Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
@bigsnake49. I think it was here:
@Bicicleur
This is interesting.
And "if" the samples are classified purely by age in each phase and area, it seems to be a tendency for Steppe ancestry to increase along Bell Beaker period, decrease along Bronze Age and increase again along the Iron Age.
Probably these are the 3(three) SF-BA2, the 2(two) SF-IA1 and 1(one) SF-BA1 that are closer to Iberians:
Comparatively with samples of same age, a little more of WHG and a little bit less of yamna. Am I wrong?
Pir3037AB | 0.37 | 0.409 | 0.222 |
Quin58 | 0.273 | 0.449 | 0.278 |
Quin234 | 0.345 | 0.503 | 0.152 |
0.366 | 0.445 | 0.19 |
PECH8 | 0.412 | 0.426 | 0.163 |
PT2 | 0.429 | 0.419 | 0.152 |
Further south and far to the east. Pontic Greek?
It's hard to distinguish between the Albanians and Mainland Greeks too. Couldn't they have used contrasting colors??? Maybe the Albanians are indeed mostly in one spot: just east of Tuscans, along with northern Greeks, but running up toward Bulgarians?
What do you think? I'm slightly color blind they tell me. I know, odd for a woman, but there you have it. My Dad was severely color blind, so I blame him. No wonder he liked sculpting more than painting.
It was an "if" on my side. It could be, also, that they're classified by Steppe (it looks more likely; still...). I don't know. I was in doubt because of PEI2 in Bell Beakers, who has more Steppe than I1388 just above.Has someone actually checked the chart and found they're all in chronological order? Is it oldest to youngest or the reverse? I would think the 100% steppe Beaker sample would be one of the first arrivals, yes?
CBV95 | La Bouche-à-Vesle | Ciry_Salsogne | 49.36232 | 3.46272 | Late Neolithic | Campaniforme | 3970 +/- 30BP (GrA-32767) | 2574-2452 | Hauts-de-France (North) |
PEI2 | Dolmen des Peirières | Villedubert | 43.1355 | 2.2519 | Late Neolithic | Campaniforme | 3935 +/- 30BP (Ly-14875) | 2563-2308 |
Does anyone knows why only two bell beakers appear in the supplements and all other BBC , "I" , with several (L151 and P312) are absent? I have checked several of the excel supplements and can't seem to find those...
Edit: and does anyone know where the "I" is from or stands for?
Cx161 | I1a2b4~ | 134632 | 179 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | I-FGC3466 |
Lyon-15193 | Cx161 | ZAC Agora | 5340 | 30 | 51.44 | 0.2 | 3.2 | 4314-4052 cal E |
Cx161 | SF-MN | 12331 | 55 | H1 | 0.999 | 0+/-0 |
If you'll look at post number 31, you'll see I can't find them either.
A
Some of the BB men do indeed not have very much steppe, as is also true of the Bronze Age, but what the chronology is I'm still not sure. They may go in opposite directions. It does seem to me the 100% steppe Beaker is one of the early arrivals, perhaps?
We know that the Belgae were not 100 % Celtic, they were already a mix of Celtic and Germanic tribes.
Some Germanic tribes may have infiltrated further south too, like Ariovistus did in Ceasar's time.
The first Germanic tribes we know of are the Cimbri and the Teutones, because the Romans new them.
Many other tribes may have been wandering around without us knowing it.
What they said in regard to MtDna N1a could perhaps be applied to all uniparentals, i.e. any lineage which was less than 25% of the total has a 95% chance of not being picked up.
Differences between northern and southern France go back to the Neolithic. That’s sometimes obscured in their graph covering broad areas and time periods.For example, look at all the U5b in Michelsberg culture.
I think they’re right to question the origin of these mitochondrial lineages. Perhaps, along with some “local” resurgence, we also have people moving in from further north.
So perhaps we could say that pre-Bronze Age, the south was fairly homogeneous in terms of mtDna but the north was heterogeneous with quite a few areas showing more U5b.
I think this fits in with a scenario where there just weren’t as many Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in Southern Europe, and so the Neolithic “take over” was pretty complete.
With the Bronze Age come I, U2, and U5a. So, some women came to France with the steppe admixed groups, unlike what seems to have happened in Spain.
Interesting also in this regard are the Bell Beakers. Perhaps it’s a function of small sample sizes, but there’s very little U of any kind; it’s almost all H and K.
Then the U5a and U5b go up in the Bronze Age (continuing migration?) to go back down in the Iron Age.
The Iron Age is interesting in another way in that H and J go way up. They point out the similarly high levels of H on the Pontic steppe and the J in central Europe Neolithic. Is that a hint for them of another population movement from more Central Europe?
YFull also works with a CI 95%. In this case, we should look to the age of formation, since this is probably a non-full developed I1-S5619 (likely the sample is negative for some current S5619 equivalents - there're seven). That said, the CI 95% of formation in YFull is not that off: 5200-4100 ybp.a) a Middle Neolithic I1 sample, Cugnaux near Toulouse in SW France dated 5300 ybp. This sample is I1-FGC3466 (aka S5619), which according to Yfull was formed 4600 ybp and has a TMRCA of 3800 ybp. It is a rare branch of I1a2-Z58>Z138 found in Western Europe.
Likely not a full-developed I1-Y6885 either. CI 95% of formation: 3900-2500 ybp.b) an Early Bronze Age I1-Y6885, downstream of I1a2-Z58>Z60>Z140>A196>Y6900. This branch is found apparently only in Britain and Ireland today. Yfull gives a age of 3200 ybp and TMRCA of 1050 ybp. The archeological sample is dated 3490 ybp, so slightly older.
Sample ID | Location | Age | Haplogroup |
OBE3626-1 | Obernai, Alsace | EBA, c. 1800 BCE | R1b-DF27>Z225 |
BIS159 | Bischwihr, Alsace | EBA, c. 1900 BCE | R1b-U152 |
BIS382 | Bischwihr, Alsace | EBA, c. 1900 BCE | R1b-U152 |
As for I1
According to the graph I posted, PIR3037AB (EBA - 3663 +/- 43BP) is supposedly R-Y28681 (formation from 4200 to 2700 ybp), below R-L21. Not sure where the categorization comes from.Here are the R1b clades deeper than P312 from the paper:
Sample ID Location Age Haplogroup OBE3626-1 Obernai, Alsace EBA, c. 1800 BCE R1b-DF27>Z225 BIS159 Bischwihr, Alsace EBA, c. 1900 BCE R1b-U152 BIS382 Bischwihr, Alsace EBA, c. 1900 BCE R1b-U152
Unfortunately no deep clade for Iron Age Gauls. I hope we can determine them by analysing the raw data.
As a side note, I'd say that the age of the sample roughly corresponding to the upper limit of CI 95% provided by YFull for formation suggests that this clade (I1-S5619) must have originated around there. More than that, a I1-S5619 obviously descend from a full developed I1 necessarily, and I1's CI 95% TMRCA is 5100-4000 ybp (we could say 5200-4000 ybp based on the range for I1-S5619 formation).YFull also works with a CI 95%. In this case, we should look to the age of formation, since this is probably a non-full developed I1-S5619 (likely the sample is negative for some current S5619 equivalents - there're seven). That said, the CI 95% of formation in YFull is not that off: 5200-4100 ybp.
This thread has been viewed 26591 times.