Modern distribution of R1b-Z2103

[halfalp]

I wouldn't believe anything Carlos Quiles wrote. His crackpot idea of the R1a people speaking Uralic invalidates any other work. Any Uralic population with R1a is a result of Slavic introgression; the haplogroup of the Uralics is N1c. Sanskrit and Lithuanian are too pure to have been the descendants of an Indo-European Uralic pidgin which would have been, in his theories, their parent. It is the Centum languages, the R1b tongues, that have the innovations. And the frequency of R1b-L51 drops precipitously east of the old Iron Curtain; it certainly has no part in spreading Indo-European tongues out of the steppe.

I dont think 1 bias toward a certain hypothesis, invalidate a complete person. That's basically what people use as an argument to discredite a lot of people, without critical thinking.

 

[Joey37]

I don't know, I guess you're right. But the idea of Corded Ware speaking Uralic makes no sense; there would be traces of it all the way into central Germany, and it would sort of invalidate the idea of Indo-European being a true language family, as some entire branches would be the result of language contact and replacement. I think Maciamo really illustrated this problem in his page on R1b-It has been suggested that Indo-European (IE) languages simply disseminated through contact, just like technologies, or because it was the language of a small elite and therefore its adoption conferred a certain perceived prestige. However people don't just change language like that because it sounds nicer or more prestigious. Even nowadays, with textbooks, dictionaries, compulsory language courses at school, private language schools for adults and multilingual TV programs, the majority of the people cannot become fluent in a completely foreign language, belonging to a different language family. The linguistic gap between pre-IE vernaculars and IE languages was about as big as between modern English and Chinese. English, Greek, Russian and Hindi are all related IE languages and therefore easier to learn for IE speakers than non-IE languages like Chinese, Arabic or Hungarian. From a linguistic point of view, only a wide-scale migration of IE speakers could explain the thorough adoption of IE languages in Western Europe - leaving only Basque as a remnant of the Neolithic languages". This speaks against demic diffusion; if R1a did not originally speak Indo-European languages, then they picked them up in the northern fringes of Yamna when it was still just a small community of forest-steppe people. I do believe, though, that R1b-Z2103 did play a major part in spreading Indo-European tongues; the distribution of this clade is much more widespread in Eurasia than the R1b-L51 descended clades.

 

[Pip]

From the data l have seen, the modern distribution of Z2103 appears to fall into two basic strands - an Armenian offshoot of Northern Maykop and a Central European branch. If there are any other modern branches that do not fall within these two strands, what are their distinguishing SNPs or STR features?

 

[halfalp]

I don't know, I guess you're right. But the idea of Corded Ware speaking Uralic makes no sense; there would be traces of it all the way into central Germany, and it would sort of invalidate the idea of Indo-European being a true language family, as some entire branches would be the result of language contact and replacement. I think Maciamo really illustrated this problem in his page on R1b-It has been suggested that Indo-European (IE) languages simply disseminated through contact, just like technologies, or because it was the language of a small elite and therefore its adoption conferred a certain perceived prestige. However people don't just change language like that because it sounds nicer or more prestigious. Even nowadays, with textbooks, dictionaries, compulsory language courses at school, private language schools for adults and multilingual TV programs, the majority of the people cannot become fluent in a completely foreign language, belonging to a different language family. The linguistic gap between pre-IE vernaculars and IE languages was about as big as between modern English and Chinese. English, Greek, Russian and Hindi are all related IE languages and therefore easier to learn for IE speakers than non-IE languages like Chinese, Arabic or Hungarian. From a linguistic point of view, only a wide-scale migration of IE speakers could explain the thorough adoption of IE languages in Western Europe - leaving only Basque as a remnant of the Neolithic languages". This speaks against demic diffusion; if R1a did not originally speak Indo-European languages, then they picked them up in the northern fringes of Yamna when it was still just a small community of forest-steppe people. I do believe, though, that R1b-Z2103 did play a major part in spreading Indo-European tongues; the distribution of this clade is much more widespread in Eurasia than the R1b-L51 descended clades.

Thing is, it's like Flat Earth. People who really are interested in this reality, you never gonna beat them, they gonna have hundred of arguments over you. The same goes for Carlos or Olympus Mons for exemple, or a lot of people, you can't really have a word because they know their " bias ", at the end of the day they might be wrong or right, or wrong in a way and right in another. I link Uralic with N1c, like i link IE with R1b, but maybe there is some subtilities that i dont think of, even with my big memory.

 

[Aaron1981]

I wouldn't believe anything Carlos Quiles wrote. His crackpot idea of the R1a people speaking Uralic invalidates any other work. Any Uralic population with R1a is a result of Slavic introgression; the haplogroup of the Uralics is N1c. Sanskrit and Lithuanian are too pure to have been the descendants of an Indo-European Uralic pidgin which would have been, in his theories, their parent. It is the Centum languages, the R1b tongues, that have the innovations. And the frequency of R1b-L51 drops precipitously east of the old Iron Curtain; it certainly has no part in spreading Indo-European tongues out of the steppe.

You haven't really thought this through have you? There are only about 600 years separating both Z2103 and L51 from their immediate parent, and L51+ hasn't been found any earlier than ~2500 BC.

 

[Pip]

I'm still interested in whether there is any evidence for a significant modern branch of Z2103 (Bashkir or otherwise) that does not appear Central European or Maykop/Armenian in origin. If we cannot find any, do we not have to provisionally conclude that Eastern Yamnayan male DNA predominantly died out? This is especially the case, as both West European L51 and Central European branches of Z2103 appear to have split away from Eastern (Russian/Caucasian) branches several hundred years before the Yamnayan culture arose.

 

[Pip]

The Western branch of today's Z2103 looks to have been formative primarily in North Eastern Europe, near to the fringe of the area occupied by Neolithic farming communities:
1. The core autosomal components of its ancient samples are Eastern Hunter Gatherer and Early European Farmer, with relatively small amounts of Western and Caucasian Hunter Gatherer.
2. Its SNP branches and the STR variance within those branches coalesce back to an estimated origin point somewhere near Poland.

Data indicates that Western Z2103's most successful branches most likely moved Southwards into the Balkans, Italy, Ukraine (and perhaps even Northern Spain) during the late 4th millennium BC. Its modern distribution has little or no correlation with the autosomal DNA proportions found in early Steppe populations, which are unlikely to be core Z2103 as their WHG component is far too high for this. The surviving branches of Western Z2103 look pretty much a balanced mix of EHG and EEF, suggesting a collaboration between these two ancestral populations that split away and evacuated East Central Europe approximately when the Yamnayans began to colonise it, and at least several centuries before the major Bell Beaker expansions took place.

Branches of Z2103 that remained in Northern Europe or settled in Central Ukraine look to have been subsumed into Corded Ware and Yamnayan populations before these too were mostly eliminated by adverse conditions or other groups.

Brother clades Western Z2103 and R1b-L51 seem to demonstrate a pretty much identical estimated development pattern until around the mid to early 4th millennium BC, when Z2103 took more Southerly paths and L51 moved into Northern France.

Z2103 looks perhaps to have been pushed to the Southern and South Eastern fringes of Europe by expansions from R1a-dominated and then L51-dominated populations.

Are there any more suggestions on how Z2103 got to where it is now most heavily distributed?

 

[KirmanjeDersim]

Hello,

I am Kurdish, Zaza-speakers of Ders?m region (Tunceli in Turkish). My Y-DNA is R1b-Z2103 > PH2731 > PH655.

My question is my Y-DNA is a Armenian sub-clades ? Actually I don’t understand, many administrators of Armenia DNA project say that my ancestry is Armenian.

Actually some my Y-DNA match say that they are Armenian of Dersim.

PS : Sorry for my English.

 

[Pip]

Hello,

I am Kurdish, Zaza-speakers of Ders�m region (Tunceli in Turkish). My Y-DNA is R1b-Z2103 > PH2731 > PH655.

My question is my Y-DNA is a Armenian sub-clades ? Actually I don’t understand, many administrators of Armenia DNA project say that my ancestry is Armenian.

Actually some my Y-DNA match say that they are Armenian of Dersim.

PS : Sorry for my English.

Yes, your y-DNA looks Armenian to me, going back to at least the early 3rd millennium BC.

 

[KirmanjeDersim]

Is it possible that my Y-DNA is of Iranian and not Armenian or even Anatolian origin? (Hittite)

 

[Lenab]

Is it possible that my Y-DNA is of Iranian and not Armenian or even Anatolian origin? (Hittite)

No R1b is from the Anatolian/Armenian origin. There is a video on YT called the Armenian dna project stating it. What's your origin?

 

[KirmanjeDersim]

I am Kurdish Zazaki-speakers of Dersim region (in Turkish : Tunceli) in Eastern Anatolia. In Family Tree DNA, I realised Y-DNA test and I have some Armenian match but they Armenian are Dersim Armenian. Two of my branch make Big-Y and we are new Mutation now we are R1b-Z2103 > L584 > PH1639 > PH2731 > PH655 > PH1731 > PH3425 > PH3610.
But two PH655 in Armenia make Big Y and they mutation are
PH2731 > PH655 > PH1731 > PH3425.
And datation is 1650 years ago, so I think that we separated from this date. But I don’t know.

 

[dosas]

Hello, I am new to this forum. I am currently waiting my Big-Y700 results, but I have done the Y-111 test before that. Feeding those results into Nevgen it gives me R1b Z2103>L584> PF7580. My paternal lineage is Greek Thracian afaik from Ivaylovgrad (currently Bulgaria).

 

[Pip]

There has been a lot of new data coming out on R1b-Z2103 regarding both its SNP phylogeny and STR diversity. ftDNA now publishes details on 278 samples. The data is now of sufficient volume and precision to enable estimates to be drawn with a reasonable degree of confidence.

My calculations now estimate an earlier TMRCA for today's Z2103 lineages (4,700 BC, compared to yfull's 3,500 BC) - three of its basal branches (PF331, Y13369 and Y4364) coalesce to estimated origin points south of the Caucasus, as do their basal sub-branches. The fourth basal branch (Z8131) also has a basal sub-branch (PH4902) coalescing to the Southern Caucasus. The hypothesis that extant Z2103's earliest development occurred in the Steppe, and that it only moved south of the Caucasus with Indo-European migrations in the mid 2nd millennium BC accordingly does not look credible.

Perhaps Z8131 expanding into the Steppe over the 5th and 4th millennia was one of the main sources of the increasing CHG component that arose there over this period?

 

[halfalp]

There has been a lot of new data coming out on R1b-Z2103 regarding both its SNP phylogeny and STR diversity. ftDNA now publishes details on 278 samples. The data is now of sufficient volume and precision to enable estimates to be drawn with a reasonable degree of confidence.

My calculations now estimate an earlier TMRCA for today's Z2103 lineages (4,700 BC, compared to yfull's 3,500 BC) - three of its basal branches (PF331, Y13369 and Y4364) coalesce to estimated origin points south of the Caucasus, as do their basal sub-branches. The fourth basal branch (Z8131) also has a basal sub-branch (PH4902) coalescing to the Southern Caucasus. The hypothesis that extant Z2103's earliest development occurred in the Steppe, and that it only moved south of the Caucasus with Indo-European migrations in the mid 2nd millennium BC accordingly does not look credible.

Perhaps Z8131 expanding into the Steppe over the 5th and 4th millennia was one of the main sources of the increasing CHG component that arose there over this period?

That's comparing Steppe R1b-Z2103* probably dead with modern R1b-Z2103 south of the caucasus. Obviously, they will not show as coming from somewhere else than south of caucasus, that should be obvious. After coming from Steppe, all those " basal branches " had a founder effect south of caucasus. Only ancient dna can explain you where it was, not modern dna.

 

[Pip]

That's comparing Steppe R1b-Z2103* probably dead with modern R1b-Z2103 south of the caucasus. Obviously, they will not show as coming from somewhere else than south of caucasus, that should be obvious. After coming from Steppe, all those " basal branches " had a founder effect south of caucasus. Only ancient dna can explain you where it was, not modern dna.

I'm not so interested in dead lines, only the branch from which modern Z2103 developed. From SNPs, yfull estimates this modern Z2103 branched four ways in 3,500 BC; from STRs, I estimate it started branching sooner (4,700 BC).

You say "after coming from Steppe", as if that were a given:
1. It is important to define what would have come from the Steppe - do you mean Z2103 in formation, fully formed Z2103 or various subclades of Z2103? (These could be separated by thousands of years)
2. Z2103's uncle clade PF7562 also seems to coalesce south of the Caucasus, indicating a good possibility that the whole family of living M269 derived from that region.
3. When would the founder effect of the South of the Caucasus basal branches have arisen? STR variability suggests this occurred very early (5th millennium BC, or 3,500 BC per yfull), certainly nowhere near the mid 2nd millennium BC when autosomal DNA suggests that EHG-heavy Steppe DNA arrived there.

Ancient DNA explains where ancient people lived, but we have no way of knowing whether any of these people were our ancestors. People actually ancestral to us might have lived somewhere completely different, so ancient DNA (like modern DNA) is just a guide, not the magic bullet that many seem to imagine.

Modern DNA can also act as a guide to where ancient DNA was. We used to realise that, but have lazily forgotten it. For instance, there are many precise branches of Z2103 (including at the basal level) within which the greatest range is exhibited in modern samples from Armenia. The quantity and precision of the data reflecting this is now sufficient to allow us to say with some confidence that this is not coincidence. The other explanations are that (i) living Z2103 developed somewhere other than Armenia and all remained together without any leakage anywhere else for thousands of years before migrating en masse to Armenia (highly implausible, especially as we know that Yamnayan early Z2103 was highly mobile and expansionary), or (ii) living Z2103 began developing in the general vicinity of Armenia and that only one basal branch of it spread at an early stage into the Steppe and beyond). If scenario (ii) seems to fit most plausibly with the data, then it seems reasonable to hypothesise that it brought autosomal CHG with it as it spread.

 

[Piro Ilir]

Z2103 seems related mainly with Armenians, and secondly with Albanians.
It would be good to know which one of Z2103 subbranches (Z2106, L584, L277.1) is the Armenian one.

 

[halfalp]

I'm not so interested in dead lines, only the branch from which modern Z2103 developed. From SNPs, yfull estimates this modern Z2103 branched four ways in 3,500 BC; from STRs, I estimate it started branching sooner (4,700 BC).

You say "after coming from Steppe", as if that were a given:
1. It is important to define what would have come from the Steppe - do you mean Z2103 in formation, fully formed Z2103 or various subclades of Z2103? (These could be separated by thousands of years)
2. Z2103's uncle clade PF7562 also seems to coalesce south of the Caucasus, indicating a good possibility that the whole family of living M269 derived from that region.
3. When would the founder effect of the South of the Caucasus basal branches have arisen? STR variability suggests this occurred very early (5th millennium BC, or 3,500 BC per yfull), certainly nowhere near the mid 2nd millennium BC when autosomal DNA suggests that EHG-heavy Steppe DNA arrived there.

Ancient DNA explains where ancient people lived, but we have no way of knowing whether any of these people were our ancestors. People actually ancestral to us might have lived somewhere completely different, so ancient DNA (like modern DNA) is just a guide, not the magic bullet that many seem to imagine.

Modern DNA can also act as a guide to where ancient DNA was. We used to realise that, but have lazily forgotten it. For instance, there are many precise branches of Z2103 (including at the basal level) within which the greatest range is exhibited in modern samples from Armenia. The quantity and precision of the data reflecting this is now sufficient to allow us to say with some confidence that this is not coincidence. The other explanations are that (i) living Z2103 developed somewhere other than Armenia and all remained together without any leakage anywhere else for thousands of years before migrating en masse to Armenia (highly implausible, especially as we know that Yamnayan early Z2103 was highly mobile and expansionary), or (ii) living Z2103 began developing in the general vicinity of Armenia and that only one basal branch of it spread at an early stage into the Steppe and beyond). If scenario (ii) seems to fit most plausibly with the data, then it seems reasonable to hypothesise that it brought autosomal CHG with it as it spread.

I think you clearly understimate what happens between, let's sayin, Yamnaya and 2K19. Everything nowadays have nothing to do with what happens to those times. You are saying you are not interested in Z2103* but then you take the conclusion over modern samples to dictate were it should be at the time or even before Z2103*. This methodology gonna bring you nowhere sadly.

There is an eazy possibility to your questioning of modern Z2103 branches. Only the one south of caucasus subsisted, while the one in the Pontic Steppe were replaced by R1a.

Also the term " basal branches " is totally missleading the entire results. There is Z2103 in modern Ukraine, Poland and Eastern Europe in general, we should assume with high possibilities, that those guys are the descendants of the Z2103* found in prehistoric Pontic Steppe. Therefore, the only thing that differentiate the Z2103 from Eastern Europe and the one from Armenia, is an older founder effect and TMRCA for the one in Armenia. Exactly the same mistakes were done about Kurdish samples of " basal branches of R1a ".

Then you have the mainstream hypothesis that both R1a and R1b transmigrated from Middle-East to Europe and from Europe to Middle-East from Epipaleolithic to Bronze Age. But more ancient dnas will come, more this idea gonna be rejected.

 

[Pip]

Z2103 seems related mainly with Armenians, and secondly with Albanians.
It would be good to know which one of Z2103 subbranches (Z2106, L584, L277.1) is the Armenian one.

I would say most likely both of the latter two, and quite possibly Z2106 as well.

 

[Pip]

I think you clearly understimate what happens between, let's sayin, Yamnaya and 2K19.

I've made no estimate of what has happened between Yamnaya and now.
On the contrary, it is the idea that Z2103 emerged on the Steppe and separated into lots of different branches (nearly all of which stuck together for thousands of years before migrating en masse to Armenia) that is based on a highly implausible underestimate of how Yamnaya and its descendants would have developed and spread around.

Everything nowadays have nothing to do with what happens to those times.

Of course it does. People with Z2103 nowadays are only Z2103 nowadays because their joint ancestor acquired the Z2103 mutation in those times.

You are saying you are not interested in Z2103*

No, I said that I wasn't so interested in dead lines.

but then you take the conclusion over modern samples to dictate were it should be at the time or even before Z2103*.

I'm not dictating anything. I am merely noting where SNP and STR calculations indicate is the most likely point of common origin.

This methodology gonna bring you nowhere sadly. There is an eazy possibility to your questioning of modern Z2103 branches. Only the one south of caucasus subsisted, while the one in the Pontic Steppe were replaced by R1a.

But this isn't what happened. There were lots of branches that subsisted South of the Caucasus, not just one. And the one branch in the Pontic Steppe was not entirely replaced by R1a, but still subsists today just as numerously (if not more so) than the Armenian branches.

Also the term " basal branches " is totally missleading the entire results. There is Z2103 in modern Ukraine, Poland and Eastern Europe in general, we should assume with high possibilities, that those guys are the descendants of the Z2103* found in prehistoric Pontic Steppe. Therefore, the only thing that differentiate the Z2103 from Eastern Europe and the one from Armenia, is an older founder effect and TMRCA for the one in Armenia.

There is nothing misleading about it.
Firstly, any Z2103* found in the prehistoric Pontic Steppe is pretty unlikely to be an ancestor of today's Eastern European Z2103 people, as (i) I estimate that Z2103 had already separated into its surviving subclades earlier on, and (ii) nearly all such ancient Z2103 lineages would have died out (Z2108 being the only steppic looking one).
Secondly, you are not going back far enough. The question is where did the basal development of living Z2103 occur? If there is one half-steppic/half-Southern Caucasus basal branch and three wholly Southern Caucasus basal branches, the balance surely tips in favour of their most recent common ancestor having been South Caucasian.

That is not to say that Z2103 was not in the Steppe from early on. There might well have been lots of Z2103 lineages in the early Steppe that became extinct; and one from an estimated 4,200 BC (Z8131) that survived and flourished there.