New phylogenetic tree of R1b-U152 (and L2)

Maciamo

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
10,175
Reaction score
3,598
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
I have been working for three days on a new updated version of the R1b-U152 tree. I had to split it in two trees as the L2 branch was taking too much space. I recommend that you viw the tree in full screen by clicking on them on the R1b page.

I had already suggested three years ago that Z56 was a predominantly Italic branch and therefore associated with the Romans too, while the Z36 subclade was Alpine Celtic, and associated especially with the La Tène culture and Iron Age Gauls. This new phylogeny confirms just that. Z56 is overwhelmingly present in Italy, while Z36 is the most common subclade in and around Switzerland and southern Germany. The other branches, including L2, appear to have scattered around Europe from the time U152 reached central Europe (circa 2500 BCE). Some branches may have diffused with the Unetice, Tumulus and Urnfield cultures.





 
I`m interested in the Z194 branch, below Z193 and Z192. I think it may be a Roman subclade, but there is the possibility of an origin north of the Alps. What do you think?
 
geiserich said:
I`m interested in the Z194 branch, below Z193 and Z192. I think it may be a Roman subclade, but there is the possibility of an origin north of the Alps. What do you think?
Click to expand...

Z192 is well represented in Italy and might be Italic/Roman, but data is still too scarce to tell.

When at look at the age of Z193 and Z192 (both 4400 ybp), it is too old to be exclusively Italic. It might be some deeper clades that are Italic. For example, based on the FTDNA data, the BY3630 under Z40483 is found only in central Italy (Rome and Naples). Oddly, it's not listed in Yfull nor on the Big Tree, but the latter lists the CTS2617 subclade which might be equivalent and is also found in Italy.

PF6652/Z194 might possibly also be Roman.
 
Never mind
 
Dear Maciamo!

My paternal grandmother's father as R1b-U152-L2-Z49-S8172. They lived all in Northeast Hungary.

Can we know something about this subclade? Z56 was italicus, Z36 was italic celt, and what is the situation with my ancestors? Thank you.
 
Z36 was italic celt,

sorry: Z35 was alpine celt
 
I am R-U152 R-Z43 Pf6571 from italy tuscany
 
roberto1960 said:
I am R-U152 R-Z43 Pf6571 from italy tuscany
Click to expand...

How about reserving this for the information on the left-hand side, or elaborate in your signature; because this is nearly all you post. Then you could have something different to write about.
 
Is this the last phylogenetic tree? I'm R-L2
 
I am R-Z193/PF6658 but from Egypt. I could have a Roman's root.
 
Claiming that L2 is "scattered around Europe" seems like a bit of a poor generalization. As discussed elsewhere, Boattini2013 shows that most of northern Italy is 10%-12% L2, with L2 being the dominant haplogroup of that area; so L2 definitely has a very strong Italian presence. Further, the FTDNA BlockTree, with its strong UK bias, shows that over 60% of their U152 participants are L2 (3690 of 5931 participants on 4/19/20); so if we want to have their data be part of the discussion, we really need to break L2 into useful subclades, including the major Italian element.

Where L2 is only a single mutation from U152 and many of these early branches have many children that are likewise only a single variant away, there is a good chance that U152 and L2 were largely contemporary, and part of a period of significant population expansion for that haplogroup. If a line has 1 male child per generation for 8 generations (urban population growth), then we are likely to see many years per mutation; but if a line has 4-6 male children per generation (rural population growth), we are going to be seeing lots of semi-contemporary mutations.

With extreme branching, like we see with U152, L2, Z36 and PF6658, we might anticipate many of these lines to be contemporary. In such a scenario, we might imagine a large clan of these mixed branches migrate into northern Italy as a group, with Z56 just representing one part of that group. There seem to be many founding legends that speak of large clans or groups of people settling new colonies in mass, and though these stories come from the historical period, some of the behaviors seen in Bronze Age haplogroups might suggest a similar strategy during that era.
 
t50 said:
Claiming that L2 is "scattered around Europe" seems like a bit of a poor generalization. As discussed elsewhere, Boattini2013 shows that most of northern Italy is 10%-12% L2, with L2 being the dominant haplogroup of that area; so L2 definitely has a very strong Italian presence. Further, the FTDNA BlockTree, with its strong UK bias, shows that over 60% of their U152 participants are L2 (3690 of 5931 participants on 4/19/20); so if we want to have their data be part of the discussion, we really need to break L2 into useful subclades, including the major Italian element.

Where L2 is only a single mutation from U152 and many of these early branches have many children that are likewise only a single variant away, there is a good chance that U152 and L2 were largely contemporary, and part of a period of significant population expansion for that haplogroup. If a line has 1 male child per generation for 8 generations (urban population growth), then we are likely to see many years per mutation; but if a line has 4-6 male children per generation (rural population growth), we are going to be seeing lots of semi-contemporary mutations.

With extreme branching, like we see with U152, L2, Z36 and PF6658, we might anticipate many of these lines to be contemporary. In such a scenario, we might imagine a large clan of these mixed branches migrate into northern Italy as a group, with Z56 just representing one part of that group. There seem to be many founding legends that speak of large clans or groups of people settling new colonies in mass, and though these stories come from the historical period, some of the behaviors seen in Bronze Age haplogroups might suggest a similar strategy during that era.
Click to expand...

First of all, this thread is 3 years old.

Secondly, I wrote "it appears that "L2 appears to have scattered around Europe from the time U152 reached central Europe (circa 2500 BCE)". I am not talking about its present distribution, but how it dispersed after arriving in Central Europe 4500 years ago. I should have said "Western Europe".
 
My point is that talking about L2 independent of U152 does not make a lot of sense as the two are likely near contemporary, have very similar distributions, and the former makes up an extremely large percentage of the latter. In some of your other posts you specifically mention their very similar geographic distributions, such as "L2+ and L2- are found in about the same proportion everywhere", which was from a 2010 post of yours. I think if you will reread my post you will find that it has merit. I am not seeking to argue with you. I definitely defer to your abundant experience, and seek only insight from you and to contribute to the wonderful resource you have created.
 
Something I'd find interesting would be if the haplogroups/subclades of Rumansch-speaking Swiss people could be analyzed, and then compared to German-speaking Swiss.

I'd guess that we'd see a relative absence of R1b-U106 and a predominance of U152 among Rumansch speakers. Obviously there are a lot of German-speaking Swiss who are also U152, but I wonder if there'd be a significant subclade difference within that. Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here, but I just think it would be quite interesting. And also Rhaetic-Romance language speakers and an analysis of them in general.
 
Robotnick said:
Something I'd find interesting would be if the haplogroups/subclades of Rumansch-speaking Swiss people could be analyzed, and then compared to German-speaking Swiss.

I'd guess that we'd see a relative absence of R1b-U106 and a predominance of U152 among Rumansch speakers. Obviously there are a lot of German-speaking Swiss who are also U152, but I wonder if there'd be a significant subclade difference within that. Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here, but I just think it would be quite interesting. And also Rhaetic-Romance language speakers and an analysis of them in general.
Click to expand...

Write to Chris or Gene ..............they will help ..............they also speak English ...............one is Austrian and other Italian

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/tyrol-dna/about/background
 
Angela said:
You might also want to take a look at this:
Click to expand...

L21 predominating among the Dolomites of Val Gardena vs the U152 of Badia is interesting.
Good article, thanks.
 
Perhaps the S47 branch of Z56 could tentatively be linked with early transalpine Gauls in "Gallia Narbonensis" (modern day Provence and Languedoc) or whatnot.

In the late 6th century bc. these would have been among the first Celts to be documented by Ancient Greek historians as far as we know, and probably engaged in trade with Greeks in or near the colony of Massalia. This may have prompted some of them to travel up the Rhone river to trade newly obtained Greek wares with other Gallic peoples to the north, thus perhaps contributing to S47's spread, and also perhaps spreading via smalltime maritime voyages/migrations, and some migrating into Iberia by land or sea.

Some tribes in the region became allies with Rome and may have spread via conscription of tribesmen as auxiliaries or later on with Romanization as Legionaries.
Just speculation at this point of course.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top