplogroup and dividing it with total number of samples)... pay attention that rows are not per sample but per exact value for markers, and thus in front of every row is a number showing how many samples with this exact set of markers are found... thus if number is 2 that row needs to be counted twice...

edit:
I just realized that data is not actually posted on this topic, and that you wanted to see it...

haplogrroup____Serbia____Montenegro
I1_____________7.8%_____6.2%
I2b1___________1.67%___1.73%
I2a2 __________38.5% ___29.2%
E1b1b _________ 17.3%___27.0%
R1a____________14.5%____7.4%
R1b____________ 4.5%____9.4%
J1______________0.6% ___0.5%
J2a ____________3.3%____4.7%
J2b ____________1.7% ___4.5%
G2a____________2.2%____2.5%
N ______________3.3% ___1.5%
Q _____________1.7%____2.0%
H______________2.2% ___1.5%
L_______________0.6%____1.2%

yup thats all i wanted thanks for posting that couldn't find it anywhere....

 

[how yes no 2]

if I2a1 in Spain is there from before Germanic tribes settlement, let's try to see who brought it...

Carpetani from what I can see...(btw. notice Germani just south of them..)...

again this fits tribal name into haplogroup I tribal name pattern
(Swedes (I1), Suebes(I1), Serbs (I2a2), Sarbans (I?), Sardinians (I2a1)...)

Iberia seems to have been settled same like America much later..as different base tribes made their colonies there (Helleni, Germani, Seurbi, Celti...)

in fact tribal name might be related to the name of Carpathian mountains and to the tribe Carpi that existed there...

In late Roman documents, the Eastern Carpathian Mountains were referred to as Montes Sarmatici. The Western Carpathians were called Carpates. The name Carpates is first recorded in Ptolemy's second century book Geographia. Around 310 AD the Carpathians are mentioned as Montes Serrorum by the Flavius Galerius Valerius Licinianus Licinius.
The name of the Carpi, a Dacians tribe may have been derived from the name of the Carpathian Mountains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_mountains

Carpi are often considered to be Dacians but:

Zosimus, a Byzantine chronicler writing around AD 500, records an invasion of Rome's Danubian provinces in 381 by a barbarian coalition of Huns, Scirii and Karpodakai ("Carpo-Dacians").[36] The latter term has been taken by many scholars as "proof" of the Carpi's Dacian ethnicity.[33] But this is the only literary evidence linking the Carpi name to that of the Dacians, and Zosimus is regarded by some modern scholars as an unreliable chronicler. One historian accords Zosimus "an unsurpassable claim to be regarded as the worst of all the extant Greek historians of the Roman Empire...it would be tedious to catalogue all the instances where this historian has falsely transcribed names, not to mention his confusion of events...".[37][38]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpi_(people)

 

[Yorkie]

As I understand it, the sparsity of I2a2a-Disles in west continental Europe, together with TMRCA for 'Disles' being roughly 1500 years, leads to the conclusion that the origin of this type is in pre-Roman north Britain, from which it then spread outward back to the continent and to Ireland. It appears to have evolved from the I2a2a-Dinaric which arrived in Britain long after I2a2b arrived there.

We don't always have to assume that because one type appears to be intermediate it must therefore be the missing link between the earlier and later forms.

I merely relayed Jean Manco's opinion that I2a2a-Disles was possibly brought to Britain via Yamnaya bands, and suggested a possible Danube Basin origin for I2a2a-Dinaric.

I am in close contact with the 'discoverer' of I2a2a-Disles, Ken Nordtvedt, and earlier this week he emailed me to suggest that I2a2a-Disles was probably founded in pre-Roman Britain, which I relayed on DNA Forums. Ken also told me that, as yet, there are no continental members of I2a2a-Disles. I never said that I2a2a-Disles was a 'missing link'. The fact is that I2a2a-Disles is closer to I2a2a-Dinaric than it is to L161 I2a2b-Isles.

As for your scenario of I2a2a-Disles 'spreading back to the continent' and then going on to Ireland; certainly the clade is found in Ireland after Scotland in terms of numbers, but I see no evidence of it spreading back. There are no continental members as yet. So where is the evidence for that?

Incidentally, how can I2a2a-Disles have evolved from I2a2a-Dinaric 'which arrived in Britain long after I2a2b'? As Ken Nordtvedt has confirmed, I2a2a-Dinaric is absent in Britain...

I think that you are getting slightly mixed up re clades here. We don't really know how the man who founded I2a2a-Disles in pre-Roman Britain got there yet [aside from Jean Manco's theory]. Ken Nordtvedt's current view is from 'somewhere on the continent'. I2a2a-Disles is a tiny clade and we need a lot more data on it.

Incidentally, the TMRCA for I2a2a-Disles is 3,500 years not 1,500 years.

 

[Shetop]

I merely relayed Jean Manco's opinion that I2a2a-Disles was possibly brought to Britain via Yamnaya bands, and suggested a possible Danube Basin origin for I2a2a-Dinaric.

I think Jean Manco also accepted Ukrainian Polesia as the place of origin of I2a2a-Dinaric.

 

[Yorkie]

I think Jean Manco also accepted Ukrainian Polesia as the place of origin of I2a2a-Dinaric.

Ken Nordtvedt has toyed with both the Danube Basin and Bohemia. I don't think he wants to say anything 'definate' yet. I have wondered about Ukraine too for Dinaric.

 

[Shetop]

It's a pity this text is not in English, but those really interested in the origin of I2a2a-Dinaric may find a way to translate it:
http://www.rus-obr.ru/idea/1148

 

[how yes no 2]

It's a pity this text is not in English, but those really interested in the origin of I2a2a-Dinaric may find a way to translate it:
http://www.rus-obr.ru/idea/1148

text is an interview with some archeologist about early Slavs...that archeologist mentions some cultures he identified with spread of Slavs by tracing backwards starting from location of early historical mention of Slavs... he has a theory that this lead to Polesia as original homeland of Slavs and he dates it to 4th century...

but origin of I2a2-Dinaric (and its spread probably) is significantly older than 4th century.... we do not even know whether I2a2-Dinaric is related to origin of Slavs or it was slavicized at some point later......

e.g. if you look at familytreedna I2a project, there is a line of I2a2-Dinaric South stretching from Switzerland to Denmark... and this is not coincidence as I2* spreads in same line...
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=ymap
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2nosubcladeM170P215/default.aspx?section=ymap

now, this is way too west to be due to historically known Slavic settlements...

 

[Shetop]

text is about archeological sites and cultures traced back from early mention of Slavs... and this particular archeologist has atheory that this lead to Polesia in 4th century...
but origin of I2a2 is significantly older than 4th century.... we do not even know whether I2a2-Dinaric is related to origin of Slavs or it was slavicized at some point later......

Well again the question I asked several times - did Slavs settle the Balkans or not?

If they did which were the regions they settled?
What do historical sources say - where did they come from?

There are only few points which should be connected, and the conclusion is immanent.

 

[how yes no 2]

Well again the question I asked several times - did Slavs settle the Balkans or not?

If they did which were the regions they settled?
What do historical sources say - where did they come from?

There are only few points which should be connected, and the conclusion is immanent.

well, then connect them aloud, so that I can tell you whether I can agree with that... and if not, why not...

I do not think it is as simple as you probably think it is..

 

[Shetop]

I don't have the time to write about all people with significant percentages I2a2a-Dinaric.

Serbs and Croats settled western Balkans in 7th century. Regions they settled coincide with those with the highest I2a2a- Dinaric.

For both of these tribes historians consider regions North of Carpathians (for Serbs Elbe river Basin) as the region where they came form. At that time this was exactly the area of the Prague Culture.

It is known that just a couple of centuries before Serbs and Croats did not inhabit Prague culture region, nor did Prague culture even exist.

So where did they come from?

Many archeologist (not just that one above) believe that Prague culture started spreading from Polesia. If we see that Polesia has significant frequencies of I2a2a-Dinaric today it is very plausible to think it is where it all started.

You are correct that the earliest archeological of Prague culture fall in the 4th century, and I2a2a Dinaric TMRCA is dated to several centuries before but there are no basis to make strong conclusions what was going on with those people before 3rd century.

 

[how yes no 2]

I don't have the time to write about all people with significant percentages I2a2a-Dinaric.
Serbs and Croats settled western Balkans in 7th century. Regions they settled coincide with those with the highest I2a2a- Dinaric.
For both of these tribes historians consider regions North of Carpathians (for Serbs Elbe river Basin) as the region where they came form. At that time this was exactly the area of the Prague Culture.
It is known that just a couple of centuries before Serbs and Croats did not inhabit Prague culture region, nor did Prague culture even exist.
So where did they come from?
Many archeologist (not just that one above) believe that Prague culture started spreading from Polesia. If we see that Polesia has significant frequencies of I2a2a-Dinaric today it is very plausible to think it is where it all started.
You are correct that the earliest archeological of Prague culture fall in the 4th century, and I2a2a Dinaric TMRCA is dated to several centuries before but there are no basis to make strong conclusions what was going on with those people before 3rd century.

ok, I can almost buy that...

but what about I2a2-Dinaric South line from Switzerland to Denmark on family tree dna (coinciding with line for I2*)?

also, attempt to make clusters of populations did group Serbs and Croats with Romanians, central Ukraine, and east and west Hungary...
It did not cluster them with Czech, Poles, Russians, east and west Ukrainians who are separate not related cluster... wouldn't they be more likely to fit into proto-Slavic?

see the large figure at:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/11/clustering-of-european-y-strs.html
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TNLyVNbffHI/AAAAAAAAC0E/vsEQYTTobHQ/s1600/Ystrclusters.png

Slavs were though made of Sclaveni and Antes.... Antes were earlier mentioned as Sarmatian tribe... Antes carry name that is likely derived from Paphlagonia Eneti (same as Veneti tribe origins from Eneti).. Veneti match location of both I2a* samples found so far (one in Veneto, other in Brittany)
so, I think that Sarmatians / Antes might be the cluster with I2a2...

however, I think that original carriers of I2a2 went under Serb-like names

Serbs and Croats came to Balkan from white Serbia and whute Croatia... neither was in Romania or Hungary....or near Danube in fact..

the cluster with Serbs and Croats does not include white Croatia (which was in area west Ukraine, south Poland, Slovakia)

white(west) Serbia was likely in Bohemia, which is hypothesized by some to be birth place of I2a2-Dinaric, but I think that hotspot there is just because it was west Serbia, that is because it was for some time in not so distant past (before Czechs and after Boii and Suebi) settled by Serbs...

Romania and Hungary are on other hand explained by Seneca's mention of Serians who dare to cross frozen Danube and rule over Dacians... his Serians are same people with the Serians of Red sea (Sheba/Sabean), northwest China(Seres) and Caspian highlands (Serboi).. all those places share haplogroup I (likely I2, perhaps I2a2 imprint)

I am also curious how Pannonians fit into this, as according to Strabo in his time (1st century AD) they live in ex-Yugoslavia and not Illyrians...
if their language is Slavic-alike (as I think it is), than big chunk of I2a2 may origin from them as well... and even though they are pre-Slav settlers, their Slavic-alike language would explain why extremely I2a2 areas (as Croats in Herzegovina) do speak Slavic language...

 

[Shetop]

ok, I can almost buy that...

but what about I2a2-Dinaric South line from Switzerland to Denmark on family tree dna (coinciding with line for I2*)?

I think you are talking about Germany? Well as I wrote in my previous post I2a2 did temporarily settle Eastern Germany. So this Y-DNA spread to other parts of Germany also. But actually it represents very low frequency for Germany as a whole. Germans simply did take much more DNA tests than people from Balkans.

also, attempt to make clusters of populations did group Serbs and Croats with Romanians, central Ukraine, and east and west Hungary...
It did not cluster them with Czech, Poles, Russians, east and west Ukrainians who are separate not related cluster... wouldn't they be more likely to fit into proto-Slavic?

I'm not aware of any historical Y-DNA issue explained with autosomal analysis. All the answers we have so far, about R1b, I1, I2a2, J2 etc are provided by different kind of arguments. Mostly by taking into account the TMRCA of particular clades inside haaplogroups.

Autosomal analysis is just nice way to see how much are different nations related, but if you want to understand history I believe it is wrong way to go.

For example we are doing one analysis and we set Basques as Western Europeans. What does this mean? When did they come to Western Europe? If analysis show Welsh people are the closest to them (which of course we know in advance, because it is obvious) does this mean Basques came from Wales?

I see no sensible logic to use there. Anyone can grab any group of people and set them as reference. And those people could live in entirely different region just 2000 years earlier. And there goes the reference... I think it is ridiculous.

 

[Yorkie]

I think you are talking about Germany? Well as I wrote in my previous post I2a2 did temporarily settle Eastern Germany. So this Y-DNA spread to other parts of Germany also. But actually it represents very low frequency for Germany as a whole. Germans simply did take much more DNA tests than people from Balkans.



I'm not aware of any historical Y-DNA issue explained with autosomal analysis. All the answers we have so far, about R1b, I1, I2a2, J2 etc are provided by different kind of arguments. Mostly by taking into account the TMRCA of particular clades inside haaplogroups.

Autosomal analysis is just nice way to see how much are different nations related, but if you want to understand history I believe it is wrong way to go.

For example we are doing one analysis and we set Basques as Western Europeans. What does this mean? When did they come to Western Europe? If analysis show Welsh people are the closest to them (which of course we know in advance, because it is obvious) does this mean Basques came from Wales?

I see no sensible logic to use there. Anyone can grab any group of people and set them as reference. And those people could live in entirely different region just 2000 years earlier. And there goes the reference... I think it is ridiculous.

I don't think that I2a2a-Dinaric settled eastern Germany. What 'Dinaric' there is in Germany probably came from eastern European immigration.

The L161 I2a2b-Isles variety of I2a2, on the other hand, was probably founded in northern Germany and there is a definate, small presence in Germany today.

 

[Shetop]

I don't think that I2a2a-Dinaric settled eastern Germany. What 'Dinaric' there is in Germany probably came from eastern European immigration.

That explanation has a problem because Dinaric-South is more frequent than Dinaric-North in Germany.

Also your point disregards explanation on - how did Dinaric-South travel from its homeland towards its final destination?

I offered this explanation several times.

 

[MichaelOH]

I merely relayed Jean Manco's opinion that I2a2a-Disles was possibly brought to Britain via Yamnaya bands, and suggested a possible Danube Basin origin for I2a2a-Dinaric.

I am in close contact with the 'discoverer' of I2a2a-Disles, Ken Nordtvedt, and earlier this week he emailed me to suggest that I2a2a-Disles was probably founded in pre-Roman Britain, which I relayed on DNA Forums. Ken also told me that, as yet, there are no continental members of I2a2a-Disles. I never said that I2a2a-Disles was a 'missing link'. The fact is that I2a2a-Disles is closer to I2a2a-Dinaric than it is to L161 I2a2b-Isles.

As for your scenario of I2a2a-Disles 'spreading back to the continent' and then going on to Ireland; certainly the clade is found in Ireland after Scotland in terms of numbers, but I see no evidence of it spreading back. There are no continental members as yet. So where is the evidence for that?

Incidentally, how can I2a2a-Disles have evolved from I2a2a-Dinaric 'which arrived in Britain long after I2a2b'? As Ken Nordtvedt has confirmed, I2a2a-Dinaric is absent in Britain...

I think that you are getting slightly mixed up re clades here. We don't really know how the man who founded I2a2a-Disles in pre-Roman Britain got there yet [aside from Jean Manco's theory]. Ken Nordtvedt's current view is from 'somewhere on the continent'. I2a2a-Disles is a tiny clade and we need a lot more data on it.

Incidentally, the TMRCA for I2a2a-Disles is 3,500 years not 1,500 years.

You are right about MRCA. The time of coalescence for I2a2 Disles is circa 500 AD. I agree that this coalescence probably took place in Britain.

Because all living I2a2 Disles males have a MRCA at 1,500 BC plus or minus, does not I2a2 Disles this common ancestor make. There could have been several I2a2 Dinaric types whose descendants were evolving into I2a2 Disles at the same time, so that the date of coalescence when all of these descendants stabilized as I2a2 Disles, presumably in GB, is significantly later than TMRCA.

 

[Yorkie]

You are right about MRCA. The time of coalescence for I2a2 Disles is circa 500 AD. I agree that this coalescence probably took place in Britain.

Because all living I2a2 Disles males have a MRCA at 1,500 BC plus or minus, does not I2a2 Disles this common ancestor make. There could have been several I2a2 Dinaric types whose descendants were evolving into I2a2 Disles at the same time, so that the date of coalescence when all of these descendants stabilized as I2a2 Disles, presumably in GB, is significantly later than TMRCA.

I'm glad you agree, and I'm also glad that we are not still growling at each other . Regarding I2a2a-Dinaric 'types'- well, the only ones I know of are 'Dinaric-North' and 'Dinaric-South'. There are some Croatian and Russian trends re certain STR markers but they don't constitute extra types according to Ken [Nordtvedt]. I hope that further data emerges soon so that we can get a better picture of Disles.

The fact remains though that I2a2a-Dinaric [and anything like it] is absent in Britain. The branchlines that linked the eastern I2a2a-Dinaric and the north-western I2a2b-Isles went their own way 13,000 years ago.

 

[how yes no 2]

I think you are talking about Germany? Well as I wrote in my previous post I2a2 did temporarily settle Eastern Germany. So this Y-DNA spread to other parts of Germany also. But actually it represents very low frequency for Germany as a whole. Germans simply did take much more DNA tests than people from Balkans.

exactly, they did do much more tests...

so why is there one I2a2 Dinaric south in east Germany and 5 all in line cutting west-central Germany on line north south from Denmark to Swiss?
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=ymap

how come this coincides with same line for I2* spread?
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2nosubcladeM170P215/default.aspx?section=ymap

I think that Germanic Suebi might have had some I2a2-Dinaric south.... tribal splits are never clear cut...

btw. Denmark, Swiss, Serbia...what is common for those lands?
symbol of white cross on red background...

as tribal name, coat of arms might speak about possible genetic history of Serbs

originaly white cross (cross is an ancient symbol that was wide used much before Christianity) on red background, as in Denmark and Swiss,

than white eagle as in Poland,

than eagle becomes double headed as the one of Byzantium

and letters appear on the shield as the ones on the flag of the Palaiologos dynasty of Byzantine Empire..

peoples adopt symbols by being part of larger tribal unions (e.g. in coats of arms of counties in Slovakia, Czech republic and south Poland there are lot of red white chessboard shields that are likely due to areas being part of white Croatia...)
or by being impressed (e.g. Russians got current flag due to tsar Peter the Great, who spent part of his life living incognito in Netherlands, and was impressed by Dutch flag...later most Slavic countries as being impressed by success of Russia followed the trend and have chosen blue, red and white colors for their flags... )

I'm not aware of any historical Y-DNA issue explained with autosomal analysis. All the answers we have so far, about R1b, I1, I2a2, J2 etc are provided by different kind of arguments. Mostly by taking into account the TMRCA of particular clades inside haaplogroups.

who said this is about autosomal analysis?

Roewer et al. had previously discovered structure in European Y-chromosomes with Y-STRs. The new study, five years later, uses a huge database of population samples. While Y-SNPs defining haplogroups are safer due to the avoidance of homoplasy, which can be a problem with a few Y-STR markers, I believe that most major haplogroups can be distinguished even with few Y-STRs, so the paper's results are valid.

From the paper:
In a total of 33,010 males we identified 4176 different haplotypes, 2192 were unique, and 56 corresponded to 42% of the Y chromosomes

from link in previous quote:

A very important new paper uses short tandem repeat (STR) markers on the human Y-chromosome over a set of 12,700 European individuals. STRs are fast mutating, making them unsuitable for the inference of phylogeny, but conversely suitable for detecting more recent population movements.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/11/clustering-of-european-y-strs.html
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/01/y-strs-in-europe.html

 

[Shetop]

who said this is about autosomal DNA?

Well I never paid attention on details of such studies (similar to autosomal ).
Ok, I understand there is a difference.

Are there any conclusions made by authors that were interesting to you?