Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe

Of course we are trying to justify our behavior, our wants and possessiveness, and it comes so easy to us, because it is our nature. The hardwire group defending instinct, to vindicate us and diminish others.

Yes, I agree that it seems to be human nature. We approve of and defend and support other members of our tribe, however that's defined, and find excuses to hate and criticize "those other people". Differences in race, religion or nationality are just the easiest way to define "us versus them". Perhaps such behaviour has or had an important evolutionary value for ensuring the survival of one's group.
 
Can't you see that the quotes are messed up in your post too? Are you quoting Moesan or me?

why is that...............who started this mix-up?
 
For example slightly darker, this French man looks Yamna like too.

frenchman.jpg

Haha he has similiar facial structures like a friend of mine. He is from Ukraine. I can also find similarity with my face. Iam from Serbia and iam definetily not Y-R1b :D. This kind of example shows that the most modern Europeans shares the same origin.
 
si

I took time to read the most of the posts in this thread, and yes, I find the quote system very confusing; almost impossible to know who is answering and who is being answered to !!! maybe it would be good when answering someone who already answered somebody else in the previous post, to erase the part written by the answered forumer (the first one)? very confusign sometimes -
concerning females rapts, I wrote 'wives' (mistake) in place of 'women' (maybe Arvisto did the same?) without precising my thought, but rapted females very often enough became "wives", did they not?

concerning southern elements in Steppes people, I think they reached the Steppes from every direction if not at everytime (someones by West (tripolje), someones by S-C Asia East Caspian, someones across Caucasus (Maykop), not at the same time - the problem is: long time scale osmosis or well determined emigrations /colonization, or both? to be continued
 
Agree on the ancient gossip thing - people saying rude things about their enemies is normal. However at the same time I think the *type* of rude things said will follow set patterns so it is still useful info e.g. the things Romans said about Etruscans probably does reflect Etruscan women having more freedom than Roman women (at the time).

Wasn't there just recently a linguistic/archeological paper published which stated Proto_Indo Europeans (based on the language) must have been "highlanders who lived close to a lake"?

Just messing but

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/search/maps/@42.5801152,77.6223995,7z
 
Norwegians have a higher combined percentage of R1a + R1b than Belarussians and Ukrainians. Plenty of Central Asians invaded eastern Europe over the last 5000 years, almost completely eliminating R1b in the region. I explained 5 years ago that this was why R1b was so low today in its original homeland.

The huge Neolithic population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture didn't just vanish in thin air. They were gradually absorbed by PIE people (probably already since the Globular Amphora culture). Don't forget that Cucuteni-Trypillian towns were the largest in the world at the time. That explains the very significant percentage of both male and female Near Eastern lineages in western Ukraine and southern Belarus today.

Additionally, Ukrainians also have partial Greek ancestry in the south (lots of J2a).

It is especially northern Belarus and eastern Ukraine that are very high in R1a, and that is just a sign of higher recent Slavic ancestry, not a sign of more surviving Yamna ancestry. The Slavic branch descends from the Corded Ware and Abashevo cultures, not from Yamna.


Are you saying that most of Greeks are descends of J2a?....if so any more info related to this?....i would gladly appreciate it....
 
I see ~30% WHG (blue) in this chart.

Haaketal2015-Figure-3_zpsf94c99b9.jpg

Would this table had an explanation as the following below?

1: Most of Early Neolithic (9,000 years) - were already populated and lived (majority) at the current modern populations (and locations) such as: Sardinian, Tuscan, Greek, Albanian, Bergamo, Spanish, South French, Basque, Bulgarian, Croatian. it looks like, more south is more ancient. Doesn't that explain that all the R1b or R1a expansion came much later to Europe?..then it would look like the R lineage came from central Asia above the baltic and through steppe as Maciamo noted (and not through Asia minor). and J2 migrated even much later towards Europe?

Then would anyone argue which is the major Y Dna in these south regions already within early Neolithic?

2. There are 2 hypothesis for the roots of indoEuropean language (9,000 years): north of Black sea and south west Anatolia....recent study is pretty conclusive about the south west Anatolia. This might correlate with migrations and Cultures spreading from south west Anatolia to east forming Mesopotamia (5,000 years) and west possibly forming Vinca Culture (7,500 years)?

I suppose after migration to Mesopotamia, at the same time another big migration went through Caucus above Black Sea and through the Steppe around 5,000 years ago (Maciamo noted 4,000 years ago) (probably majority of R1b and R1a)
Now if this is correct then the predecessors of Hittites or Hittites from Anatolia might be R1b (in majority) and migrated through the steppe. But at the same time, hod did an R1b1 end up in Spain 7,000 ybp? maybe just an individual or individuals got there and not through some massive migrations

On the other side if there was a migration from south west Anatolia through south east Anatolia years ago possibly forming Vinca culture, although there is no evidence yet that they spoke indo european. And it looks like Vinca scripts is Archaic and has no relation to PEI then it might be that Vinca culture is neither R* lineage only possibility would be I2a1 G2a2 or E-V13?


http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/ite...kaert_2012.pdf
https://theoreticalecology.wordpress...nguage-family/
 
Last edited:
If you look at the chart on page 25, the division is very clear. The orange is Neolithic Farmer, although I don't know if it's exactly the same as the component in the prior Lazardis paper. Here, the standard is Starcevo and LBKT, and thus Stuttgart shows a little WHG, as does the Spanish early Neolithic. Still, it's Early Neolithic Farmer in Europe and EEF is the closest term, as Alan pointed out above. The blue is, of course, WHG, based on Loschbour. The green is Yamnaya. That component is not based on the R1b1 hunter gatherer who was so similar to the R1a1 hunter gatherer but who was, indeed, found in the Samara Valley. The green Yamnaya component is based on the later and downstream R1b samples from Yamnaya, and thus autosomally are half Eastern Hunter Gatherer and half "Near Eastern". I agree with Alan that this is the "West Asian" component that Dienekes has been chasing all these years. In my opinion, however, it should not be seen as some totally foreign component. I think they could have extracted the majority EEF like component.
Haak-et-al.-2015-Figure-3.png


(Alan is also right that ENF has no place in the discussion. That is a component found through modeling by Eurogenes. It is not, unlike these components, based on an ancient set of genomes.)

It's interesting that a little sliver of Yamnaya made it into the Gamba samples. You can also see how the blue WHG component made something of a comeback in the MN of Germany. Obviously, that didn't happen in other areas. Then there's the big explosion of it with Corded Ware, and lower levels in Bell Beaker.

There are all sorts of questions that arise as to why individual groups have their own particular set of percentages, as well. The Greeks (I believe the samples were taken in a northern part of the mainland) and the Albanians, for instance, why do they have less Yamnaya, when in addition to what might have come originally, they were invaded by Slavic speaking tribes who would have carried some with them? Also, why do they have more WHG than their immediate neighbors? The PCA is also interesting:

The PCA is also interesting:
View attachment 7074
You can see how the later Yamnaya samples cluster right between the EHGs and the Near Easterners.

Does anyone know, by the way, where the authors talk about the percentage of population replacement in the south?

Great point Angela...
Greeks and Albanians have less later Yamna maybe cause (if we can suppose this way) as the predominant % of their dna is E-V13 (over 40%), if we add another Ie2 by 15% then we have over 65% EEF and WHG.
Yamna is only 15% (graph above) and it could be mainly through R1b and R1a, however it tops 25% (Greek and Albanian), we miss the 10%, maybe the 10% (R1b or R1a) was already at those regions before Yamna?
Then how about J2 which has 18%?...i don't have any comments here for now...

Albanians have mostly E-V13 (39%) Modern Greeks (19%), then R1b (18.6%) Modern Greeks (11.7%) migrated from steppe, then J2 (18.6%) Modern Greeks (17%) from middle east and in the end slavic tribes R1a (5%) Modern Greeks (16%)
now historically speaking modern greeks were slavinized (R1a) much more than the Albanians


 
Last edited:
Would this table had an explanation as the following below?

1: Most of Early Neolithic (9,000 years) - were already populated and lived (majority) at the current modern populations (and locations) such as: Sardinian, Tuscan, Greek, Albanian, Bergamo, Spanish, South French, Basque. it looks like, more south is more ancient. Doesn't that explain that all the R expansion came much later to Europe?..then it would look like the R lineage came from central Asia above the baltic and through steppe as Maciamo noted (and not through Asia minor). and J2 migrated even much later towards Europe?

Then would anyone argue which is the major Y Dna in these south regions already within early Neolithic?

2. There are 2 hypothesis for the roots of indoEuropean language (9,000 years): north of Black sea and south west Anatolia....recent study is pretty conclusive about the south west Anatolia. This correlates with Cultures spreading from south west Anatolia to east forming Mesopotamia (5,500 years) and west possibly forming Vinca Culture (7,500 years).

I suppose after migration to Mesopotamia another big migration went through Caucus above Black Sea and through the Steppe around 4,000 years ago as Maciamo noted (probably majority of R1b and R1a)
on the other side migration through south west Anatolia through south east balkans 7,500 ears ago forming Vinca culture, although there is no evidence yet that they spoke indo european.

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/ite...kaert_2012.pdf
https://theoreticalecology.wordpress...nguage-family/

in summary , the paper states that there was one set of haplogroups in central Europe prior to 4500BC and then another different set came in....the older set comprises of I2 , G2 and T1, C and others from what I recall .............corded ware was the others .............R1 came in the younger set of migrations

CultureCountryYBPHgSimple hgN
Mesolithic_HGLuxembourg8'000I2a1b-L178I21
Early_NeolithicHungary7'700I2a-L460I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1-P37.2I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1a1a-L672I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1b-M423I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1b2a1-L147.2I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2c2-PF3827I25
Early_NeolithicHungary7'600H2-L281H21
Early_NeolithicSpain7'300F*-P135F*1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'300I2a1b1-L161.1I21
Early_NeolithicGermany7'200T1a-PF5604T1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a-PF3147G2a1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a-PF3185G2a1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a1-PF3170G2a1
Early_NeolithicHungary7'100C1a2-V20/V184C12
Early_NeolithicSpain7'100R1b1-M415R1b11
Early_NeolithicGermany7'000G2a2a1-PF3155G2a1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'000E1b1b1a1b1a-V13E1b1b1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'000G2a-P15G2a5
Early_NeolithicSpain6'900C1a2-V20C11
Early_NeolithicHungary6'400I2a-L460I21
Early_NeolithicGermany6'300F-M89F*2
Early_NeolithicGermany6'200G2a2b-S126G2a1
 
in summary , the paper states that there was one set of haplogroups in central Europe prior to 4500BC and then another different set came in....the older set comprises of I2 , G2 and T1, C and others from what I recall .............corded ware was the others .............R1 came in the younger set of migrations

CultureCountryYBPHgSimple hgN
Mesolithic_HGLuxembourg8'000I2a1b-L178I21
Early_NeolithicHungary7'700I2a-L460I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1-P37.2I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1a1a-L672I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1b-M423I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1b2a1-L147.2I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2c2-PF3827I25
Early_NeolithicHungary7'600H2-L281H21
Early_NeolithicSpain7'300F*-P135F*1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'300I2a1b1-L161.1I21
Early_NeolithicGermany7'200T1a-PF5604T1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a-PF3147G2a1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a-PF3185G2a1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a1-PF3170G2a1
Early_NeolithicHungary7'100C1a2-V20/V184C12
Early_NeolithicSpain7'100R1b1-M415R1b11
Early_NeolithicGermany7'000G2a2a1-PF3155G2a1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'000E1b1b1a1b1a-V13E1b1b1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'000G2a-P15G2a5
Early_NeolithicSpain6'900C1a2-V20C11
Early_NeolithicHungary6'400I2a-L460I21
Early_NeolithicGermany6'300F-M89F*2
Early_NeolithicGermany6'200G2a2b-S126G2a1


So if Maciamo haplogroup timeline is correct, and according to early neolithic skeletons found:

1: Can we say that the early Neolithic people indigenous natives of Europe (at least as per ybp noted) are E-V13 (10,000 ybp) G2a2 (9,000) and I2a1 (8.000 ybp) ?

Current populations with highest I2a are:

Bosnian Croats 71%
Bosnians 56%
Sardinians 42.3%
Norwegians 40.2%
Swedes 40%
Danes 38.7%
Slovenians 38.7%
Croats 37%
Serbians 33%
Bosnians Serbs 31%
Icelanders 34%
Dutch 32.9%
Sami 31%
Peak or roots of I2a1 seems to be current Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro and south west Serbia
However no ancient I2a1 is found yet at these areas except the 5 of them in Sweeden.


Current Populations with highest G2a2 are:
Osetians 60%
Georgians 32%
Although G2a2 already in Europe at the early Neolithic its roots looks like its current Georgia and Osetia (caucasus mountains)
And it has much lower numbers with that of E-V13 and !2a1


Current populations with highest E-V13 are:
Albanians in Kosovo 47.3%
Albanians in Macedonia 39%
Albanians in Kosovo, Macedonia and Albania 39%
Greeks in Greece 31%
Italians in Sicily 27.3%
Peak or roots of E-V13 seems to be current borders of Kosovo, west Macedonia, Albania, Greece (especially Peloponnese and south Greece with higher %)
However no ancient E-V13 is found yet at these areas except the one in Spain


2: Then came the migrations at early 5,000 ybp with R1 across black sea through Yamna

3:
Then looks like J2 migrated the latest from middle east to Europe
 
Last edited:
This is why i meant that more south is more ancient in current Europe, as far as we are talking about early Neolithic, and if we are talking about indigenous natives of European DNA (at least for Early Neolithic period), not taking into account current Russia


HaplogroupPossible time of originPossible place of origin
I217,000 years agoBalkans
I2b13,000 years agoCentral Europe
I2a11,000 years agoBalkans
E1b1b-V138,500 years agoBalkans
I2b19,000 years agoGermany
I2a18,000 years agoSardinia
I2a22,500 years agoPoland, Central Europe
E1b1b-M815,500 years agoMaghreb
I15,000 years agoScandinavia
R1b-L214,000 years agoCentral or Eastern Europe
R1b-S283,500 years agoaround the Alps
R1b-S213,000 years agoFrisia or Central Europe
I2b1a< 3,000 years agoBritain

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_European_populations
 
I've got almost all Ancient West Eurasian Y DNA right here.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12G2cfjG0wHWarsl5bB99ridFmvUWzqlZfZ6_e_R6oIA/edit#gid=898544046

It's got the same pattern as mtDNA, see here.

[FONT=Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif]https://drive.google.com/open?id=1HcAhe7QvggT792VruuoZX6IsTg4LhWXV-Z_ZfTk2KGA&authuser=0[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif]Autosomal DNA says the same. There were 2 migration events that changed the genetics of Europe between 8,000-4,000 years ago. I know I'm beating a dead horse, but still it's neat to see how consistent mtDNA, Y DNA, and autosomal DNA are with each other. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif]1. Migration of Balkan/West Asian farmers. Brand new mtDNA: R*(HV, JT, U3, U8a1a, U8b1a1, K) and N*(N1a1a, N1a1b(Not found in West Europe, only East), X, W). And Brand new Y DNA(G2a, T1a, H2, E1b-V13). The newcomers were made up of the same very ancient mtDNA haplogroups which are exclusive to western Eurasia today(split from what's in the East 45,000YO>, and makeup almost 100% of modern European and Middle Eastern mtDNA). [/FONT]They also carried relatives of the U clades which existed in the natives of Europe. [FONT=Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif] The new Y DNA they brought are also Western and believed to have originated in West Asia.

Autosomal DNA says the farmer immigrants and modern West Asians descend mostly from the same ancient West Asian population. And that they were a mix of Basal Eurasian and something similar to the natives of Europe, which is consistent with mtDNA. Between 7,000-5,000 years ago they became about 25% native West European in most regions, but some were probably over 50%. In mtDNA and Y DNA we can during that time period native lineages rose in popularity.

2.Migration from Eastern Europe into the rest of Europe: New mtDNA: U5a, U4, U2e, T1a, J1b, J2b, J2a1a, H2a, H6, H13a, N1a1b, and maybe more. New Y DNA: R1b-L23, R1a-M417.

Autosomally they introduced ancestry related to Mesolithic Russians and Upper Paleolithic Siberians, who both had Y DNA R. They also lowered West Asian affinities.
[/FONT]
 
Would this table had an explanation as the following below?

1: Most of Early Neolithic (9,000 years) - were already populated and lived (majority) at the current modern populations (and locations) such as: Sardinian, Tuscan, Greek, Albanian, Bergamo, Spanish, South French, Basque, Bulgarian, Croatian. it looks like, more south is more ancient. Doesn't that explain that all the R1b or R1a expansion came much later to Europe?..then it would look like the R lineage came from central Asia above the baltic and through steppe as Maciamo noted (and not through Asia minor). and J2 migrated even much later towards Europe?

Then would anyone argue which is the major Y Dna in these south regions already within early Neolithic?

2. There are 2 hypothesis for the roots of indoEuropean language (9,000 years): north of Black sea and south west Anatolia....recent study is pretty conclusive about the south west Anatolia. This might correlate with migrations and Cultures spreading from south west Anatolia to east forming Mesopotamia (5,000 years) and west possibly forming Vinca Culture (7,500 years)?

I suppose after migration to Mesopotamia, at the same time another big migration went through Caucus above Black Sea and through the Steppe around 5,000 years ago (Maciamo noted 4,000 years ago) (probably majority of R1b and R1a)
Now if this is correct then the predecessors of Hittites or Hittites from Anatolia might be R1b (in majority) and migrated through the steppe. But at the same time, hod did an R1b1 end up in Spain 7,000 ybp? maybe just an individual or individuals got there and not through some massive migrations

On the other side if there was a migration from south west Anatolia through south east Anatolia years ago possibly forming Vinca culture, although there is no evidence yet that they spoke indo european. And it looks like Vinca scripts is Archaic and has no relation to PEI then it might be that Vinca culture is neither R* lineage only possibility would be I2a1 G2a2 or E-V13?


http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/ite...kaert_2012.pdf
https://theoreticalecology.wordpress...nguage-family/

I'm not sure it would be of too big interest but here I answer you and myself (in a former post I claimed southern elements in Steppes were come from every direction: west South and east, but it 's no more sure according to last works)
the Yamnaya people we have their DNA, in Samara, so maybe it's not truth for every steppic tribe, had not too much 'west-asian' component and in certain runs (poolings) their 'west-asian' is not accompagnied by 'mediterranean' nor by 'red-sea' nor any other south-Caucasus/Anatolian component - but they show a bit of 'south-asian' (what kind: ANI or ASI, ANI almost sure!) and in other runs they show a lot of 'gedrosia' with very few 'caucasus', coming to confirm their rather east caspian origin than Cucuteni western or ancient Armenian of whatever South Caucasus/Anatolian population - by the way, the most of their physcial features, variated, lack the 'danubian' gentle mediterranean' type of first West-Anatolia/Danube/Greece farmers - when qualified "southern", the types are more 'cappadocian' with a bit of 'cromagnoid' (the Catacomb types?), showing maybe and more northern types (Dnieper) and more eastern Caspian tendancies ('cappadocian' is a variety of 'indo-afghan' with less of the more robust ancient 'eurafrican-brünnoid'-'capelloid' tendancies - others types are other mixes where everytime the old elements ('cromagnoid', 'brünnoid' and 'even 'borrebylike' brachys' are present - I recall the most of the steppic people were of high stature between 1m69 and 1m74 as means (only higher: a serie of Harappa: 1m76) - 'proto-europoid', (discutable term, 'borrebylike') and eastern southerners were all of them of bigger stature than the most of Europeans of the time, proving the strong imput of steppic I-Eans in North Europe until today. Corded were tall, BBs were tall, even Globular Amphoras were neatly taller than Lengyel people, at first sight.
I know that doesn't answer the question of first proto-I-Ean place because steppic tribes could have been later indo-europeanized population (maybe all the satem ones?) if we accept the Anatolian hypothesis I have some difficulty to adopt for now.
the DNA we have, if the analysis are not contradicted in future, are not supporting a South-Caucasus hypothesis for Steppic people: the eastern DNA seems arriving there later than the period we can expect for a proto-I-Ean genesis: and Maykop people physically were very apart from the most of teppic people (I long to DNA from Maykop)
 
It's true Catacombes people showed more "southern" imput physically but their mt DNA if I red well showed contacts with more northeastern or eastern populations: so 2 solutions:
1- (preferred for now): came from Eastern North the Caspian - 2- from South Caucasus, but passed across it in a "short" journey fromSouth- East Caspian, without too much contacts with Anatolian/S-Caucasus/Near-Eastern predecessors. Grigoryev, a partizan of the Anatolian hypothesis, believes in a Neolithic diffusion of I-Eans in West, through Balkans, and South the Caspian, a proto-Aryan diffusion, all from the Kurdistan. I don't agree for now based on what we have at hand (profanes), but what could be interesting is that he thinks Catacombs people (based upon supposed placenames) were proto-Indo-ryan come through North the Caspian. Could explain some differences between Catacombes and certain Pit Grave people of Yamnaya or others horizons... I think DNA from more niverous Pit Grave subcultures or descendants could help more.
I recall Maykop and Armenia people seemed phoenotypically very apart from the different Pontic tribes according to Kozmintsev and contrary to Armenians scientists! But with the unprecise that Scientists could be sometimes on the matter, this does not exclude a participation of them in the genesis process; what would please me: what DNA and what phoenotypes had these first "Armenians", aside the eternal obscure plottings distances (and TOO: were they already I-Eans??? or Hurrians?): the several new types in Anatolia and South Caucasus, for i red, seem arrived lately, about the 2500 BC or not very earlier... perhaps my agenda dates are false?!?
 
I could have posted it in a lot of threads all of them turning around the same basic problem

a puzzling hypothesis more
THE SINTASHTA CULTURE AND SOME QUESTIONS OF INDO-EUROPEANS ORIGINS
S.A. GRIGORIEV

only 3 pages but striking!
 
I could have posted it in a lot of threads all of them turning around the same basic problem

a puzzling hypothesis more
THE SINTASHTA CULTURE AND SOME QUESTIONS OF INDO-EUROPEANS ORIGINS
S.A. GRIGORIEV

only 3 pages but striking!
Interesting. If he added map with movement arrows and dates would be more easy to follow his theory.
According to him Corded was not ancestors of known IEs right?
 
CultureCountryYBPHgSimple hgN
Mesolithic_HGLuxembourg8'000I2a1b-L178I21
Early_NeolithicHungary7'700I2a-L460I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1-P37.2I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1a1a-L672I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1b-M423I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2a1b2a1-L147.2I21
Hunter_GathererSweden7'700I2c2-PF3827I25
Early_NeolithicHungary7'600H2-L281H21
Early_NeolithicSpain7'300F*-P135F*1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'300I2a1b1-L161.1I21
Early_NeolithicGermany7'200T1a-PF5604T1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a-PF3147G2a1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a-PF3185G2a1
Early_NeolithicGermany7'100G2a2a1-PF3170G2a1
Early_NeolithicHungary7'100C1a2-V20/V184C12
Early_Neolithic
Spain7'100R1b1-M415R1b11
Early_NeolithicGermany7'000G2a2a1-PF3155G2a1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'000E1b1b1a1b1a-V13E1b1b1
Early_NeolithicSpain7'000G2a-P15G2a5
Early_NeolithicSpain6'900C1a2-V20C11
Early_NeolithicHungary6'400I2a-L460I21
Early_NeolithicGermany6'300F-M89F*2
Early_NeolithicGermany6'200G2a2b-S126G2a1

I found on Ancestral Journeys this new: that R1b-M415 from Els Trocs is now positive for V88 equivalent SNP PF6279.

See: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/europeanneolithicdna.shtml
 
Eurogenes seems having found something of importance about Y-R1a and Y-R1b diffusion in Northern Europe, more or less, rather more, linked to Steppes
in Sweden, and in Denmark, it seems the Battle Axes people cited by Allentoft show neatly different positions in autosomals the ones from the others when compared to modern populations:
Y-R1b among aDNA Northenr Europe, Y-R1a among East Russia/Mordvins!
 

This thread has been viewed 369359 times.

Back
Top