MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,880
- Reaction score
- 1,291
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
Some bits of crop from the « French » data in Patterson (thanks to B.Sécher)
As a whole, the WHG element compared to the EEF one (so for a big part the Late Neolithic pop before BB’s) is even enough in France places allover, from MN to IA ; little variation ; as a mean between 19 % and 26 % - maybe a little less WHG in the mix in South-East ?
- 25,2 % {19,9 to 28,9} in MN Brittany
- 19,3 % {16,5 to 21,8} in LN Champagne
– 22,5 % {21,0 to 28,5} in CA/BB (?) Haute-Provence (except 13,9 % I10345 female, special profile : foreign female from other remote place, rather EEF rich ?)
– 20,3 % {20,4 to 23,1} in M/LIA Provence (except 10,1 % I13621 male, special profile, more ‘steppe’ - but here, maybe enemies, locals or intruders?)
– 24,1 % {16,1 to 34,7} in M/LIA Champagne -
But the averages can hide some individuals stories and disparities, spite there are not big differences for an exogamic society after Neolithic.
For the Champagne M/LIA where we have 22 person, I don’t find striking positive or negative link between the % of WHG in LN mix with the % of ‘steppic’, which could tell us the Steppes men sent females who were richer or poorer in WHG. It seems that in West the BB’s took a lot of local female but also that the ones they sent along them had already WHG (like say : GAC?).
- Concerning ‘steppic’, no great oppositions since CA/BB (40,7 % in Haute-Povence, 41,4 % in Champagne) but nevertheless we find less of it in South-East and Brittany (35,9 % and 32,0 % + 31,9 %, what is not amazing.
In Brittany (little samples) if I group by periods, it gives CA : 31,4 % - BA : 32,3 % -
grouped by sex, it ‘s more significative : males : 36,8 % - females : 24,5 % - but the samples (5 in all) are so small !
Brittany apart, I don’t see a link between % of ‘steppic’ and sex for any period :
- Haute-Provence : males : 40,7 % - females : 40,6 %
- Provence : males : 36,2 % - females : 35,0 %
- Champagne : males : 40,9 % - females : 42,4 %
The explanation of these results is maybe more complicated than it appears because at the individual level we have people with diverse combinations of ancestries (plus : this ancestry is vague concerning CHG and Farmers ancestry contribution.
As a whole, the WHG element compared to the EEF one (so for a big part the Late Neolithic pop before BB’s) is even enough in France places allover, from MN to IA ; little variation ; as a mean between 19 % and 26 % - maybe a little less WHG in the mix in South-East ?
- 25,2 % {19,9 to 28,9} in MN Brittany
- 19,3 % {16,5 to 21,8} in LN Champagne
– 22,5 % {21,0 to 28,5} in CA/BB (?) Haute-Provence (except 13,9 % I10345 female, special profile : foreign female from other remote place, rather EEF rich ?)
– 20,3 % {20,4 to 23,1} in M/LIA Provence (except 10,1 % I13621 male, special profile, more ‘steppe’ - but here, maybe enemies, locals or intruders?)
– 24,1 % {16,1 to 34,7} in M/LIA Champagne -
But the averages can hide some individuals stories and disparities, spite there are not big differences for an exogamic society after Neolithic.
For the Champagne M/LIA where we have 22 person, I don’t find striking positive or negative link between the % of WHG in LN mix with the % of ‘steppic’, which could tell us the Steppes men sent females who were richer or poorer in WHG. It seems that in West the BB’s took a lot of local female but also that the ones they sent along them had already WHG (like say : GAC?).
- Concerning ‘steppic’, no great oppositions since CA/BB (40,7 % in Haute-Povence, 41,4 % in Champagne) but nevertheless we find less of it in South-East and Brittany (35,9 % and 32,0 % + 31,9 %, what is not amazing.
In Brittany (little samples) if I group by periods, it gives CA : 31,4 % - BA : 32,3 % -
grouped by sex, it ‘s more significative : males : 36,8 % - females : 24,5 % - but the samples (5 in all) are so small !
Brittany apart, I don’t see a link between % of ‘steppic’ and sex for any period :
- Haute-Provence : males : 40,7 % - females : 40,6 %
- Provence : males : 36,2 % - females : 35,0 %
- Champagne : males : 40,9 % - females : 42,4 %
The explanation of these results is maybe more complicated than it appears because at the individual level we have people with diverse combinations of ancestries (plus : this ancestry is vague concerning CHG and Farmers ancestry contribution.
