R1b-U152/S28 : more Gaulish or Roman ?

Who spead R-U152 ?

  • The (Proto-)Italo-Celts

    Votes: 34 28.8%
  • The Hallstatt/La Tène Celts

    Votes: 31 26.3%
  • Italic people, including the Romans

    Votes: 14 11.9%
  • Hallstatt/La Tène Celts AND Italic people

    Votes: 26 22.0%
  • Earlier Neolithic or Mesolithic people

    Votes: 4 3.4%
  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 9 7.6%

  • Total voters
    118
^^Be sure to inform us when you find a WHG derived for the important European de-pigmentation snps.
 
the thing is it makes no sense to say that this alleles were totally absent from WHG. tell me how many WHG genomes were analysed until now? it will never be enough to say it for certain that they did not also have those alleles. especially when their neighbours the SHG and EHG were fixated.
 
the thing is it makes no sense to say that this alleles were totally absent from WHG. tell me how many WHG genomes were analysed until now? it will never be enough to say it for certain that they did not also have those alleles. especially when their neighbours the SHG and EHG were fixated.
^^

There you have it folks: no evidence will be enough because I don't WANT that to be the case.

This is the type of debate that is apparently current in some quarters, and that is presumably the product of modern education.
 
no its not only a farmer feature. in fact farmers were only fixated in one of those alleles while scandinavian hunter gatherers and probably also eastern hunter gatherers were fixated in both. i also wouldn't be so sure that WHG did not already have those alleles too.

yes exactly, it is not an exclusive farmer feature but it (homozygous derived mutation) is a feature common in farmers(majority); have to look at the data again so correct me where i am wrong but as i remember it I1819 ukraine mesolithic/EHG? was so far the only derived homozygous at both SNPs and that seems something regional as also I1736 ukraine neolithic of similar stock/EHG? per admixture analysis was also homozygous derived at SLC24A5 yet heterozygous at SLC45A2; is KO1 WHG or EHG or WHG but more ANE than LaBrana ? either way he and the foragers of Gonzalez-Fortes et al were homozygous ancestral at these SNPs yet the anatolia_n admixed GB1 (most prob inherited) was heterozygous at both;

PS: the point of #253 was that no need to wait for something 'celtic/celts' bronze age for these derived mutations concerning skin pigm;
 
Last edited:
The more I see of it, I am less convinced that Z56 should be seen as predominantly Italic; most subclades seem scattered in the L2 territory (and dominated by L2), probably also taking part in Tumulus, Urnfield, Hallstatt and La Tene spread. Many subclades seem present also in Southern and Eastern France, and within Germany. Only the Z56>Z72 subclade seems to me really "Roman"/Italic. The question is, was this then one of the Italic lineages or could it have come with the Gauls Cisalpina, being Romanized later on? Its age is about 250 BC; in contrast to the Z56 map in earlier posts, it is also present in Lombardy, Liguria (either by itself or by later Roman+medieval spread). Interesting is one sample sharing most mutations with Z72, but is negative for Z72 from the Franche-Comté. Unfortunately this is only one sample in a modern day, but it may offer a clue.
 
The new data confirms the Z56 branch as overwhelmingly Italic and the Z36 branch are emanating chiefly from Switzerland and southern Baden-Württemberg, making it look distinctly linked to the La Tène culture. Unfortunately L2 and Z193 aren't so clear cut. In my opinion, L2 expanded across western Europe much earlier, perhaps with the first Proto-Celtic migrations between 2300 and 1800 BCE, alongside L21 and DF27. We see an explosion of new DF27 and L2 lineages taking place right under the top of the tree, so closer to 2300 BCE (± 300 years). Even the large Z49, Z34 and L20 subclades are only a couple of centuries younger (2100 BCE according to Yfull), and indeed they are distributed all over western Europe, and sometimes also Poland. This all suggests a major Unetice dispersal of L2 (+ DF27 and L21) subclades. This was the big Bronze Age PIE wave that marked the collapse of Megalithic cultures in central and western Europe.

During that time, Z36 remained around Switzerland and Z56 probably more around Austria and Bavaria, until the Urnfield and Hallstatt expansions. Some L2 subclades would also have remained around the Alps and some would even have participated to the Italic invasion of the Italian peninsula (e.g. ZZ48).

There is little data about Z193, which makes it difficult to spot distribution patterns, but some subclades are probably Italic too (e.g. PF6693).


Nice tree

I'm the french guy, BY3958 positive on the Z56 tree.

As now we are 5 people under BY3538 (three FTDNA U152 project BIG Y tested members, one from the paper on Sardinian Y chromosome and one Spanish guy from the Human genome project).

It goes like that : BY3538 & al.(Netherlands & Germany)>>>BY3958 & al.(Sardinia)>>>BY2806 & al.(France "me" & Spain). It could help you for your next tree
 
I am italian from tuscany I am R-U152 R-Z43 from many generation in tuscany, I have red hair
 
I am italian from tuscany I am R-U152 R-Z43 from many generation in tuscany, I have red hair

Sorry to deceive you but Y-haplogroup have almost nothing to do with red hair.

In proportion there is more Blond/red hair E1b1b Scandinavian then Red hair or Blond R1b italian. Better look at your nuclear DNA.

Btw did you do the BIG Y ?
 
Sorry to deceive you but Y-haplogroup have almost nothing to do with red hair.

In proportion there is more Blond/red hair E1b1b Scandinavian then Red hair or Blond R1b italian. Better look at your nuclear DNA.

Btw did you do the BIG Y ?

The only possible reason E1b1b could possess red hair is because it is IN Scandinavia. R1b has always been associated with red hair predominately Celtic R1b as it continues to be today. Red hair is more common in Ireland and Scotland than anywhere in the world, well what a surprise! Some of the last remaining Celtic strongholds.
 
my Y dna R-U152 R-Z43 is more celtic or roman I am from many generation in tuscany italy
 
Is it more Celtic or Roman? Your traits will tell you. Do you have lighter hair/eyes/skin? Then it shows you have genetic influence of more Nordic populations such as Celts, or possibly German.
 
Last edited:
Having only one y DNA isn't enough though. Cause you still have your mom's father's DNA to find out. I don't know if you can receive that unless your mom's brother or father can be tested.
 
I am italian from tuscany I am R-U152 R-Z43 from many generation in tuscany, I have red hair

There you go, you have red hair. Tuscany a name that's derived from the Etruscans, which warred with Celts as far back as 300 B.C. I would say your R-U152 is Celtic.
 
But roman people origin indo european origin also italics tribes are similar to celts, etruscan people the origin from anatolian region turkey
my dna 70 european 30 turkey armenian
 
But roman people origin indo european origin also italics tribes are similar to celts, etruscan people the origin from anatolian region turkey
my dna 70 european 30 turkey armenian

No, it isn't.

I informed you days ago that as you are posting from Peru the Italian flag should not be showing. If it is not fixed by this afternoon you will receive an infraction, as per forum rules.

You're not getting off to a very good start.
 
no clue about the op, but from what i know light skin (homozygous derived at rs1426654/rs16891982) is a neolithic anatolian_farmer feature and so far in aDNA none of the celts actually had red-hair surprising since all of them are briton-celts (driffield-terrace/rathlin) in fact most were dark-haired(+some brown/blonde) and prevailing dark-eyed; i reckon that more extensive data will show whether ginger and celts go hand in hand or just false translations;

concerning phenotypic SNP's of pigmentation we have too few "Celts" to judge based upon only ancient DNA -
you confuse pan-europoid skin depigmentation based on 2 principal loci mutations with typical and more limited super-depigmentation based on other less known nd less common loci
 
concerning phenotypic SNP's of pigmentation we have too few "Celts" to judge based upon only ancient DNA -
you confuse pan-europoid skin depigmentation based on 2 principal loci mutations with typical and more limited super-depigmentation based on other less known nd less common loci

yes, that is what i meant with 'extensive data', though that so much literature stress the "fact" that romans saw red-haired people everywhere they looked i did expect the six british celts to be red-haired or at least the majority after all they span two-three hundred years of roman period, none of the celts being red-haired was very surprising; no confusion, that is what i meant that 'pan-europoid skin depigmentation' was already attested in/by anatolian derived farmers so chronologically earlier than bronze age people;
 
Actually, although Anatolian farmers did have a percentage of people who were derived for both SLC24A5 and SLC45A2, there were populations which had higher rates, including the SHG in Scandinavia. Also, if my memory serves, only one sample from Anatolia was predicted to have light hair.

The vast majority of people with majority EEF ancestry in Europe had dark hair and eyes, like Otzi, although he was derived for the major de-pigmentation snps. Also, a certain number were only derived for SLC24A5. Again, if memory serves, that was particularly the case in Iberia. It was only later on that you get light hair in Central Europe. See:
Christina Gamba et al
https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3803/33016272762_2f3e139a15_b.jpg

ncomms6257-f3.jpg



As Moesan points out, there are a lot of small effect genes that are also involved in pigmentation.

In particular, there are specific genes for red hair.

The red hair gene:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair#Biochemistry_and_genetics

I don't know why there are so many fewer redheads than one might expect. It may have to do with the fact that it is an autosomal recessive trait, so both parents have to carry it. If one would do, I'd have red hair.

I also suspect we may not be translating certain words or descriptions precisely.
 
yes, that is what i meant with 'extensive data', though that so much literature stress the "fact" that romans saw red-haired people everywhere they looked i did expect the six british celts to be red-haired or at least the majority after all they span two-three hundred years of roman period, none of the celts being red-haired was very surprising; no confusion, that is what i meant that 'pan-europoid skin depigmentation' was already attested in/by anatolian derived farmers so chronologically earlier than bronze age people;

OK. Maybe I had misinterpreted your post. Good Sunday end.
 
Recessive? Yes Angela; I suspect a lot of us are aware of that: a 30/40% of bearers of at least one mutation for red hairs gives around 6/7% of effective red hairs and even then density of rufosity varies according to mutations concerned and perhaps too to general genome background -
but very ofthen, in a pop where 4 to 10% of red hairs are found, you have a very greater % of very light and freckled skins, and linked to it big % of red beards (sometimes eyebrows); as a rule , less red beards among females (humour of a hard sunday)... these facts can explain the generalization of antique authors concerning "red haired" entire pops. Today, still, these generalizations are very common: stereotypes.
 

This thread has been viewed 377119 times.

Back
Top