Just the opposite (R1a, R1b, IE)

johen said:
This is not? I misunderstood?
Click to expand...

It is not. First of all - this is just one person, so it can be only one haplogroup.

And "F (xG, I1, I2a, J, L1b2, T, O2b, Q1a2a, Q1b1, R1a1a, R1b1c2)" means, that this sample is some kind of F (note: around 3/4 of human Y-DNA is F, because most of Non-African haplogroups are descended from F), but it is not G, not I1, not I2a, not J, not L1b2, etc. This "x" in front of G, I1, I2a... means "not" (or "negative for").

This sample, can be for example F* ("*" meaning basal, so without any further mutations - actual, genuine F), H, K*, I2b, I2c, L1a, some kind of O (but not O2b), some kind of Q (but not Q1a2a or Q1b1), some R1a*, some R1b (but not R1b1c2), R2, etc. It can be anything, except for those haplogroups listed there as negative.

Check this tree of haplogroups showing which is descended from which:

YDNA_Tree.png
 
Let's add another paradox, aka "yellow alarm" for the Yamnayans...:

German Bell Beakers in the context of the prehistoric Near East

Eurogenes/Davidsky and Ryukendo have found that the German BB had some 1/4 or 1/3 of Iberian_Chalco. The autosomal data fits finely with the paper exposing the mtDNA H1 and H3 expansion from Iberian BB. Only the Y-DNA is lacking to confirm what archaeology, mtDNA and aDNA are showing us.

I bet that before this year will end there will be Yamnayists proposing that the coast R1b Yamnayans got into their chariots and sailed on them till reaching Iberia, oh yeah.
 
berun said:
Let's add another paradox, aka "yellow alarm" for the Yamnayans...:

German Bell Beakers in the context of the prehistoric Near East

Eurogenes/Davidsky and Ryukendo have found that the German BB had some 1/4 or 1/3 of Iberian_Chalco. The autosomal data fits finely with the paper exposing the mtDNA H1 and H3 expansion from Iberian BB. Only the Y-DNA is lacking to confirm what archaeology, mtDNA and aDNA are showing us.

I bet that before this year will end there will be Yamnayists proposing that the coast R1b Yamnayans got into their chariots and sailed on them till reaching Iberia, oh yeah.
Click to expand...

No need for that; some people have proposed for years that R1b bearing people from the steppe, via the Carpathian basin, sailed to Iberia, bringing copper metallurgy there.

See: Ancestral Journeys, by Jean Manco
http://epubbookonline.com/book/9733/p/13

"[FONT=&quot]The search for copper had spread westwards along the Mediterranean by the end of the 4th millennium [/FONT]BC[FONT=&quot]. The earliest known copper mine and metallurgical complex in France is in the mountains of Languedoc at Cabrières and Péret.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]At around the same time a rich Copper Age culture appeared in Iberia, accompanied by social changes. The earliest dates of copper-working there (c. 3100 BC) are for specialized, large-scale mining-metallurgical factories in southwestern Iberia, such as Cabezo Jure and Mocissos. Yet the two foci for Copper Age Iberia became the lofty, fortified settlements of Zambujal (Torres Vedras, Portugal) and Los Millares (Almería, Spain). Both were distant from the main sources of copper. Both were set on promontories commanding approaches by river or sea. Zambujal and its satellites had the more easily defended position on a peninsula carved out by the great River Tagus where it met the sea. Ease of defence was combined with ease of access from the ocean. The Tagus estuary formed a natural harbour, and Zambujal itself once had a channel to the sea close by. The position speaks of a seaborne people, anxious to defend itself. Both Zambujal and Los Millares began as small strongholds, and expanded with the creation of new walls enclosing larger areas: four walls have been discovered at Zambujal. There is ample evidence of warfare in weaponry and death by violence.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There are also clues to clannishness in enigmatic plaques found in burials, whose markings may record the lineage of the dead. When copper-working appears around the Tagus, so do artificial cave-tombs. Around Los Millares we see the emergence of the beehive tomb or tholos, with a circular chamber and corbelled vaulted roof. Gold and ivory, statues and jewelry found in such tombs suggest wealth. We can build a picture of heavily defended centres of regional power. Yet even the two largest Iberian settlements are more like defended villages than truly urban. There is no sign of public buildings in Los Millares. [] Essentially it was a collection of dwellings for farming folk. Craftwork was mainly carried out on a small scale in the home."

"Where had the copper technology come from? Claims have been made for an independent discovery of metallurgy in Iberia, but there is no evidence of a long period of experimentation. Metal objects from Zambujal were made of copper and an arsenic-copper alloy. Higher levels of arsenic, which produces a harder metal, were found in objects such as daggers, which require a hard edge. So the incorporation of arsenic was no accident. Metalworking had arrived in Iberia in a sophisticated form. As we shall see (), the evidence points to people whose origins lay on the European steppe."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This is the map showing the route:
StelaePeople_zps24790e03.jpg
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
It was discussed on this site all the way back in 2013:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28899-New-migration-map-of-haplogroup-R1b/page3[/FONT]
 
berun said:
Let's add another paradox, aka "yellow alarm" for the Yamnayans...:

German Bell Beakers in the context of the prehistoric Near East

Eurogenes/Davidsky and Ryukendo have found that the German BB had some 1/4 or 1/3 of Iberian_Chalco. The autosomal data fits finely with the paper exposing the mtDNA H1 and H3 expansion from Iberian BB. Only the Y-DNA is lacking to confirm what archaeology, mtDNA and aDNA are showing us.

I bet that before this year will end there will be Yamnayists proposing that the coast R1b Yamnayans got into their chariots and sailed on them till reaching Iberia, oh yeah.
Click to expand...

We have to be cautious: some decennies can change everything concerning cultures. And we have not (I have not, at least) the precise subclades of a lot of Iberian and Germany BBs mt-H; concerning mt-H1 I'm ready to believe they were since a long time in Iberia, for the others I don't know. Have we big differences in auDNA and mt-DNA between Iberia and Germany LN before Steppics first introgressions of some importance? BBs auDNA show a bit less EEF than auDNA of Halberstadt LN, Albersted LN and Benzigenrode LN, and even if some of its WHG id from Iberia, it cannot go very high.
The differences between females lignages and autosomes between Germany BBs and CWC could be due to both having taken local females on different routes in addition to their own females (BBs less proper females?). The Desideri 's survey based upon discrete traits of teeth was not so decisive spite some clues: a 'mediterranean' imput from Iberia into S-France and partially Switzerland and Hungary (for S-France I think a close pop already in place, and with later moves on every direction. Desideria thinks some N-BBs were accultured CWC.
&: We have rising of mt-H in N-Central Bs but what kind of mt-H?
 
@Angela

First notice about.... "that", as much as I red in peer per viewed papers it was an speculation about a possible Aegean influence in SE Spain (Millares, Argar). For steles there are among Mayans, Chinese, etc. Are related? I would say no, of course...

Even late Neolithics had their own anthropomorphic stelae (masculine and femenine), you can check here

http://www.raco.cat/index.php/Cypsela/article/view/285651/373623

so what? I will go to say that IE and Yamnayans came from Iberia? Frankly I'm not good telling jokes.

Abouth smithers... I don't know from where the knowledge arrived, but I can't imagine thousends and thousends of smithers arriving by boat from somewhere and changing in such impressive way the DNA. I think we are importing now Indian programmers and mathemacians by plane... let's see how this migration will end up...
;)
 
I tend to agree with the stelae map linked by Angela although I wonder if there were three routes to the west from the original source
1) maritime to iberia
2) danubian to rhine mouth
3) north of the carpathians to the baltic

the adna in each case may vary as a result of mixing with different people along the way

(further finds of R1b in the west may change this though)
 
berun said:
@Angela

First notice about.... "that", as much as I red in peer per viewed papers it was an speculation about a possible Aegean influence in SE Spain (Millares, Argar). For steles there are among Mayans, Chinese, etc. Are related? I would say no, of course...

Even late Neolithics had their own anthropomorphic stelae (masculine and femenine), you can check here

http://www.raco.cat/index.php/Cypsela/article/view/285651/373623

so what? I will go to say that IE and Yamnayans came from Iberia? Frankly I'm not good telling jokes.

Abouth smithers... I don't know from where the knowledge arrived, but I can't imagine thousends and thousends of smithers arriving by boat from somewhere and changing in such impressive way the DNA. I think we are importing now Indian programmers and mathemacians by plane... let's see how this migration will end up...
;)
Click to expand...

The purpose of the post was to let you know that the proposal for Yamnaya related genetic intrusion into Iberia to account for "Beaker" culture was made long ago, and is memorialized in a book Jean Manco published relatively recently. So, no need to wait for someone to come up with a theory; the theory already exists.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17573854-ancestral-journeys

It's indeed speculation but I think she would insist it's informed speculation. It does include an analysis purporting to show a resemblance between these specific stelae and those on the steppe. We're all free to be persuaded or not by her argument. Since ancient dna results are supposedly on the way we should know soon if it makes any sense. To validate her theory there would need to be R1b in the first copper working sites that show evidence of foreign intrusion that was not there before.
 
It can't be stablished a migration route by a unique cultural item which moreover is prone to be copied or imitated; even if this theory would have checked typologies and datations (what about the Megalithic dates in Iberia uh?), this is not a valid argument; to put even more clear i consider such kind of theories like those linking Pyramids all over the world and Atlantis... which may spound good for those with Atlantitis but not so much for me.
 
We propose an additional, yet unde-
scribed, gene flow process from Anatolia into Europe as a better
explanation than a contribution from a hypothetical third source
into Neolithic central Anatolia, Chalcolithic northwest Anatolia,
and Chalcolithic central Europe. Thus, Neolithic population dy-
namics that initiated in the Anatolian region resulted in multiple
waves of expansion and admixture in west Eurasia.
Click to expand...

The migration took place with the first neolithic herders (less proportion than farmers)? or it arrived in a second wave? In whichever case another problem for Yamnayans... morover if such second wave reached them (less complicated access than Italy) and even surpassed their territory......... because if so all yamnayan genes in Europe would be a fake imitation of the new wave plus central Europe migrations here and there.
 
berun said:
The migration took place with the first neolithic herders (less proportion than farmers)? or it arrived in a second wave? In whichever case another problem for Yamnayans... morover if such second wave reached them (less complicated access than Italy) and even surpassed their territory......... because if so all yamnayan genes in Europe would be a fake imitation of the new wave plus central Europe migrations here and there.
Click to expand...

Hi Berun,
When I tried to say sort of that to Davidsky at Eurogenes e got berzerk.
In my thread about non metric dental I tried to explain how that very good proxy for genetics stipulates a migratory event from earlier than 8000bc from the baltic to Stepped. Karelia had the same EHG as Samara HG, and even in Baraba forrest (other side of Urals) and south Turkmenistan they show up.
In case of a migratory event of CHG and anatolia component to already existing EHG in eastearn Europe leaves what for Yamnaya?
 
Maybe the best would be to run how would appear Southafrican coloreds with Dominican mulattos, two unrelated populations but surely sharing between them more genes than with Caucasians. That could explain the fact that Haak advised that the Corded Ware people derived from a Yamnayan-alike population. Big trouble: genetics are against Yamnaya, R1a expansion is against Yamnaya, proto-IE ecosystem is against Yamnaya, demographics are agasint Yamnaya, archaeology can't provide serious proofs for Yamnayans other than Afanasievo protoTurks, etc.

The best in this science is that in few months much will be settled down and in few years we will have the big picture, we can think now about theories and then check out if we were right or not, but many also will realize (I suppose) how their need for security about facts or security for their self-steem was forcing them to cover eyes and ears.
 
berun said:
The date of L51 being 5600-3900 BC is inside the time of neolithization and megalithism in Western Europe, if L11 appeared 900 years after it would be more near to the Megalithic expansion than to the Bell Beaker one.

And as for the Bell Beaker samples of around 2500 BC, this people had a CW substrate, which was mainly R1a, but if I follow R1b = IE i would need to think that their previous Neolithic Y-DNA changed absolutely in few generations, and what is more incredible, the Y-DNA that was imposded over them was from a rare clade in CW, so i can't, i can't with that.

Thereafter we have L51 in countries high in L11+, not in the steppes but precisely were the western R1b is strong: Ireland, France, Italy, Portugal...
how to deal with it if it appeared 7000 years ago in the steppe? I would not say it is pseudoscience, but realy it has no sense at all.

View attachment 7820
Click to expand...

"Technical" point:
if this R-L51* map is absolute % its not enough: you need a relative % among total Y-R1b. L51* is not a so old SNP stage that it would have completely disappeared in lands where its descendants are a HUGE majority (Western Europe today). But I think Central and N-E Europe R1b whole variance (SNPS based, more convincing than STRs) is bigger than the Western Europe one, no? All that game of up/downstream SNPs is a dynamic thing. By the way I saw some maps where descendant L11 was well present in South Baltic Sea too (I supposed a pre-U106/L21 group, waiting for proofs). All that could support an eastern enough formation of L51/L11 WHICH ARE NOT TOO REPRESENTED IN ANATOLIA / CAUCASUS, today, if they came from there (their more remote ancestors could have been come from there but I prefer to wait). The variance it's true is a "two cutting sides knife". And old forms can be linked to a small pop not knowing new mutations; not a proof of older presence there, or at least not a proof of direct ascendance from there (I think into Balkans/Greece by instance). But the relatively less variated Western Y-R1b spite their huge density speaks for a demographic boom we have to date precisely: datations are not God 's word: you mentioned 5600/3900 BC for TMRCA of L51: is that to say all the descendants were born in the same day? Is that to say the TMRCA "producer" (ancestor) was living in Iberia or France at these dates because we find the most of L51 there? Maciamo wrote something about all that, already.
&: I think in an HG at some stage of its story in a big enough pop with not to quick increase, old upstream SNPs(*) bearers tend to fade out and new downstream SNPs bearers appear, the bulk of the pop being around the middle-way SNPs OF THE TIME. As a fact, the older SNPs* bearers fade out (in reality, give birth to new downstream ones!), without need of moves of the pop. the biggest the pop with time, the less old SNPs stages; here West seems nevertheless the place of the faster increase of some ligneages: always the same question: Megaliths or BBs or a bit later BBs??? (keep in mind Megaliths seem having interacted with TRBK: East-West cultural great meating: the beginnig of increase of pop?). Sorry for my laborious english
 
To me it's difficult to separate the question that L-51* and its subclades are in high frequencies in Western Europe, because if you have high freq of A and high freq of Aa, Ab, Ac and Ad in the same place, with Occam's Razor it is to have that L-51* was in Western Europe in enough high freq in old times as to develop so many clades (more people more mutations possible). Of course it's possible even that a bunch of L51* came from the steppes (yet to be found), but when such clades were popping it was the time of the Bell Beaker culture, which was a Western phenomenon, so it's more difficult to accept the "bunch of steppe herders theory" with all this info.

Also P312 has higher freq in Western Europe, suming up all to these evidence, and its own date, 2900 BC, is leaving more difficult to an IE arrival from the steppes.
 
Tomenable, I'm not doubting about the IE expansion (which I think also was thraumatic for Old Europe), what I'm not accepting anymore is the steppe origin. My pet theory now is Old European Russia (Novgorod-Smolensk line)
 
berun said:
Tomenable, I'm not doubting about the IE expansion (which I think also was thraumatic for Old Europe), what I'm not accepting anymore is the steppe origin. My pet theory now is Old European Russia (Novgorod-Smolensk line)
Click to expand...

Old European northern Russia, which was known for its domesticated horses and wheeled vehicles?
 
Wheeled vehicles fit well for open spaces and fit well for steppe areas. Good for Sintashta and Andronovo and their southern expansions. The Sintashta were the first to use chariots and evolved from Abashevo (Russian CW).

The Russian bet is more by having R1a and that the Corded Ware delivered farming production there, so a population burst, that if too strong could begin to push outside.
 
berun said:
To me it's difficult to separate the question that L-51* and its subclades are in high frequencies in Western Europe, because if you have high freq of A and high freq of Aa, Ab, Ac and Ad in the same place, with Occam's Razor it is to have that L-51* was in Western Europe in enough high freq in old times as to develop so many clades (more people more mutations possible). Of course it's possible even that a bunch of L51* came from the steppes (yet to be found), but when such clades were popping it was the time of the Bell Beaker culture, which was a Western phenomenon, so it's more difficult to accept the "bunch of steppe herders theory" with all this info.

Also P312 has higher freq in Western Europe, suming up all to these evidence, and its own date, 2900 BC, is leaving more difficult to an IE arrival from the steppes.
Click to expand...

Don't confuse geographic origin and place of today higher concentration; old story! I propose you a route; and the richness of Central-East Europe for R1b is not a dream of mine - only nuance: a possible later sinc effect, but it could not explain all the diversity there. West knew a super-boom after a first boom in Alps or/and Danube; the male biased reproduction can explain an artificially higher growing for Y-haplo's, it's clear. the position of R-U152 and the high presence in Italic tribes stayed longer in Hungary seems to me the sign of a more eastern centered place for the first R1b. Nothing sure but? And you could give up with the Ocam razor: when badly used it's a dangerous tool (LOL). Future will tell us, all that for now are guesses, more or less evident.
nos vad deoc'h.
 
I know to don't rely on greographic frequencies, but when you have a high frequency of A and also a high frequency of A' by sure A' was there from the first minute at least.

It's like in surnames, you have per example the Catalan surnames Pujol and Puyol, the first has high frequencies in Catalonia and the second one also (but surely with more freq in the Pyrenees). The explanation of the "y" mutation is dialectal, but you have it where more Pujol are, the other way, lets say that it appeared first in Murcia and then came back to Catalonia to have also there a high frequency would be unusal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 75599 times.

Back
Top