Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 126

Thread: Iberian Bell Beaker Y-DNA and mtDNA

  1. #26
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    As far as I know there are two incoming papers about BB Iberian Y-DNA.

    As for Gimbutas making BB IE... she wrote some 40 years ago and many things have changed, she is now outdated and radiocarbon dates are irrefutable for a western origin. Now I believe that Gimbutas was somewhat eccentric in her conclusions as it was Sigmund Freud: after knowing about experiments trying to make rockets to travel to the space he judged that his inventor was phalus obsessed... in fact it was all the contrary, it was the psychoanalist that was obsessed with sex and everything was looked from such perspective; somewhat seems similar for Gumbutas: all peaceful and farmer cultures worshipping goddesses were non indoeuropean, and those cultures displaying violence, weapons, patriarchy, horses and so were undoubtfuly IE; of course the equation is not universal and at least it could be said that it was sexualy-biased.

  2. #27
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Results from Unambiguous Bell Beaker:

    Bell Beaker from Kromsdorf 4550 ybp = 0% H + 100% ( T1a, K1, I1a1, W5a, U2e, U5a1 )

    Bell Beaker from Benzingerode-Heimburg 4300/4200 ybp = 0% H + 100% ( T2a, W1, U5a )

    Bell Beaker from Quedlinburg 4300/4200 ybp = 50% H5/H1 + 50% ( T2e, J1c, U5a, U5b )

    Bell Beaker from Rothenschirmbach 4300/4200 ybp = 60% H5/H3 + 40% ( K1a2 )

    Bell Beaker from Alberstedt 4300/4200 ybp = 100% H5/H3 + 0% ( - )

    1- The oldest tested Bell Beaker population is Kromsdorf and there is not found any H carrier.
    2- H5 is the only H haplogroup shared among all of these Bell Beaker populations where H is found.
    3- H5 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
    4- K1a2 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
    5- W1 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
    6- T1a is found in a 9500 ybp individual from Jordan.
    7- T2e is found in a 7500 ybp individual from Neolithic Hungary.
    8- J1c is found in a 9900 ybp individual from Neolithic Iran.
    9- H3 is found in a 7300 ybp individual from Neolithic Portugal.

  3. #28
    Elite member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824
    Points
    9,097
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,097, Level: 28
    Level completed: 58%, Points required for next Level: 253
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    As far as I know there are two incoming papers about BB Iberian Y-DNA.

    As for Gimbutas making BB IE... she wrote some 40 years ago and many things have changed, she is now outdated and radiocarbon dates are irrefutable for a western origin. Now I believe that Gimbutas was somewhat eccentric in her conclusions as it was Sigmund Freud: after knowing about experiments trying to make rockets to travel to the space he judged that his inventor was phalus obsessed... in fact it was all the contrary, it was the psychoanalist that was obsessed with sex and everything was looked from such perspective; somewhat seems similar for Gumbutas: all peaceful and farmer cultures worshipping goddesses were non indoeuropean, and those cultures displaying violence, weapons, patriarchy, horses and so were undoubtfuly IE; of course the equation is not universal and at least it could be said that it was sexualy-biased.
    Actually Marija Gimbutas is still reliable in regarding the Indoeuropeism discipline. She said that BB were IE and proto-Celts, so I'm pretty curious if this hypotesis was right, because BB were also in parts of Europe without hystoric Celts.
    Sicilians and mainlander Southern Italian phenotype galleries.

    http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/1111/Re-Groups-of-Sicilians
    http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/375/Southern-italians-how-we-really-look

  4. #29
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    @Alpenjager, percents are not useful with low quantities, what I have is quite simple: from 17 BB samples 11 were H (2/3), even a higher proportion if they were not the first generation there; then if you compare it with all previous Neolithic and CWC samples taken in Central Europe you get only 1/9 (6 cases H and 47 no H); the history behind is evident.

    @Hauteville, all "religions" have their own Holy Cows, but as i'm not Yamnayist I'm allowed to eat meat ;) Radiocarbon dates are saying that she was mistaken other than we think that proto-Celtic was spoken in Portugal around 3000 BC and IE was going there sailing with chariots; and for Yamnayans, well, DNA is showing us how they didn't contributed in anything, even their R1b clade was extingished there after the coming of the northern R1a. Of course checking if she was right or mistaken is good, but by now she was not right in the basics. What is worse, if BB were spreading Celtic languages, why then the actual archaeologists are happy with Urnfield / Hallstad / La Téne cultures spreading over all the Celtic territories? is that there were two celtizations then? Better to get the easy explanation than two explanations...

  5. #30
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,120
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    @Alpenjager, percents are not useful with low quantities, what I have is quite simple: from 17 BB samples 11 were H (2/3), even a higher proportion if they were not the first generation there; then if you compare it with all previous Neolithic and CWC samples taken in Central Europe you get only 1/9 (6 cases H and 47 no H); the history behind is evident.

    @Hauteville, all "religions" have their own Holy Cows, but as i'm not Yamnayist I'm allowed to eat meat ;) Radiocarbon dates are saying that she was mistaken other than we think that proto-Celtic was spoken in Portugal around 3000 BC and IE was going there sailing with chariots; and for Yamnayans, well, DNA is showing us how they didn't contributed in anything, even their R1b clade was extingished there after the coming of the northern R1a. Of course checking if she was right or mistaken is good, but by now she was not right in the basics. What is worse, if BB were spreading Celtic languages, why then the actual archaeologists are happy with Urnfield / Hallstad / La Téne cultures spreading over all the Celtic territories? is that there were two celtizations then? Better to get the easy explanation than two explanations...
    Did you count the number of H mtdna in central Europe that have been discovered in the neolithic times..............clearly the logical scenario is that the marker of H ( mtdna ) is still in the area 3000 years later during BB times

    or

    did you dismiss these numbers?
    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  6. #31
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    @Alpenjager, percents are not useful with low quantities, what I have is quite simple: from 17 BB samples 11 were H (2/3), even a higher proportion if they were not the first generation there; then if you compare it with all previous Neolithic and CWC samples taken in Central Europe you get only 1/9 (6 cases H and 47 no H); the history behind is evident.
    You are talking of a sample of 17 but I'm exposing 24 unambiguous BB samples from several settlements, is perfectly useful.

    The oldest known H1 in Europe have been found in a 7200 ybp sample from Karsdorf together with the paternal haplogroup T1a1. This is 3000 years before Bell Beaker. This is the same for most of H subclades.

  7. #32
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,120
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Alpenjager View Post
    You are talking of a sample of 17 but I'm exposing 24 unambiguous BB samples from several settlements, is perfectly useful.

    The oldest known H1 in Europe have been found in a 7200 ybp sample from Karsdorf together with the paternal haplogroup T1a1. This is 2000 years before Bell Beaker.
    not just H1 , but also H46 for a similar time frame

  8. #33
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    I will give you some numbers for 7200 ybp Central Europe settlements:


    Native inhabitants from Karsdorf (YDNA: T1a1 )
    43% H ( 12 samples )

    Non-native inhabitants from Karsdorf
    23% H + 11% HV = 34% R0 ( 9 samples )

    Derenburg (YDNA: H2 + G2a )
    12% H + 13% HV + 4% V = 29% R0 (24 samples )

    Halberstadt (YDNA: G2a )
    9% H + 13% V = 22% R0 ( 31 samples )

    Naumburg
    20% H ( 5 samples )

    Eilsleben
    100% H ( 1 sample )

    Asparn Schletz
    100% H ( 1 sample )

  9. #34
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    @Sile, the increase of H must be explained, being by a migratory process or by a particular selection; as such increase is linked to a given exogenous culture the answer is mainly migration. There is also the autosomal evidence and in some weeks maybe the Y-DNA.

    @Alpenjager, you still doing percents from scanty numbers from here and there, so let's go to the big numbers. In "Ancient DNA reveals key stages in the formation of Central European mitochondrial genetic diversity" in the supp you can find out:

    Oberwiederstedt 0H from 14; in Halberstadt 8H from 47, in Naumburg 2H from 10, in Karsdorf 13H from 46, in Deremburg 5H from 40; suming up 28H from 156... gives a 18% of H (but the authors assign to the LBK culture a 17%); you can find out also that the authors concede for the CWC a 23% for H... but then it doubles with BB, 48%. Maybe with this exposition you can see also the case. And such German BB plot with the Portuguese Neolithics... high also in H.

  10. #35
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,322
    Points
    35,100
    Level
    57
    Points: 35,100, Level: 57
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 350
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    don't know if this is serious data, but I compiled results from Ancestral Journeys-Peopling of Europe:
    I found:
    14 mt-H / 58 Unetice of Germany, 15 mt-H / 64 Unetice (total CN-Europe) 24,1% and 23,4%
    9 mt-H / 45 CWC of Germany, 12 mt-H / 56 CWC (total CN-Europe) 20,0% and 21,4%
    16 mt-H / 38 BBS of Germany, 19 mt-H / 44 BBS (total CN-Europe) 42,1% and 43,2%
    9 mt- H / 36 TRBK of Germany, 12 mt-H / 42 TRBK (total CN-Europe) 25,0% and 28,6%

    I don't see a strong imput of mt-H5 among BBs.
    If I group H1+H3 as "west" or "ancient" and H2+H4+H5+H6 as "eastern" or "new", I found among the defined mt-H:
    BBS 6 "WA" >< 2 "EN" (3 H1 + 3 H3)
    TRBK 4 "WA" >< 2 "EN" (2 H1 + 2 H3)
    CWC 0 "WA" >< 5 "EN"
    Unetice 1 "WA" >< 7 "EN" (1 H3)
    it's few and not too scoentific but surely it could signify something.
    We see Tricherbecher, spite an imput from East, is still very occidental, and it PRECEDE BBs in time (Long Barrows: a come back phenomenon of Atlantic Megalithers in Northwest, after first contacts in N-Germant-DK with first "steppicized" (I-E or not) ???
    the auDNA of one Gokhem man seems confirming a 'mediterranean' with more contacts with West than with East, and some WHG imput
    mt-H5 which seems come from East is scarce enough among BBs and TRBK
    So yes, BBs show partial difference with CWC with weight put upon supposedly "atlantic" mt-DNA. It remains that their auDNA, very unlevel, place them between Northern pops and Southeastern pops of Europe, not too close to today Iberians.
    So we have to trace the origin of the MOST of the mt-H DNA in Europe, even H1 and H3, which could be linked more to Southern WHG than to the genuine Neolithic farmers; it could also have begun to colonize West-Central Europe before the BBs time.
    But at the haplo's level, what we have for ancient DNA is still statistically too small, and the BBs we have are almost all from Northern Europe, Eastern Germany for the most.
    What remains is the discrepancy in my drawing between german BBs and their H1/H3 mt and today Iberians rich for these two mt-haplos, and for y-R1b...

  11. #36
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    @Alpenjager, you still doing percents from scanty numbers from here and there, so let's go to the big numbers. In "Ancient DNA reveals key stages in the formation of Central European mitochondrial genetic diversity" in the supp you can find out:

    Oberwiederstedt 0H from 14; in Halberstadt 8H from 47, in Naumburg 2H from 10, in Karsdorf 13H from 46, in Deremburg 5H from 40; suming up 28H from 156... gives a 18% of H (but the authors assign to the LBK culture a 17%); you can find out also that the authors concede for the CWC a 23% for H... but then it doubles with BB, 48%. Maybe with this exposition you can see also the case. And such German BB plot with the Portuguese Neolithics... high also in H.
    46 samples in Karsdorf? There aren't 46 samples. Well, You are clearly mixing samples from several periods for almost every location. You need to diferentiate between 7200 ybp Karsdorf settlement and CWC Karsdorf, there is no-continuity from one to another. This is not a good way to understand nothing.

    Also you are missinterpreting the BB results.

  12. #37
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    @MOESAN, take into account that the spread of the BB surely was not direct, there were surely generations to reach Germany and their aDNA was not like in the beginning. There is the autosomal i na paper refered already here were such BB ploted between the expected pops. For the mtDNA in the paper of "Mitochondrial DNA from el Mirador" realy it plots just with Neolithic Portugal (70% H), being the ancient Central European cultures far as the HG.

    @Alpenjager, now if you don't like the percents you could mail to Brandt et al. to complain to the authors of the paper refered, but in the supp. they have more than 150 samples from the LBK (also other samples from different periods from the same villages but the excel is quite clear to understand); take into account that by now you have not refered your data and your data to me is not guaranteed, moreover to proceed to assign a 100% for a unique sample in a village is, in the most diplomatic way that i can express it, to don't understand the basics about statistics.

  13. #38
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,120
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    @MOESAN, take into account that the spread of the BB surely was not direct, there were surely generations to reach Germany and their aDNA was not like in the beginning. There is the autosomal i na paper refered already here were such BB ploted between the expected pops. For the mtDNA in the paper of "Mitochondrial DNA from el Mirador" realy it plots just with Neolithic Portugal (70% H), being the ancient Central European cultures far as the HG.

    @Alpenjager, now if you don't like the percents you could mail to Brandt et al. to complain to the authors of the paper refered, but in the supp. they have more than 150 samples from the LBK (also other samples from different periods from the same villages but the excel is quite clear to understand); take into account that by now you have not refered your data and your data to me is not guaranteed, moreover to proceed to assign a 100% for a unique sample in a village is, in the most diplomatic way that i can express it, to don't understand the basics about statistics.
    You need to realise that H Mtdna was in BB central Europe thousands of years before any Iberian H Mtdna went there...............in other words H Mtdna has NO relation to the commencement of BB

  14. #39
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Ok... let's say it more simple then: H came with Neolithic people here and there, ok, in LBK and Central European Middle Neolithic cultures it reached a 15-25%, even in Calcholithic Central Spain; but H by X causes was more prevalent in Neolithc Portugal (70%), ok, then in S. Portugal the BB appeared around 2800 BC, ok, then the BB people in Germany of 2500 BC display an unexpected increase of H, 48%. What do you suggest which would be the best explanation for it? To me clearly is that H was going to Germany along BB pots, arrows and buttons, increasing the H there; other solutions are available but such alternatives are not the most simple.

    By the way i suggest you to read these papers as to understand what i try to explain (not so well i guess):

    Mitochondrial DNA from El Mirador Cave (Atapuerca, Spain) Reveals the Heterogeneity of Chalcolithic Populations

    Neolithic mitochondrial haplogroup H genomes and the genetic origins of Europeans

    New Population and Phylogenetic Features of the Internal Variation within Mitochondrial DNA Macro-Haplogroup R0

  15. #40
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    @Alpenjager, now if you don't like the percents you could mail to Brandt et al. to complain to the authors of the paper refered, but in the supp. they have more than 150 samples from the LBK (also other samples from different periods from the same villages but the excel is quite clear to understand); take into account that by now you have not refered your data and your data to me is not guaranteed, moreover to proceed to assign a 100% for a unique sample in a village is, in the most diplomatic way that i can express it, to don't understand the basics about statistics.
    "moreover to proceed to assign a 100% for a unique sample in a village is, in the most diplomatic way that i can express it, to don't understand the basics about statistics"? So, do you think this invalidate my previous comment in some way?

    I'm still trying to find 46 LBK samples in Karsdorf among all known Brandt papers. "in the most diplomatic way that i can express" This is falsify data to support your theory and misinform deliberately to other forum members.

    You can find all Karsdorf samples here: http://britishacademy.universitypres...5758-chapter-6

    http://science.sciencemag.org/highwi...blesS1-S17.xls

    The data supports my previous comments, not yours.

    Please, let me know if you need any other source. See my comments again and ask for any source.

  16. #41
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Alpenjager View Post
    "moreover to proceed to assign a 100% for a unique sample in a village is, in the most diplomatic way that i can express it, to don't understand the basics about statistics"? So, do you think this invalidate my previous comment in some way?

    I'm still trying to find 46 LBK samples in Karsdorf among all known Brandt papers. "in the most diplomatic way that i can express" This is falsify data to support your theory and misinform deliberately to other forum members.
    Don't beat yourself too much. We couldn't get to berun either with our explanations on various subjects. Unfortunately he is immune to statistics and pattern recognition, though a nice guy in general.
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  17. #42
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    Quote Originally Posted by Alpenjager View Post
    Results from Unambiguous Bell Beaker:

    Bell Beaker from Kromsdorf 4550 ybp = 0% H + 100% ( T1a, K1, I1a1, W5a, U2e, U5a1 )

    Bell Beaker from Benzingerode-Heimburg 4300/4200 ybp = 0% H + 100% ( T2a, W1, U5a )

    Bell Beaker from Quedlinburg 4300/4200 ybp = 50% H5/H1 + 50% ( T2e, J1c, U5a, U5b )

    Bell Beaker from Rothenschirmbach 4300/4200 ybp = 60% H5/H3 + 40% ( K1a2 )

    Bell Beaker from Alberstedt 4300/4200 ybp = 100% H5/H3 + 0% ( - )

    1- The oldest tested Bell Beaker population is Kromsdorf and there is not found any H carrier.
    2- H5 is the only H haplogroup shared among all of these Bell Beaker populations where H is found.
    3- H5 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
    4- K1a2 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
    5- W1 is found in a 8350 ybp individual from Anatolia.
    6- T1a is found in a 9500 ybp individual from Jordan.
    7- T2e is found in a 7500 ybp individual from Neolithic Hungary.
    8- J1c is found in a 9900 ybp individual from Neolithic Iran.
    9- H3 is found in a 7300 ybp individual from Neolithic Portugal.

    Other BB populations from Germany, Czech R. and Denmark:

    39% H/H46/H44/H1af/H2a and 61% non-H (K1c, U5a, W, T1a, T2a, U5b, U4c, U4*) Samples: 18

    H2a found in Kumtepe 6700 ybp
    H46 found in Karsdorf 7100 ybp

  18. #43
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    @Alpenjager, Karsdorf samples are in the excel that you posted, lines 126-171 of the third page, even so I caught now that all individuals were sampled twice, so the numbers are for all the half... but the percents remain the same.

    Maybe I don't understand patterns so well, but if a village is 18 percent Schmith and in the next day it is added a 30 percent of newcomers named Ferreira... I think i would have some 48 percent of people with a nickname refering to smithers?

  19. #44
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,322
    Points
    35,100
    Level
    57
    Points: 35,100, Level: 57
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 350
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    @MOESAN, take into account that the spread of the BB surely was not direct, there were surely generations to reach Germany and their aDNA was not like in the beginning. There is the autosomal i na paper refered already here were such BB ploted between the expected pops. For the mtDNA in the paper of "Mitochondrial DNA from el Mirador" realy it plots just with Neolithic Portugal (70% H), being the ancient Central European cultures far as the HG.
    recall: the partial surprise for me is the apparently not too big difference between today Spain and ancient German BBs concerning Y-R1b+mtH spite their auDNA is different as a whole.
    As you can see i'm very cautious when speaking about BBs: what kind of BBs?
    - Generations? Surely 3000/2900 BC to 2500 BC it's a long enough time. Vut someones think the first BBs, and the propagation of their typical first luggage did not take so much times to reach very remote regions of West. A first phase could have seen no colonization but rather fast travels of possible prospection.
    - Is there an unique BBs phenomenon: could we not imagine two origins or at least two roads for BBs? (by instance I was imagining an eastarn people come from either Anatolia or Western Black Sea, near Carpathians, who could have taken two routes and known different environments and admictures before converging in Germany, but at this stade it's only a peplum secnario)
    - After a first explorating stage, I suppose BBs intergrated diverse Chalcol societies rather than they colonized them from Southern Portugal to Poland. I see them rather as a catalizor for societies which were not exactly the same ones (some could be Chalco from East mediterranean, other Chalco from North-central Europe with Steppes ties?). What we see as a big travel from South-West to North-East could be in fact a progressive homogeneization of pops by moves from region to region with a patrolinear aspect implying wives changing place more often, homogeneization launched by progress and trade at larger scales than before, due to local elites taking part in the game under BBs impulse - whatever their ethny - No complete shared way of life, no uniformity, but differences in burying and so on, between diverse great regions labelled "BB" at the end.
    - Sure, a too small number of men could have had hard work to create what seems nevertheless a big change. But nothing points to a great demic move from Iberia only. I wonder if the final success fo "BBs" is not the fact of their maybe proto-Italo-Liguro-Celtic "pupils" or "snob supporters", with in fact an expansion of Y-R1b males, taking progressively the opposite way of the females place-to-place moves: when I say move, I think osmosis, very slow.
    - Have we the mt-DNA of the VERY LATE NEOLITHIC PRE-BB/PRE-CWC? i 'll try to pick what is accessible. I think a progressive osmosis of basic people had begun already since the Megaliths period, seeing Atlantic people gaining ground more in East and North. The Megalithic period seemingly saw an increse in pop in Denmark. This civilisation needed men and men I think (and women too!) and I think the Megalithers of Western Europe had their part in the FunnelBK culture along with others come from Eastern Europe, maybe Steppes.
    - mt H question is not simple: some mt-H (H1 sure, maybe H3) can have reached Portugal BEFORE REAL NEOLITHIC, from South-East Europe.
    others mt-H are easterners with a different "recent" story. So what seems a revolution of the mtDNA for us could have been very more subtile.
    I 'll search.
    Thanks for amiable debate not always the case on some of our threads!

  20. #45
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    For the megalithic expansion I have not idea if it was demic or cultural. This culture appears after the first neolithics are well stablished and became well populated. The megaliths appear as a way to display the richness and capacity of each local clan.

    BB are more complex. In Catalonia they appear in a estrange way if they were migrants as they continue old burials (caves, megaliths, hypogeums...). It seems that they followed the same in other areas. It's not the usual invader behavior. Being from Portugal they had two factors not present in other European regions: metalurgy and above all dense villages, so they had the demographic potential and a new technology. But realy I don't know which factor aided more to the spread: overpopulation? invaders with daggers and arrows? Metalurgic services? they made the best beers? horses or donkeys allowing bigger exchange nets? Demographic crisis in other late neolithic cultures? In whichever case it seems granted that the migration was big: Western Europe is a big area but they were capable to cover the most, if they would be a bunch of men only spreading into few regions would be enough.

  21. #46
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,254
    Points
    41,862
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,862, Level: 63
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 1,088
    Overall activity: 10.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    For the megalithic expansion I have not idea if it was demic or cultural. This culture appears after the first neolithics are well stablished and became well populated. The megaliths appear as a way to display the richness and capacity of each local clan.

    BB are more complex. In Catalonia they appear in a estrange way if they were migrants as they continue old burials (caves, megaliths, hypogeums...). It seems that they followed the same in other areas. It's not the usual invader behavior. Being from Portugal they had two factors not present in other European regions: metalurgy and above all dense villages, so they had the demographic potential and a new technology. But realy I don't know which factor aided more to the spread: overpopulation? invaders with daggers and arrows? Metalurgic services? they made the best beers? horses or donkeys allowing bigger exchange nets? Demographic crisis in other late neolithic cultures? In whichever case it seems granted that the migration was big: Western Europe is a big area but they were capable to cover the most, if they would be a bunch of men only spreading into few regions would be enough.
    don't underestimate how quick a small tribe can procreate
    you don't need a mass immigration to become genetically dominant
    IMO that is what BB people did

    as for megaliths, I think they came with oxens

  22. #47
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,254
    Points
    41,862
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,862, Level: 63
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 1,088
    Overall activity: 10.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    recall: the partial surprise for me is the apparently not too big difference between today Spain and ancient German BBs concerning Y-R1b+mtH spite their auDNA is different as a whole.
    I think you're confusing Iberian chalcolithic with Iberian BB. We have no Iberian BB DNA.

  23. #48
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    @Alpenjager, Karsdorf samples are in the excel that you posted, lines 126-171 of the third page, even so I caught now that all individuals were sampled twice, so the numbers are for all the half... but the percents remain the same.

    Maybe I don't understand patterns so well, but if a village is 18 percent Schmith and in the next day it is added a 30 percent of newcomers named Ferreira... I think i would have some 48 percent of people with a nickname referring to smithers?
    Actually, because village will grow to 30% of more people village will have 130% people when compared to 100% from before arrival of Ferreira. In this case the old 18% will get smaller of 30%, to about 14% of new population. Likewise 30% won't be 30 anymore but 23%, so in total 37% smiths. Unless you meant that 30% of Ferreiras of total of population after they joind.

    In numbers. Let's say population of village was 100 people with 18 Smiths. After 30 Ferreiras are added there will be 130 people in the village. 130 is new 100%. In this case 18 Smiths is (18*100%/130=) 13.8%, and 30 Ferreiras (30*100%/130=) is 23%, in total smiths are 36.8% of population.

    Your calculation is right if in population of 100% we already have 18 Smiths and 30 Ferreiras, but not if 30 Ferreiras are an addition to existing population.
    Last edited by LeBrok; 13-07-16 at 02:05.

  24. #49
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,084
    Points
    8,680
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,680, Level: 27
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 15.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Ok... I supposed that the main concept would be taken and I was not to get the calculator, but if we go we go... so to get a 48% from a previous 18% it would be needed to add up 45 Ferreiras for each 100 old villagers: quite impressive the population change... and if samples were not first generation, so that many male Ferreiras had local mtDNA recent ancestry, the initial numbers could be even higher.

  25. #50
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,322
    Points
    35,100
    Level
    57
    Points: 35,100, Level: 57
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 350
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    I think you're confusing Iberian chalcolithic with Iberian BB. We have no Iberian BB DNA.
    I'm not confusing anything, Bicicleur. I 'm just comparing ancient BB of Central Europe, and TODAY Iberians, who stay apart on PCA plottings, spite they have close %s for total mt-H and dominance for Y-R1b, even if in C-Europe BBs R1b seem almost 100%. I know comparing ancient and modern population could mistake us, but surely not completely. So supposed close enough males and females ligneages would, theorically, give close enough populations on PCA. Or it proves that today Iberians are descendant of other Y-R1b (+) mtH people we have to find in history, but not from BBs, or BBS of C-Europe were not as a whole BBs of 3000 BC Iberia (what I 'm should think easily enough, wiating more info). It's all. As all of us here I wait for true Iberian BBS anDNA.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •