Lack of G2a in Basque

In my opinion, Haplogroup I2a1 is most likely to be the "original" Y-Haplogroup associated with the Basques. I think so for several reasons: first off, we know that I2a1 was present in western Europe in the Neolithic (in Treilles), alongside G2a. In my opinion, the fact that Treilles was mixed G2a and I2a1 does by no means contradict the fact that modern-day Basques have virtually no G2a.

The other issue is that apart from Sardinia, the Basque country (and moreso, Aragon) has one of the highest concentrations of I2a1.
 
This makes sense to me. At least, I2a1 was one of the first, because we can't exclude the posibility of another one, as for example some subclades of R1b as I said, that could be more present between the Basques than in other populations.
 
This makes sense to me. At least, I2a1 was one of the first, because we can't exclude the posibility of another one, as for example some subclades of R1b as I said, that could be more present between the Basques than in other populations.

Haplogroup I as a whole is definitely old (despite the apparent bottleneck effect), and in my opinion it's the best candidate for Paleolithic Y-Haplogroups in Europe. But it doesn't necessarily have to be that. We merely know that it is at least Neolithic in age.

Something else I wanted to bring up is: just because I2a1 and G2a are present in Treilles doesn't mean the two Haplogroups are associated with each other. If you look at the distribution of I2a1 and G2a today it's very clear that they weren't.
 
I don't agree at all. The (proto)-Celtic branch is tought to be the R-S116, which is where Basques and all spaniards belong too. In today's basque country there is Celtic or at least Indo-european toponymia. In historic times there were celts living there. As for the G2a, is curious that basques autosomally lack the West-Asian component (which peaks in Georgians) and as well the G2a peaks in Georgians.

But there isn't good evidence that Basques are the same people as those who produced Celtic toponymia, is there? I recall reading that modern Basques are most likely primarily descended from people who lived in Aquitania in Classical times. Do you think they're more native to the Basque Country?

Besides, R1b-S116 includes populations other than Basques that were non-IE, like the Iberians of the Classical Age, unless you're suggesting that they were entirely R1b-S116-. So I don't think it would be inconsistent with the data to suppose that R1b-S116 peoples were descended from small non-IE populations who largely adopted IE languages, but not entirely. (Although I'm not sure I'm going to argue that it's the most likely scenario, just that it is a possible scenario).

Haplogroup I as a whole is definitely old (despite the apparent bottleneck effect), and in my opinion it's the best candidate for Paleolithic Y-Haplogroups in Europe. But it doesn't necessarily have to be that. We merely know that it is at least Neolithic in age.

Haplogroup I dated conventionally is about 22,000 years old... very Paleolithic. What are you suggesting? A serious dating error? Multiple migrations and subsequent extinction in Asia? (Keep in mind that I2 is itself dated to about 21,000 years ago and branches into 11+ extant subclades, all of which have a center of diversity in Europe, by the beginning of the Neolithic).

Something else I wanted to bring up is: just because I2a1 and G2a are present in Treilles doesn't mean the two Haplogroups are associated with each other. If you look at the distribution of I2a1 and G2a today it's very clear that they weren't.

But there are some interesting patterns they share, like how Sardinia has the largest frequency of both in Europe. I2a1a is the Haplogroup I subclade that appears to have spread the most during the Neolithic of the Haplogroup I subclades, and G2a seems to be the primary haplogroup of the Neolithic farmers, at least that we've found so far. So I do see some correlation, with the main reason they don't correlate strictly being that they started spreading from opposite sides of Europe.
 
Haplogroup I dated conventionally is about 22,000 years old... very Paleolithic. What are you suggesting? A serious dating error? Multiple migrations and subsequent extinction in Asia? (Keep in mind that I2 is itself dated to about 21,000 years ago and branches into 11+ extant subclades, all of which have a center of diversity in Europe, by the beginning of the Neolithic).

I was suggesting nothing, I just may have worded it somewhat unfortunately. The statement that I2a1 is known to have been in "in Europe at least since the Neolithic" does not rule out Paleolithic. From that perpective, Haplogroup I remains the most likely candidate for being Paleolithic. I agree that I also haven't seen any convincing model yet of how Haplogroup I could have entered at a later day, anyways, and also from where. Paleolithic is indeed the most likely explanation.

But there are some interesting patterns they share, like how Sardinia has the largest frequency of both in Europe. I2a1a is the Haplogroup I subclade that appears to have spread the most during the Neolithic of the Haplogroup I subclades, and G2a seems to be the primary haplogroup of the Neolithic farmers, at least that we've found so far. So I do see some correlation, with the main reason they don't correlate strictly being that they started spreading from opposite sides of Europe.

Yeah, I see your point.
 
Yes and no. It still appears to me that the typically "Celtic" (at least, those that are usually considered that, as mentioned, L21 and U152) subclades of S116 are very rare in the Basque Country and in Iberia as a whole.
Well, that's simply not true. L21 is not rare at all in Iberia. But I would want you to read this quote on R-S116 :

R-S116 shows maximum Y-STR diversity in France and Germany but maximum frequency in Iberia and the British Isles. In the latter region it is represented mainly by R-M529 with the R-M222 subclade being particularly prominent in Ireland but also North England. It would be interesting to see data for Scotland, and I do not doubt that R-M222 would be prominent there as well. R-S116 also shows signs of being a Celtic, or Celtiberian-related lineage.

European Journal of Human Genetics doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.146

A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe

Natalie M Myres et al.
 
Yes and no. It still appears to me that the typically "Celtic" (at least, those that are usually considered that, as mentioned, L21 and U152) subclades of S116 are very rare in the Basque Country and in Iberia as a whole.
Well, that's simply not true. L21 is not rare at all in Iberia. But I would want you to read this quote on R-S116 :

R-S116 shows maximum Y-STR diversity in France and Germany but maximum frequency in Iberia and the British Isles. In the latter region it is represented mainly by R-M529 with the R-M222 subclade being particularly prominent in Ireland but also North England. It would be interesting to see data for Scotland, and I do not doubt that R-M222 would be prominent there as well. R-S116 also shows signs of being a Celtic, or Celtiberian-related lineage.

European Journal of Human Genetics doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.146

A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe

Natalie M Myres et al.
 
Yes and no. It still appears to me that the typically "Celtic" (at least, those that are usually considered that, as mentioned, L21 and U152) subclades of S116 are very rare in the Basque Country and in Iberia as a whole.
Well, that's simply not true. L21 is not rare at all in Iberia. But I would want you to read this quote on R-S116 :

R-S116 shows maximum Y-STR diversity in France and Germany but maximum frequency in Iberia and the British Isles. In the latter region it is represented mainly by R-M529 with the R-M222 subclade being particularly prominent in Ireland but also North England. It would be interesting to see data for Scotland, and I do not doubt that R-M222 would be prominent there as well. R-S116 also shows signs of being a Celtic, or Celtiberian-related lineage.

European Journal of Human Genetics doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.146

A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe

Natalie M Myres et al.
 
Well, that's simply not true. L21 is not rare at all in Iberia. But I would want you to read this quote on R-S116 :

Explain to me why all studies I have seen thus far show common L21 only in the British Isles, plus some marginal evidence in northwestern France?

Even the Myres paper you cited says "In the latter region (ie Britain) it is represented mainly by R-M529 with the R-M222 subclade being particularly prominent in Ireland but also North England."

L21 appears to be quite rare in Iberia, just like for instance U152.
 
I thought the majority of the Basques R1b was the R1b1b2 - M153 which although greater in the French basques was still the most dominanat of the R1b for basques.

Besides, the french basques which where related to the gascons in both genes and language seems correct.
The I - haplogroup seems to be more "hidden" in the pyrennes and so more original for the basques .

The MtDna found for both Spanish and french Basques as a Neolithic marker was J1c1 and J2a
 
Well, that's simply not true. L21 is not rare at all in Iberia. But I would want you to read this quote on R-S116 :

Sorry but L21 is almost absent in Iberia

L21-S145-poE-CT.png
 
Sorry but L21 is almost absent in Iberia
Well, where is this map from ? Anyways, it is obviously almost absent, since it has not been tested on academic studies. But there is a project going on (you can see it in the Y-DNA section of this forum) with quite an amount of Iberians with L-21.
 
Well, where is this map from ? Anyways, it is obviously almost absent, since it has not been tested on academic studies. But there is a project going on (you can see it in the Y-DNA section of this forum) with quite an amount of Iberians with L-21.

You might also want to check this out:

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full.pdf

Also virtually no L21 on the Iberian penninsula, but, interestingly U152 which I had not seen before to this extend. It's also very clear that they have tested L21 in Iberian in their studies.
 
You might also want to check this out:

Also virtually no L21 on the Iberian penninsula, but, interestingly U152 which I had not seen before to this extend. It's also very clear that they have tested L21 in Iberian in their studies.
At the Myres et al. 2010 study there is 2.5% in Spain and 3% in Portugal. It's clearly not a celtic marker.
 
At the Myres et al. 2010 study there is 2.5% in Spain and 3% in Portugal. It's clearly not a celtic marker.

What makes you think U152 isn't Celtic at all? Granted, it can't beexclusively Celtic, but it very much matches the spread of the Hallstatt and La-Tene Cultures.
 
What makes you think U152 isn't Celtic at all? Granted, it can't beexclusively Celtic, but it very much matches the spread of the Hallstatt and La-Tene Cultures.
I was talking of L-21. Anyways, these are mini-subclades. What matches the spread of Celts is R-S116, Maciamo even has a map about it :

h t t p://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/546/r1b.png/
 
R1b-L11-Europe.png


Surprisingly the study found more R1b S116 in Provence and Catalonia than in the Basque country
 

This thread has been viewed 142803 times.

Back
Top