What does genetics say about the origin of Germanic people?

Another haplogroup which can be related to the Germanic migration is Q-M346 (L56, L57, M346) As you read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242 It has been found in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, ...

And as you read about Lurs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lurs#cite_note-Grugni-28 Q-L56 has one of the highest frequencies among Lurs (6%).

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_Q_Y-DNA.shtml "Modern Scandinavians belong to two distinct branches of L56: Y4827 and L804. All modern carriers of each branch seem to descend from a single ancestor who lived only some 3,000 years ago, during what was then the Nordic Bronze Age."

Haplogroup-Q.gif
 

It is really possible that there are a few mistakes in these DNA analyses, the same things can be said about all other genetic tests of ancient samples, but anyway we have these info and I see no reason for denying them. Haplogroup R1b1a2a1a (P311) still exists in Khuzestan/Luristan area in the west of Iran and we have genetic evidences which show the same haplogroup existed in the northeast of this land in the ancient times, it is certainly possible that it came from this land, not from the sky!
 
You see no reason that they are wrong? Do you see the contradictions in the SNP reads? They are pretty damning. Ignoring the glaring mistakes that software they used made is ignoring the obvious that the SNP calls are faulty. It makes you look like you are desparately clinging to these inaccurate calls because they just might support your pet theory. The calls are incorrect and Darra-i Kur is damaged and has below 100,000 SNP reads (refer to my posts). It's bad news. The R-U106 and I2 guys are also clearly wrong as per their Ycall excel file. But you'll deny this because of your biases.
Read my posts again on this and actually look at the GLARING errors. One of their biggest mistakes was labeling Ma'alta Boy something other than R* when we know he is simply R*. Just wait till that pre-print is finally officially published, they actually went through and made corrections to the Y-calls and those will be published officially when the paper is finalized.
Now in regards to haplogroup Q:
From Eupedia
Scandinavian Q1a
The oldest evidence to date of the presence of haplogroup Q is Europe are Q1a2-L56 samples from Mesolithic Latvia tested by Mathieson et al. (2017) and from the Khvalynsk culture (5200-4000 BCE), excavated in the middle Volga region and tested by Mathieson et al. (2016). The Khvalynsk culture is ancestral to the Yamna culture, which represents the Late Copper Age and Early Bronze Age homeland of the Proto-Indo-European speakers. Q1a2 could have travelled alongside haplogroup R1a-Z284 (via Poland) or R1b-U106 (via the Danube) to Scandinavia, or have been present there since the Mesolithic, as in Latvia. Both scenarios are possible as modern Scandinavians belong to two distinct branches of L56: Y4827 and L804. In either cases, all modern carriers of each branch seem to descend from a single ancestor who lived only some 3,000 years ago, during what was then the Nordic Bronze Age.
The maternal equivalents of that Siberian Q1a2 in prehistoric Eastern Europe are probably mtDNA haplogroups C4a and C5, which have been found Mesolithic Karelia (north-western Russia), in the Neolithic Dnieper-Donets culture in Ukraine, and in the Bronze Age Catacomb culture in the Pontic Steppe. Nowadays mtDNA C is mostly found among Siberians, Mongols and Native Americans, who happen to share Y-haplogroup Q1a2 on the paternal side. The analysis of prehistoric genomes from Eastern Europe did confirm the presence of a small percentage of Amerindian-related autosomal admixture.
Oddly enough, the L804 branch, which descends from the same Northeast Siberian branch as the Native American M3, is now found exclusively in Germanic countries, including Scandinavia, Germany, Britain and northern France. Like the other Scandinavian branch (L527>Y4827), its genetic diversity suggests that this lineage expanded from a single ancestor living approximately 3,000 years ago, presumably in Scandinavia, in what would have been the Nordic Bronze Age. At present it remains unclear when and how Q1a2-L804 reached Europe in the first place, but it might have been a very long time ago, during the late glacial period or the Mesolithic period. It may well have arrived at the same time as Q-Y4827. Alternatively, L804 might have come as a minor lineage accompanying haplogroup N1c1 from Mongolia until it reached Northeast Europe during the Neolithic period, some 7,000 years ago.
From Eupedia
Central Asian & Indo-Iranian Q1b1
While Q1a is more Mongolian, Siberian and Native American, Q1b1 (F1213) appears to have originated in Central Asia and migrated early to South Asia and the Middle East. The highest frequency of Q1b1 in Europe is found among Ashkenazi Jews (5%) and Sephardic Jews (2%), suggesting that Q1b was present in the Levant before the Jewish disapora 2,000 years ago. In fact, Jewish Q1b all belong to the Y2200 subclade, which was formed some 2,600 years ago. Other subclades of Q1b1 are found throughout the Middle East, including, Armenia, Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon (2%), and in isolated places settled by the Phoenicians in southern Europe (Crete, Sicily, south-west Iberia). This means that Q1b must have been present in the Levant at latest around 1200 BCE, a very long time before the Hunnic migrations. One hypothesis is that Q1b reached the Middle East alongside haplogroup R1a-Z93 with the Indo-Iranian migrations from Central Asia during the Late Bronze Age. The age estimate for the Middle Eastern Q1b1a (L245) branch is 4,500 years, which corresponds roughly to the beginning of the Proto-Indo-Iranian expansion to Central Asia. The other branch, Q1b1b (Y2265) is found in Central Asia, Iran, Pakistan and India, a distribution that also agrees with an Indo-Iranian dispersal.
Q1b1 was probably not one of the original lineages of Proto-Indo-European speakers of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe since it is almost completely absent from Balto-Slavic and Germanic countries. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to assume that Q1b1 was indigenous to the Ural mountains or Central Asia and was absorbed by the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-Europeans there during the Bronze Age, either during the Sintashta or Andronovo culture, then spread with the Indo-Aryans to India, Iran and the Near East. Q1b1 probably settled in the Levant at the same time as R1a-Z93, as both lineages are found among the Jews and the Lebanese and in places historically colonised by the Phoenicians. Autosomal analyses have confirmed that all Levantine people (Jews, Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrians) possess about 0.5% of Northeast Asian (Mongoloid) admixture. Since these populations lack Mongoloid mtDNA, the presence of Northeast Asian admixture can only be explained by the 2% of Q1b1 among Levantine men, the only paternal lineage of Mongoloid origin in the region.
As per Grugni et al branches of Q in the region:
Q1* = P36.2*
Q1a1 = M120
Q1a2 = M25
Q1a3 = M346
Q1b1 = M378
YFull tree Q-M120
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M120/
YFull tree Q-M25
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M25/
YFull tree Q-M346
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-L56/
YFull tree Q-M378
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-L275/
YFull tree Q-Y4827
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-Y4827/
YFull tree Q-L804
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-L804/
The only branch here that is L56 is Q-M346 now let's take a look:
Q-L56 formed 26,200 YBP and has a TMRCA of 19,900 YBP
Q-L804 formed 15,200 YBP and has a TMRCA of 3200 YBP.
The common ancestor here is very very very old and it predates any thing that we can call "Germanic" or "Iranian".
The oldest sample of Q-L56 is found in Mesolithic Latvia followed by Khvalynsk culture (5200-4000 BCE) in the Volga region of Russia. Khvalynsk is ancestral to Yamnaya.
Now really, Cyrus, I have a question for you, I really want to know. Why do you want to prove such a connection between Germanic ethnolinguistic cultures and Iranian ethnolinguistic cultures?
We know their connection is Indo-European and traced to the Steppes.

The predecessors of Germanic went to Europe and their language formed most likely out the dialect continuum of NW IE removed from the dialect continuum that gave rise to Indo-Iranian languages.
 
Also, you say genetic evidences that P311 existed there since ancient times? That's your ancient evidence? You're citing the damaged sample with less than 100,000 SNPs? Refer to my posts again.
Additional Haplogroup Q stuff:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00438-017-1363-8
Interesting paragraphs from this study:
Both Q1a1b-M25 and Q1a2-M346 subclades were frequent in Turkic-speaking populations, and their time estimates were at approximately 3-5 KYA (ESM_1; Table 1). According to Fig. 3 and Table 1, Q1a1b-M25 had spread from Central Asia to Western Asia and to Hungary in Central Europe (ESM_1); Q1a2-M346 had migrated from Southern Siberia (Malyarchuk et al. 2011) to most parts of Eurasia and the Comoros Islands of Africa. The results coincided with Turkic nomadic migrations from Southern Siberia and Mongolia to Central and Western Asia, Caucasus, and Eastern Europe (Yunusbayev et al. 2015). Therefore, we suggested that Q1a1b-M25 and Q1a2-M346 probably migrated with Turkic nomads from Southern Siberia to most parts of Eurasia. A few Q1a1b-M25 and Q1a2-M346 samples in Mongolic-speaking populations probably indicated that Turkic nomads had overlapped with Mongolic-speaking populations when they lived in the present Mongolian territory (Yunusbayev et al. 2015). An ancient DNA study showed that the Hungarians probably originated from Central Asia–Southern Siberia at approximately 4 KYA (Neparáczki et al. 2016), which was consistent with our time estimates (Table 1). Therefore, we proposed that Q1a1b-M25 and Q1a2-M346 had migrated from Central Asia–Southern Siberia to Central Europe at least 4 KYA. Three individuals of Africa (the Comoros Islands) that belonged to Q1a2-M346 reaffirmed that Middle Eastern populations had a genetic influence on the Comoros Islands (Gourjon et al. 2011).


Subclades Q1a2a1a2-L804 and Q1a2b2-F1161 were the downstream of Q1a2-M346 (Fig. 2), both of which mainly distributed in Western and Northern Europe (Fig. 3). Q1a2a1a2-L804 arrived in Western and Northern Europe as early as 5-7 KYA (Table 1). Ancient DNA studies showed that first European farmers migrated from Central Europe to Western and Northern Europe between 5 and 7.5 KYA (Haak et al. 2005, 2010; Bramanti et al. 2009; Malmström et al. 2009). Therefore, we supposed that Q1a2a1a2-L804 had spread from Central Europe to Western and Northern Europe with European early Neolithic farmers. The time estimate for Q1a2b2-F1161 was one thousand years later than its upstream clade Q1a2-M346 (Table 1), which seemed to be unrelated to the Neolithic transition of Europe (Haak et al. 2010). Since Q1a2-M346 spread across Europe at that time, it probably brought Q1a2b2-F1161 to Western and Northern Europe, and even to Western and Southern Asia (Khurana et al. 2014; Yunusbayev et al. 2015).
 
You see no reason that they are wrong? Do you see the contradictions in the SNP reads? They are pretty damning. Ignoring the glaring mistakes that software they used made is ignoring the obvious that the SNP calls are faulty. It makes you look like you are desparately clinging to these inaccurate calls because they just might support your pet theory. The calls are incorrect and Darra-i Kur is damaged and has below 100,000 SNP reads (refer to my posts). It's bad news. The R-U106 and I2 guys are also clearly wrong as per their Ycall excel file. But you'll deny this because of your biases.
Read my posts again on this and actually look at the GLARING errors. One of their biggest mistakes was labeling Ma'alta Boy something other than R* when we know he is simply R*. Just wait till that pre-print is finally officially published, they actually went through and made corrections to the Y-calls and those will be published officially when the paper is finalized.

In this thread you have actually done nothing except denying! The interesting thing is that when you say one thing is wrong, you think it means all other ones are wrong too!! What about haplogroup R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2 whcih has been found both in Samara (northeast of the Caspian sea) and Loebanr (north of Pakistan)? Show me your evidences which prove they are wrong too.
 
Refer to my post where I provided the Y-calls for S8998 (Loebanr sample ID), Loebanr is dated to 1000-800 BC. His SNP calls show is more accurately R(xR1) maybe R2.
EDIT: So to just keep this right up here:
S8998.E1.L1 A00 36 0
S8998.E1.L1 A0-T 0 12
S8998.E1.L1 A0 16 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1 0 6
S8998.E1.L1 A0a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 A0b 12 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1a 8 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1b 0 4
S8998.E1.L1 A0a1 9 1
S8998.E1.L1 A0a2 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 BT 1 194
S8998.E1.L1 CT 1 104

S8998.E1.L1 DE 15 0
S8998.E1.L1 CF 0 2
S8998.E1.L1 E 74 0
S8998.E1.L1 D 25 0
S8998.E1.L1 C 79 1
S8998.E1.L1 F 0 13
S8998.E1.L1 D1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D2 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 GHIJK 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 G 93 0
S8998.E1.L1 HIJK 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2 19 0
S8998.E1.L1 H 17 0
S8998.E1.L1 IJK 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2a 19 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 H2 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 H3 88 0
S8998.E1.L1 IJ 6 0
S8998.E1.L1 K 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1a2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1d1 20 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2a2 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 I 57 0
S8998.E1.L1 J 63 1
S8998.E1.L1 LT/K1 10 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1d1a 46 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1d1b 5 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1b1 103 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1b2 20 0
S8998.E1.L1 L/K1a 36 1
S8998.E1.L1 T/K1b 30 0
S8998.E1.L1 NO/K2a 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2c 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2b1 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a2a 7 1
S8998.E1.L1 H1b2a 43 0
S8998.E1.L1 NO1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 P/K2b2 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2b1a 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1d1 43 1
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1d2 43 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a2a1 42 0
S8998.E1.L1 T1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 N/K2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 O/K2a2 28 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 M/K2b1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 P1/K2b2a 0 9
S8998.E1.L1 T1a1 7 0
S8998.E1.L1 T1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 N1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 O1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 O2 5 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1a1 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 S/K2b1a4 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 M1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 M2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 Q/K2b2a1 10 0
S8998.E1.L1 R/K2b2a2 0 25
S8998.E1.L1 R1 12 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 R1a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1 6 1 (negative for R1b1)
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a 10 0 (negative for R1b1a)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1c 3 0 (negative for R1b1c)

S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2 2 0 (negative for R1b1a2)
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a 11 0 (negative for R1b1a1a)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2 17 1 (17 negative calls, negative for R1b1a1a2)
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1 1 0 (negative)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2 2 0 (negative)
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a2b3a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a2b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1e 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2f 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2a1a1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a1a1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1g2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a5 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2c1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1b1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b3a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b3c 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1h 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1i 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1j 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1k 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2e1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2e1c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2c1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2a1a1b1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1b3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1j1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1k1 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2a1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1b 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1c1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1c1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g3c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1i1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1i2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2a1d2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b5 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b1b3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b4 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b1 5 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1l1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2a1a1c2b1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1b4c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b4a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2d1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b1a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1k1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a2a2a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a2b1a1 1 0

S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2 0 1 (can't be positive for this mutation without positive calls for upstream SNPs, it is negative for upstream SNPs)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b2b2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3a1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a 6 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1e 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b1b4a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1a2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1a1a1a2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1c1b1a2a1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a1a1e3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b1a1a 1 0

Do you see why Loebanr is not actually U106? He is more likely R(xR1) or R2, besides Loebanr is dated to 1000-800 BC, our oldest U106 sample is: Lille Beddinge (Sweden) R1b1a1a2a1a1-U106 2275-2032 BC Allentoft et al. 2015, after that we find U106 in R1b1a1a2a1a1-U106 1881-1646 BC Olande et al. 2017 in De Tuithoorn, Oostwoud, Netherlands. These samples PREDATE Loebanr. So even it was actually a legitimate U106 it doesn't fit your narrative. Phylogeny matters.
 
Last edited:
Refer to my post where I provided the Y-calls for S8998 (Loebanr sample ID), Loebanr is dated to 1000-800 BC. His SNP calls show is more accurately R(xR1) maybe R2.
EDIT: So to just keep this right up here:


Do you see why Loebanr is not actually U106? He is more likely R(xR1) or R2, besides Loebanr is dated to 1000-800 BC, our oldest U106 sample is: Lille Beddinge (Sweden) R1b1a1a2a1a1-U106 2275-2032 BC Allentoft et al. 2015, after that we find U106 in R1b1a1a2a1a1-U106 1881-1646 BC Olande et al. 2017 in De Tuithoorn, Oostwoud, Netherlands. These samples PREDATE Loebanr. So even it was actually a legitimate U106 it doesn't fit your narrative. Phylogeny matters.

It seems you again just wanted to fool me, I found the source, it says Bolded calls are derived SNPs consistent with R1b, and especially because of R/K2b2a2 0 25 derived markers, that is certainly R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2. I read the same thing about Darra-e-kur too.
 
Incorrect.
Read it again. I also bolded derived calls. I have the Y-calls file on my computer, I provided the link to the Twitter response from the lead scientist of the paper. Your source also went through the Y-calls and found they were inconsistent also and they highlighted the inconsistencies. I'm not trying to fool you, you're fooling yourself because you desperately want to confirm your biased theory.

Loebanr can't be U106 if it is NEGATIVE for R1b in the first place it doesn't matter if it has a false positive at U106 position, as the UPSTREAM SNPs are NEGATIVE. It doesn't even matter if Loebanr was U106 (he wasn't and S8997 who is the second grave in the site is R2 and both have the same maternal haplogroup) the sample is predated by U106 in Sweden (Allentoft) and the Netherlands (Olalde).


Darra-i Kur has a total SNP count BELOW 100,000 and it has no upstream positive calls that precede P311. It's most accurate read is haplogroup BT, and that is not even worth putting down in a data sheet. You can try as you much as you want to misinterpret the data, but you still fail to see what it says. The Y-calls are inconsistent, and those haplogroup estimations are incorrect, and the finalized paper (NOT THE PRE-PRINT) will show the correct data.
 
Now really, Cyrus, I have a question for you, I really want to know. Why do you want to prove such a connection between Germanic ethnolinguistic cultures and Iranian ethnolinguistic cultures?
We know their connection is Indo-European and traced to the Steppes.

The predecessors of Germanic went to Europe and their language formed most likely out the dialect continuum of NW IE removed from the dialect continuum that gave rise to Indo-Iranian languages.

The only important thing for me is language/culture of people who lived in my country in the bronze age, it doesn't matter for me that they migrated to the Germanic lands or vice versa, I strongly believe a Germanic culture existed in Iran before the arrival of the Iranian culture in the 1st millennium BC. Of course culture is not just language, for example I believe mythical history of Iran (not Iranian/Avestan mythical history) is almost the same as Germanic mythical history, you can never find them in other Iranian myths in other countries, there are numerous things that I can talk about them, for example about the city of Dehloran in the west of Iran where Lurs live, we read: http://damavand9.blogspot.com/2009/05/dehloran.html?m=1 One of the most interesting things that you could find near the city Dehloran is a natural liquid Tar spring. According to the myths told by the native people, this tar spring was the blood of a dragon that was killed by the Iranian invincible hero, Esphandyar. Who was this hero who killed a dragon, bathed in its blood, and thereby received a skin as hard as horn that makes him invulnerable?
 
Let's go over this again:

S8998.E1.L1 A00 36 0
S8998.E1.L1 A0-T 0 12
S8998.E1.L1 A0 16 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1 0 6
S8998.E1.L1 A0a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 A0b 12 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1a 8 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1b 0 4
S8998.E1.L1 A0a1 9 1
S8998.E1.L1 A0a2 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 A1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 BT 1 194
S8998.E1.L1 CT 1 104

S8998.E1.L1 DE 15 0
S8998.E1.L1 CF 0 2
S8998.E1.L1 E 74 0
S8998.E1.L1 D 25 0
S8998.E1.L1 C 79 1
S8998.E1.L1 F 0 13
S8998.E1.L1 D1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D2 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 GHIJK 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 G 93 0
S8998.E1.L1 HIJK 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2 19 0
S8998.E1.L1 H 17 0
S8998.E1.L1 IJK 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2a 19 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 H2 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 H3 88 0
S8998.E1.L1 IJ 6 0
S8998.E1.L1 K 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1a2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1d1 20 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b2a2 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 I 57 0
S8998.E1.L1 J 63 1
S8998.E1.L1 LT/K1 10 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1d1a 46 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1d1b 5 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1b1 103 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1b2 20 0
S8998.E1.L1 L/K1a 36 1
S8998.E1.L1 T/K1b 30 0
S8998.E1.L1 NO/K2a 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2c 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2b1 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a2a 7 1
S8998.E1.L1 H1b2a 43 0
S8998.E1.L1 NO1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 P/K2b2 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 D1b1a2b1a 4 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1d1 43 1
S8998.E1.L1 H1a1d2 43 0
S8998.E1.L1 H1a2a1 42 0
S8998.E1.L1 T1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 N/K2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 O/K2a2 28 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 M/K2b1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 P1/K2b2a 0 9
S8998.E1.L1 T1a1 7 0
S8998.E1.L1 T1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 N1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 O1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 O2 5 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1a1 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 K2b1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 S/K2b1a4 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 M1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 M2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 Q/K2b2a1 10 0
S8998.E1.L1 R/K2b2a2 0 25
S8998.E1.L1 R1 12 0 (12 negative calls for R1, how can it be R1b-U106 if negative for the root of R1?)
S8998.E1.L1 R2 0 1
S8998.E1.L1 R1a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1 6 1 (negative for R1b1)
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a 10 0 (negative for R1b1a)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1c 3 0 (negative for R1b1c)

S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2 2 0 (negative for R1b1a2)
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a 11 0 (negative for R1b1a1a,, 11 NEGATIVE CALLS)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2 17 1 (17 negative calls, negative for R1b1a1a2) << 17 negative calls!
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1 1 0 (negative)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2 2 0 (negative)
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a 3 0 (NEGATIVE)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R2a3a2b2a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a3b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1 1 0 (NEGATIVE)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a2b3a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b2a2b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c 1 0 (NEGATIVE)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1e 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2f 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2a1a1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1a1a1b1a1a1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1g2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a5 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2c1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1b1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b 1 0 (NEGATIVE)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b3a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b3c 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1h 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1i 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1j 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1k 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2e1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2e1c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a2c1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2a1a1b1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2 1 0 (NEGATIVE)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1b3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1j1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1k1 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2a1d 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1b 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b 2 0 (NEGATIVE)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1c1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1c1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g3c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1i1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1i2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2a1d2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b5 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b1b3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b4 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b1 5 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1l1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a2a1a1c2b1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b1b4c 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a 1 0 (NEGATIVE - ANCESTRAL MEANS NEGATIVE)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b1b1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b4a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2d1b 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b1a 3 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1k1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a2a2a2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c1a2b1a1 1 0

S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2 0 1 (can't be positive for this mutation without positive calls for upstream SNPs, it is negative for upstream SNPs)
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2a1a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1b3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b2b2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3a1 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g1b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1a3 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a 6 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1e 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1b1b4a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1e2b3a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1a2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1g2a1a2b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a1a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a 2 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b2 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2b1c1a1a1a2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1c1b1a2a1b1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b2a 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a1a1e3a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a2a1 1 0
S8998.E1.L1 R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2a1b1a4b1a1a 1 0

I've pointed out the negative calls that are upstream of U106. So try and accuse me of trying to fool you, you are only fooling yourself to fit your narrative. And to paraphrase someone from another forum who I suspect is your "source": "some kind of R for his 25 positive calls for Haplogroup R. However he is negative for R1/R1b/R1b1, etc, the fundamentals of phylogeny make this inconsistency of the haplogroup call quite clear. This Loebanr guy is R(xR1) maybe R2, and judging by the sample S8997 buried in the same area he is probably R2a, as he shares a maternal haplogroup with S8997.
 
Let's go over this again:
I've pointed out the negative calls that are upstream of U106. So try and accuse me of trying to fool you, you are only fooling yourself to fit your narrative. And to paraphrase someone from another forum who I suspect is your "source": "some kind of R for his 25 positive calls for Haplogroup R. However he is negative for R1/R1b/R1b1, etc, the fundamentals of phylogeny make this inconsistency of the haplogroup call quite clear. This Loebanr guy is R(xR1) maybe R2, and judging by the sample S8997 buried in the same area he is probably R2a, as he shares a maternal haplogroup with S8997.
Why you just focus on negative calls? We see positive calls for R1b1 and R1b1a1a2 too, as I see there are negative calls for upstream SNPs in several other ancient samples too, I don't know why you consider them correct but just this one is incorrect!
 
Why you just focus on negative calls? We see positive calls for R1b1 and R1b1a1a2 too, as I see there are negative calls for upstream SNPs in several other ancient samples too, I don't know why you consider them correct but just this one is incorrect!

sigh... Cyrus,

You're not understanding me.

R1b1 has 6 negative calls to 1 positive call (do the math the odds are higher that it is negative), R1 has 12 negative calls. R1b1a1a2 has 17 negative calls to 1 positive call (again do the math, the odds are higher). S8998 isn't even positive for R1, it has 12 negative calls! It can't be R1b-U106 if it is R1 negative, do the math. He's also negative for R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a, R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a, R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a, R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b, etc etc. In order to be R-U106 a genetic sample needs to be positive for ALL UPSTREAM SNPs that define R, R1, R1b, and so on down to U106, if they are negative for R1, R1b and everything upstream of U106 it is not possible. Ancestral means "NEGATIVE" and derived means "POSITIVE". The softwares final haplogroup call is inconsistent with the upstream calls which are negative (especially R1, R1b and others). On the left number column is the ancestral values and on the right number column is the derived values. I don't know how many more times this needs to be gone over. If an individual is negative for R1, let alone R1b and other clade defining mutations they most definitely cannot be U106. So how about we wait until the pre-print is finalized and officially published, they've already said they were fixing the Y-calls and going over them manually and they will release that information when the paper is officially published.

I have looked at the other ones too and found several inconsistencies and I'm not the only one who has taken the time to look at these, the I2 guys are most definitely wrong and there are several other examples from different haplogroups in that pre-print that others have gone over that are wrong and for your information I've already stated that they mislabeled Ma'alta boy (MA-1) too. They labeled him something way downstream when we know from other data and actually good analysis that he is R* (R-M207*). I'm focusing on Darra-i-Kur (damaged sample) and Loebanr because you keep touting them as evidence of your theory when they are inconsistent (thus incorrect) Y-haplogroup calls due to damage and software errors from a new software program that has issues. Hell they labeled more than just those incorrectly due to the software they used.
 
Spruithean, what about R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2 in Samara? It seems to be the oldest one, we have two similar haplogroups in the south of it (Afghanistan and Pakistan) that you say both of them are wrong, if it is proved that the original one is correct then these ones can be correct too, for example it is possible that pre-print has some errors. Those who are expert in genetics certainly know these basic things that you say, when they talk about these haplogroups after doing deep DNA analyses, they have certainly some strong reasons.
 
Spruithean, what about R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2 in Samara? It seems to be the oldest one, we have two similar haplogroups in the south of it (Afghanistan and Pakistan) that you say both of them are wrong, if it is proved that the original one is correct then these ones can be correct too, for example it is possible that pre-print has some errors. Those who are expert in genetics certainly know these basic things that you say, when they talk about these haplogroups after doing deep DNA analyses, they have certainly some strong reasons.

R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2 in Samara (Yamnaya)? Not likely. Earliest U106 is Lille Beddinge in Sweden like I cited earlier followed by De Tuithoorn in the Netherlands.
The Yamnaya samples from Samara in Russia? Those Samara Yamnaya were reported by both Haak et al. 2015 and Mathieson et al. 2015. Central and South Asian pre-print refers to them by modern nomenclature and they cited Mathieson et al as their source. So they did not publish Y-calls in the excel file because it seems they did not do the analysis for those samples. If you look at the Y-calls excel file these samples are unavailable.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature16152#extended-data
An excerpt from Haak et al. 2015 (they refer to the nucleobases)

Haak et al. (2015) https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/02/10/013433.full.pdf:
I0370 (Yamnaya)
This individual was assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a2 (CTS1078/Z2103:7186135G→C), with upstream haplogroups R1b1a2 (M269:22739367T→C, L150.1:10008791C→T), R1b1a (L320:4357591C→T) also supported.

I0429 (Yamnaya)
This individual was assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a2 (Z2105:15747432C→A) and to the upstream haplogroups R1b1a2a (L23:6753511G→A) and R1b1a2 (L150.1:10008791C→T, M269:22739367T→C). It was ancestral for R1b1a2a2a (L584:28731917C→T) and so could be designated R1b1a2a2*(x R1b1a2a2a).

I0438 (Yamnaya)
This individual could also be assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a2 (Z2105:15747432C→A). It could also be assigned to the upstream haplogroups R1b1a2a (L23:6753511G→A), R1b1a (L320:4357591C→T). It was ancestral for R1b1a2a2a (L584:28731917C→T), and R1b1a2a2c (CTS7822:17684699A→T), so it could be designated R1b1a2a2*(xR1b1a2a2a, R1b1a2a2c).

I0439 (Yamnaya)
This individual could be assigned to haplogroup R1b1a (P297:18656508G→C), with upstream haplogroup R1 (M173:15026424A→C, M306:22750583C→A) also supported. It was ancestral for haplogroup R1b1a2a1 (L51:8502236G→A) and so could be designated R1b1a*(xR1b1a2a1).

I0443 (Yamnaya)
This individual could only be assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a (L49.1:2842212T→A, L23:6753511G→A). It could also be assigned to the upstream haplogroups R1b1a2 (PF6399:2668456C→T, L150.1:10008791C→T, L1353:19179540G→A, PF6509:22190371A→G, M269:22739367T→C, CTS12478:28590278G→A). The individual was ancestral for haplogroup R1b1a2a1 (L51/M412:8502236G→A) and, unlike I0231, I0370 and I0438 also for R1b1a2a2 (Z2105:15747432C→A). Thus, it could be designated as R1b1a2a*(xR1b1a2a1, R1b1a2a2).

I0444 (Yamnaya)
The individual could be assigned to haplogroup R1b1a2a2 (CTS1078/Z2103:7186135G→C) and also to the upstream haplogroups R1b1a2 (L150.1:10008791C→T) and R1b1 (M415:9170545C→A).
So yes, it seems there are inconsistencies here, obviously some of these Yamnaya are R-L23, however the Central and South Asian pre-print did not do the calls for those samples and instead cited Mathieson et al. 2015 (and Haak et al) as their source and used modern nomenclature via ISOGG or YCC (it seems they didn't do the assessment of these samples! They aren't in the excel file for the Ycalls), and we know there are inconsistencies with the Central/South Asian pre-print, they reported MA-1 wrong and several others because of the software they used. Let’s wait until the Central and South Asian paper is finalized (we've been waiting awhile!) before we start making maps using the pre-print data, does that seem fair? So perhaps we revisit this sort of discussion when that paper is finally finalized and people can create hypotheses based on the finalized data and not the pre-print.
 
Last edited:
As you read here: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13904-Central-and-South-Asian-DNA-Paper

Central and South Asian DNA Paper

Its finally out!!!

The Genomic Formation of South and Central Asia

ProfileVagheesh M Narasimhan, Nick J Patterson, Priya Moorjani, Iosif Lazaridis, Lipson Mark, Swapan Mallick, Nadin Rohland, Rebecca Bernardos, Alexander M Kim, Nathan Nakatsuka, Inigo Olalde, Alfredo Coppa, James Mallory, Vyacheslav Moiseyev, Janet Monge, Luca M Olivieri, Nicole Adamski, Nasreen Broomandkhoshbacht, Francesca Candilio, Olivia Cheronet, Brendan J Culleton, Matthew Ferry, Daniel Fernandes, Beatriz Gamarra, Daniel Gaudio, Mateja Hajdinjak, Eadaoin Harney, Thomas K Harper, Denise Keating, Ann-Marie Lawson, Megan Michel, Mario Novak, Jonas Oppenheimer, Niraj Rai, Kendra Sirak, Viviane Slon, Kristin Stewardson, Zhao Zhang, Gaziz Akhatov, Anatoly N Bagashev, Baurzhan Baitanayev, Gian Luca Bonora, Tatiana Chikisheva, Anatoly Derevianko, Enshin Dmitry, Katerina Douka, Nadezhda Dubova, Andrey Epimakhov, Suzanne Freilich, Dorian Fuller, Alexander Goryachev, Andrey Gromov, Bryan Hanks, Margaret Judd, Erlan Kazizov, Aleksander Khokhlov, Egor Kitov, Elena Kupriyanova, Pavel Kuznetsov, Donata Luiselli, Farhad Maksudov, Chris Meiklejohn, Deborah C Merrett, Roberto Micheli, Oleg Mochalov, Zahir Muhammed, Samridin Mustafakulov, Ayushi Nayak, Rykun M Petrovna, Davide Pettner, Richard Potts, Dmitry Razhev, Stefania Sarno, Kulyan Sikhymbaevae, Sergey M Slepchenko, Nadezhda Stepanova, Svetlana Svyatko, Sergey Vasilyev, Massimo Vidale, Dima Voyakin, Antonina Yermolayeva, Alisa Zubova, Vasant S Shinde, Carles Lalueza-Fox, Matthias Meyer, David Anthony, Nicole Boivin, Kumarasmy Thangaraj, Douglas Kennett, Michael Frachetti, Ron Pinhasi, David Reich

Abstract

The genetic formation of Central and South Asian populations has been unclear because of an absence of ancient DNA. To address this gap, we generated genome-wide data from 362 ancient individuals, including the first from eastern Iran, Turan (Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan), Bronze Age Kazakhstan, and South Asia. Our data reveal a complex set of genetic sources that ultimately combined to form the ancestry of South Asians today. We document a southward spread of genetic ancestry from the Eurasian Steppe, correlating with the archaeologically known expansion of pastoralist sites from the Steppe to Turan in the Middle Bronze Age (2300-1500 BCE). These Steppe communities mixed genetically with peoples of the Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC) whom they encountered in Turan (primarily descendants of earlier agriculturalists of Iran), but there is no evidence that the main BMAC population contributed genetically to later South Asians. Instead, Steppe communities integrated farther south throughout the 2nd millennium BCE, and we show that they mixed with a more southern population that we document at multiple sites as outlier individuals exhibiting a distinctive mixture of ancestry related to Iranian agriculturalists and South Asian hunter-gathers. We call this group Indus Periphery because they were found at sites in cultural contact with the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) and along its northern fringe, and also because they were genetically similar to post-IVC groups in the Swat Valley of Pakistan. By co-analyzing ancient DNA and genomic data from diverse present-day South Asians, we show that Indus Periphery-related people are the single most important source of ancestry in South Asia — consistent with the idea that the Indus Periphery individuals are providing us with the first direct look at the ancestry of peoples of the IVC — and we develop a model for the formation of present-day South Asians in terms of the temporally and geographically proximate sources of Indus Periphery-related, Steppe, and local South Asian hunter-gatherer-related ancestry. Our results show how ancestry from the Steppe genetically linked Europe and South Asia in the Bronze Age, and identifies the populations that almost certainly were responsible for spreading Indo-European languages across much of Eurasia.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/03/31/292581

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2018/03/31/292581.DC1/292581-2.xlsx

Darra.I.Kur_d Darra.I.Kur Darra.I.Kur petrous L5082 1240K.capture DoukaJHulEvol2017 This study Katerina Douka 4655 2850-2460 calBCE (3989±31 BP, OxA-31781) Darra_i_kur_MBA Darra_i_kur_MBA Iran / Turan BA Darra-i-Kur Cave Afghanistan 36.783333 70 M H2a R1b1a1a2a1a 0.031 36481 Damage PASS .. .. minus .. .. ..

S8998.E1.L1 I8998 LOEB_78, Grave 78, Individual 1 petrous S8998.E1.L1 1240K.capture n/a (no date) This study Ron Pinhasi, Luca Olivieri, Muhammad Zahir, Massimo Vidale, Roberto Micheli 2950 1000-800 BCE SPGT Loebanr_IA South Asia IA Loebanr 1 Pakistan 34.747222 72.391667 M W3a1b R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2 3.95464 881251 All PASS(Xcontam=0.005) 0.004617 4.39622593 half 0.18 W3a1b 0.99
 
spruithean said:
Let?s wait until the Central and South Asian paper is finalized (we've been waiting awhile!) before we start making maps using the pre-print data, does that seem fair?

Ok, it seems you just didn't know, it was finalized last year, so we should just focus on making map, yes?

Therfore we have R1b-P311 in Afghanistan from 2850-2460 BC (in fact it is the only haplogroup which has been found in this country from the ancient times) and R1b-U106 in Pakistan from 1000-800 BC, and from another side, we know Germanic language didn't exist in the north of Europe before 500 BC and R1b-U106, a subclade of R1b-P311, is the main haplogroup of Germanic-speaking people.

There are also other genetic evidnces like I2a2a2a in Turkmenistan:

S8527.E1.L1 I8527 MOS324, IE-10-23 petrous (CBD) S8527.E1.L1 1240K.capture n/a (no date) This study Sergey Vasilyev 5450 5000-2000 BCE Geoksiur_EN Geoksiur_EN Iran / Turan C Geoksiur Turkmenistan 37.1907 61.0343 M .. I2a2a2a 0.028172 33150 All PASS .. .. half 0.213 .. ..

Migration map of R1a, based on recent researches:

iook_r1a.jpg


Also Q-M346 (L56, L57, M346), ...

All genetic evidences show that the Germanic people migrated from Iran to Scandinavia.
 
WOW it looks great, new theory! or it's finally proven? Germanics settlement of Europe from Southern Caucasia region!
 
Cyrus, that thread is old (03-31-2018) the paper is still not published, it is still a pre-print. It's still a pre-print at BioXRiv see your own link from that website. I'm well aware that it hasn't been officially published.
From your bioXriv link:
"[This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed [what does this mean?]."
It also says "March 31, 2018." as the date for the pre-print being posted on bioXriv.

It could be upwards of 6 months for this paper to be finalized. They've done their reassessment and will publish said results when they publish the paper.

So again, we should wait before we make assumptions and before we start making maps based off of bad Y-calls using a pre-print that hasn't been officially published.
Also still there is no evidence of Germanic people migrating from Iran as the Darra-i-Kur is a damaged sample with low reads of everything, Loebanr has inconsistent reads, the I2 samples inconsistent reads, etc the list goes on. Besides even if your precious Loebanr was U106 and if those I2 were legitimate they are PREDATED by European samples by a huge timeframe. So it would mean a migration from Europe, not to.

I repeat, the BioXRiv link is a pre-print and the study has not been officially published and it will likely be published on Nature when it is finalized.
Hate to burst your bubble, but this paper is a STILL a pre-print.

I follow the main author on twitter and he has not posted anything about the study being finalized.

This was shared from Mr. Narasimhan himself on April 4, 2019 via his twitter:

"We would appreciate if people would: - Identify errors or fill in missing information for location, lat, long, archaeological context, date, label- fix Y chr haplogroup determinations (by manual checking).- identifying other problems in the data or annotations for individuals"
 
WOW it looks great, new theory! or it's finally proven? Germanics settlement of Europe from Southern Caucasia region!
No, he's trying to pull a fast one, read the link Cyrus provided:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/03/31/292581
It says it is a pre-print.
Too bad it is still a pre-print.
If it isn't a pre-print anymore Cyrus, find the official published link and share it. You won't find the OFFICIAL FINALIZED version because it is still a pre-print.

Even the PDF from the bioXriv link says it is a pre-print.
 

This thread has been viewed 162795 times.

Back
Top