They really missed the boat IMO when they call for a Paleolithic movement, as if they completely ignored recent ancient DNA . . .
=====
I would be a good article pre-NGS-Y full sequences without the Paleolithic nonsense error. At least we have the first complete article with Iberian DF27 proportions. We can observe in the Y Full tree that R-P312-S116 branched fastly and intensively with various minor branches, so the unresolved P312(xDF27, U152, L21, L238, DF19) results are quite expected.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-P312/
=====
Yes, kind of an anachronism, a paper reminiscent of about 2006, except now they are restricting the claim to P312 (S116) rather than to all of M269, as was once done.
=====
Given that we have no more than 3 Mesolithic Samples from West of Germany and South of Sweden, and no more than 35 Neolithic samples from France/Iberian/British Isles I would hold on onto making conclusions about the status of P312 in Western Europe. Thus I don't think the authors need to ignore ancient DNA to make any claims, because most of the Western European ancient DNA comes from a single burial in Treilles, France, thus there are vast regions that remain to be sampled.
Now what do you make of the big proportion of R1b-S116* in the Irish, DF99??
=====
R1b-M269 (and its son R1b-P312) has not been found in any site in Neolithic Western Europe. R1b-M269 appears for the first time in Bell Beaker (R1b-P312 being the majority there), Corded Ware and Battle-Axe Sweden (R1b-U106 on this case) sites. It can't be "old" as in Neolithic Europe. Furthermore, in Bell Beaker, Corded Ware and Battle-Axe Sweden an autosomal Yamnayan component was detected. Back at Yamnaya, nearly all samples have been R1b-M269 so far. It fits with the mainstream model of the spread of IE languages in Western Europe, including the timeframe.
Clearly, a 2nd "IE homeland", as Gimbutas called it, was established somewhere in Central Europe (after the steppe invasion) and from there R1b-P312 came to conquer Western Europe (the UK, France and Iberia, as well as Northern Italy).
=====
The frequencies of R1b in Iberia are rather consistent outside the Basque population at 55-65%. The higher rate among Basque may be simply due to their relative isolation and lack of immigrants to their regions. The spread of P312 and descendants almost mimics Beaker pottery to a tee. The arrival of these newcomers in the late Neolithic, and whatever their origins needs to be determined. They appear to have distinct traditions from the earlier farmers whom they supplanted and/or absorbed.
The Danish rate of R1b 37.36% is a little lower than I usually see (40-44%), but can be explained by the fact Beaker was not as influential in the north west as it was in the SW of Europe.
ADD: The higher rate of R1b can be explained in Basque if BB were almost exclusively a varied mix of P312, coupled with a lack of immigration to the region. This appears to be the case from aDNA.
=====
Yet not a single R1b-L11 derived lineage has been found east of Germany, and most of the Yamnaya samples have been R1b-Z2105 derived, which is a cousin clade to European R1b-L51 but not ancestral to it. As for the autosomal component, Corded Ware is the one that has massive amounts of Yamnaya-like ancestry and R1a majority haplogroups. The German Beaker amount of Yamnaya-like component can be easily explained with interaction with the next door neighbors who had 70%+ of the components. We know that 2000 BC Northern Iberians were still much like Neolithic farmers and Lactose Intolerant, yet 3000 BC Peripheral Basques have lactose tolerance in them.
Now I would kindly ask everybody to try to focus our attention to the thread topic which is the dissection of R1b-S116 in Iberians and to a lesser extent some Western European populations, let's leave the Paleolithic/Neolithic/Yamnaya discussion for the appropriate thread.
=====
But the Paleolithic assertion is an essential part of this paper. And not a single ancient R1b-L11 derived lineage has been found west of Germany either.
Wasn't there a paper some years ago by a group of Indian scientists that placed the origin of R1a in India? This sort of looks like an occidental version of the same sort of thing.
=====
Fair enough, but this thread is about a study that chose to ignore ancient DNA and that is IMO a major oversight. But to your point, there are plenty of active topics on ancient DNA to carry on about it here.
=====
Let me make something clear, I do am
not advocating a Paleolithic/Neolithic origin of R1b-P312 in Western Europe, I'm simply mentioning that there is a great lack of ancient DNA in Western Europe, and want to add that the widespread presence of ANE/Yamnaya component in Europe, specially in Western European can be attributed to an immensely number migrations(Roman Empire, Vikings,, Celts, Germanics, etc) that have occurred in Europe since the Bronze Age. Also keep in mind that Basques who have one of the greatest(if not the greatest) frequencies of R1b-P312 in Europe have a local minimum in ANE/Yamnaya ancestry related, even lower(though not by much) than their Iberian neighbors who have far lower frequencies of R1b-M269. Yes I know we can attribute it to a founder's effect, etc, well then let's try to explain the modest R1b-U152 frequency in Sardinians and their even lower amount of Yamnaya/ANE ancestry, or how about the higher Yamnaya/ANE in Italians compared to Iberians. It's clear that R1b was not the only vector that carried ANE/Yamnaya into Southern Europe. Now I find it fascinating that the German Beaker samples are so uniformly R1b, and that the very first R1b-P312 in Europe have popped up in there, but let's wait until we get more Megalithic samples from Western Europe.
Remember a single R1b-P312 sample from Western Europe dating back to 3000 BC and looking like Neolithic farmers autosomally and lacking Yamnaya/ANE in them would throw the "R1b_L11 in Western Europe is from Steppe" theory upside down on its axis. Right now we have a 5000 BC farmer, who might or might not have been R1b-V88, let's keep an open mind.
=====
That's very true, but it seems less and less likely with each succeeding ancient y-dna result.
My mind is ready to open, but someone is going to have to knock on the door of it bearing some convincing evidence. A 7,000-year-old Neolithic farmer who was M269- and probably P297-, like those V88+ guys in Africa, doesn't do it for me.
=====
Just curious - you guys don't think Bell Beaker is relevant to this thread on origins of P312 in Iberia?
Just throwing that out there... It's clearly not what the paper is saying, but I am using this as a counter argument.
=====
Beaker and its origins are the things that most puzzle me. Fully developed Beaker is very "kurgan" looking, but supposedly its oldest sites are in Iberia.
It's confusing. The idea that Beaker began in Iberia could be wrong (see this recent paper by Christian Jeunesse), or perhaps early Beaker in Iberia lacked any P312 but acquired it in Central Europe. Another possibility is the one suggested by Jean M in her "Stelae People" idea, i.e., a steppe people bearing P312 came to Iberia fairly early and became involved in the Iberian genesis of Beaker.
=====
I'm wondering if the R1b-U152 and R1b-L21 presence in Iberia is far more recent, one R1b-L21 due to Atlantic trades with the Isles and R1b-U152 due to the Romans or if they came with the original R1b-P312 population, in any case it's obvious that R1b-P312 entered Iberia from the North and diffused throughout, thus the North African entry given by Klyosov is I think highly unlikely, same thing with an origin of R1b-P312 in Iberia, it's very clear that Iberia is a recipient of R1b-P312 not a donor. As for the German Beakers it is my understanding that the only subclade of R1b-P312 found has been R1b-U152 thus far.
So some food for thought, an R1b-DF27 population enters Iberia? Or does an R1b-xDF27 population enter Iberia and R1b-DF27 is born in Iberia? Is that the very first layer of R1b-P312 in Iberia, or was there significant amount of R1b-U152/L21/others siblings? If we assume the birth of R1b-DF27 was outside of Iberia, then where?
=====
DF27 is extremely regular in almost all Iberian regions (around 40-50%) and we can observe in the YFull tree several basal DF27 Iberian individuals
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-DF27/
Only in the Basque Country DF27 is superior than 60% and rural or native Basque surnames are superior to 70%,
so the concentration and the point of entrance was from the Basque Atlantic Pyrenees to the West and South. DF27 was born there or immediately adjacent because they were the main Iberian peopler and only minor branches moved to other distant places but never with a big concentration comparable with that pioneer region of distribution.
=====
The subclades of DF27 that are best known to be numerous in the modern Basque population are quite young (born a few centuries AD, not two or three millennia BC). They are found in an early Basque cemetery, but it likewise is several centuries AD. There has so far been no confirmed association of DF27, or any subclade of it, in Copper or Bronze Age Iberia. Many of the other subclades/branches of DF27 have their distribution weighted far to the north, northeast, and east of any place in Iberia, Basque or otherwise. Including the Nordic countries, Poland, Ukraine, and Armenia -- not just the nearby Isles, or Netherlands, where many have been misled into thinking their YDNA lineage is Basque. Some of the branches found in abundance elsewhere (especially Z295 and above) are the ancestors, not the descendants, of the DF27 Basques who live there now.
It is a very, very common error to equate modern population density with ancient presence in the same place. Once that idea takes hold, it is really hard to overturn with mere evidence.
