PDA

View Full Version : First ancient genomes from Corded Ware



Pages : [1] 2

rms2
09-11-2014, 11:19 PM
Paper to be read in October 2014 at ASHG:
http://www.ashg.org/2014meeting/abstracts/fulltext/f140121091.htm
Lazaridis, Haak et al., Capture of 390,000 SNPs in dozens of ancient central Europeans reveals a population turnover in Europe thousands of years after the advent of farming.



This is presumably the basis of the lecture that was reported recently in Science: http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/09/three-part-ancestry-europeans

Okay, I'm thinking that on the y-dna side this cannot all be R1a1; otherwise, what is the talk of "major population turnover" if they are talking R1a1, unless they are thinking mainly of Eastern and not Central Europe? I still think there is a link between Corded Ware and U106.

Artmar
09-12-2014, 08:24 AM
Okay, I'm thinking that on the y-dna side this cannot all be R1a1; otherwise, what is the talk of "major population turnover" if they are talking R1a1, unless they are thinking mainly of Eastern and not Central Europe? I still think there is a link between Corded Ware and U106.
Certainly, it wasn't all R1a1(it's not a hunter-gatherer culture to be uniform). But R1a, especially Z282 is very likely to be one of the major haplogroups there. The rest could've been I1, some R1b, G2a, I2, etc.

rms2
09-12-2014, 03:37 PM
Certainly, it wasn't all R1a1(it's not a hunter-gatherer culture to be uniform). But R1a, especially Z282 is very likely to be one of the major haplogroups there. The rest could've been I1, some R1b, G2a, I2, etc.

Well, we know R1a1 was already recovered from the Corded Ware site at Eulau, Germany. What I meant is that, if that abstract is right about "major population turnover" in Central Europe with the advent of Corded Ware, then surely on the y-dna side of things it couldn't mean R1a1, because Central Europe did not become predominantly R1a1.

T101
09-12-2014, 04:36 PM
Okay, I'm thinking that on the y-dna side this cannot all be R1a1;

Right. I think we will see in the Hungarian sites (which is really the Baden Culture and not Corded Ware,)
a lot of R1b-L23 and R1b-L51 replacing the earlier G2a dominated Neolithic cultures and indigenous I2 groups. The early German Corded Ware sites should be primarily R1a-CTS4385, R1a-L664, and some extinct lines. While the more recent dates down to 3500 BP may also include R1b-L11, R1b-L51.

If the sites however are more in Eastern Germany, it should be R1a-Z282, R1a-Z280 and/or R1a-Y2395 with a large contingent of I1.


I still think there is a link between Corded Ware and U106.

I don't think R1b-U106 arrives on the scene until at least Unetice, and isn't a significant player until the Nordic Bronze age.

Artmar
09-12-2014, 04:36 PM
Well, we know R1a1 was already recovered from the Corded Ware site at Eulau, Germany. What I meant is that, if that abstract is right about "major population turnover" in Central Europe with the advent of Corded Ware, then surely on the y-dna side of things it couldn't mean R1a1, because Central Europe did not become predominantly R1a1.
They probably meant a genomic turnover, with farmer-like LBK and post-LBK populations being replaced with hybrid farmer/hunter-gatherer Corded populations.
But it has nothing to do with modern y-dna genepool in Central Europe, since most of those lineages were replaced or pushed somewhere to an extent by later cultures. That's why we have early Z280s in England and Ireland for example :)

T101
09-12-2014, 05:35 PM
They probably meant a genomic turnover, with farmer-like LBK and post-LBK populations being replaced with hybrid farmer/hunter-gatherer Corded populations.

Yes, and it should show the post-Neolithic spread of ANE into Central and Western Europe by the Indo-European R1a and R1b groups.

rms2
09-12-2014, 06:58 PM
They probably meant a genomic turnover, with farmer-like LBK and post-LBK populations being replaced with hybrid farmer/hunter-gatherer Corded populations.
But it has nothing to do with modern y-dna genepool in Central Europe, since most of those lineages were replaced or pushed somewhere to an extent by later cultures. That's why we have early Z280s in England and Ireland for example :)

Maybe, but I'm thinking that y-dna is part of what they meant, since there has been a lot of comment on the prevalence of G2a in Neolithic sites. I guess we'll find out when the paper is released.

I don't see how you could get "major population turnover", even with regard to autosomal dna, without a revolution in y-dna or mtDNA or both.

rms2
09-12-2014, 07:06 PM
. . .

I don't think R1b-U106 arrives on the scene until at least Unetice, and isn't a significant player until the Nordic Bronze age.

Maybe, but arrives on the scene from where? Do you mean to say that U106 did not exist until Unetice?

Hando
09-12-2014, 07:48 PM
They probably meant a genomic turnover, with farmer-like LBK and post-LBK populations being replaced with hybrid farmer/hunter-gatherer Corded populations.
But it has nothing to do with modern y-dna genepool in Central Europe, since most of those lineages were replaced or pushed somewhere to an extent by later cultures. That's why we have early Z280s in England and Ireland for example :)
What are these lineages that were "replaced or pushed somewhere to an extent by later cultures"? Are you suggesting that the Corded Ware (Hybrid farmer/hunter-gatherer Corded populations) which replaced the Neolithic farmers in Central Europe were themselves replaced by "later cultures"? If that is the case, then are you suggesting that modern Central Europeans are not descended from Corded Ware populations?
Thanks

Generalissimo
09-13-2014, 03:45 AM
What are these lineages that were "replaced or pushed somewhere to an extent by later cultures"? Are you suggesting that the Corded Ware (Hybrid farmer/hunter-gatherer Corded populations) which replaced the Neolithic farmers in Central Europe were themselves replaced by "later cultures"? If that is the case, then are you suggesting that modern Central Europeans are not descended from Corded Ware populations?
Thanks

Modern Central Europeans are in large part of Corded Ware origin. But the population turnover in Central Europe during the Copper Age, in which the mostly G2a descendents of the LBK farmers were absorbed and replaced by the presumably mostly R1a Corded Ware migrants from the east, wasn't the final genetic shift in the region.

The scientists working on these problems are aware of this, and it's likely we'll eventually see something published on the topic. This is a quote from Brandt et al. 2013.


Notably, the CEM (Central European Metapopulation) clusters with the late Neolithic cultures and individuals of the BBC in particular (Fig. 2A), suggesting that the Western European mtDNA variability had a stronger influence than the contemporaneous eastern CWC/EBA (Corded Ware/early Bronze Age) complex, implying yet another shift after the EBA.

Artmar
09-13-2014, 08:36 AM
What are these lineages that were "replaced or pushed somewhere to an extent by later cultures"?
Z282*, Z280, PF6155(pre-M458), Z283, various L664s or CTS3485s and other lineages that are not today still not deeply examined or are extinct now. Also other haplogroups, that aren't as safe as some subbranches of R1a but still existed - most likely various variants of an I, G2a, R1b(?) etc.

Are you suggesting that the Corded Ware (Hybrid farmer/hunter-gatherer Corded populations) which replaced the Neolithic farmers in Central Europe were themselves replaced by "later cultures"? If that is the case, then are you suggesting that modern Central Europeans are not descended from Corded Ware populations?
Thanks
Mostly by Unetice and Hallstatt. But I haven't said that modern Central Europeans don't descend from CWC. They do, especially after Slavic expansion which brought many Corded Ware-derived y-chromosomal lineages. Descent isn't visible only in y-dna and mtdna - it's also reflected in autosomal genetics. That's why we shall wait for genomes.

Atimeres
09-13-2014, 09:31 AM
Mostly by Unetice and Hallstatt. But I haven't said that modern Central Europeans don't descend from CWC. They do, especially after Slavic expansion which brought many Corded Ware-derived y-chromosomal lineages. Descent isn't visible only in y-dna and mtdna - it's also reflected in autosomal genetics. That's why we shall wait for genomes.

Artmar, I think that the essence of the "Slavic expansion" stuck mainly in the revival of the old post-Corded Ware extension sets of the population, which in the second millennium BC. Experienced the largest demographic crisis, but it never disappeared from Central Europe.
Overcoming the crisis and the emergence of a number of mobile groups of Slavs in the first centuries AD created for archaeologists impression they arrive "somewhere" (from the Far East?).

But studying in depth the archeology of Corded and pre-Corded Ware culture (of the Globular Amphora from about 4000 years BC and the Janisławice culture from VI millennium BC) and archeological clear migration route of so-called "inserts type of Dęby" outside the Caucasus through Crimea, the lands of the Black Sea​​, Rudoj Ostrow and Dnieper to Kuyavia (Kujawa), we see that R1a does not drop "of the sky" in the fifth century AD.

Artmar
09-13-2014, 10:44 AM
Artmar, I think that the essence of the "Slavic expansion" stuck mainly in the revival of the old post-Corded Ware extension sets of the population, which in the second millennium BC. Experienced the largest demographic crisis, but it never disappeared from Central Europe.
Overcoming the crisis and the emergence of a number of mobile groups of Slavs in the first centuries AD created for archaeologists impression they arrive "somewhere" (from the Far East?).
That's what I basically said, by writing "They do, especially after Slavic expansion which brought many Corded Ware-derived y-chromosomal lineages." Some R1a lineages, like Z282, were always in the Corded Ware zone (even if covered by R1b's in later times) but Slavic expansion helped to regain it's presence after this demographic crisis you speak of.

But studying in depth the archeology of Corded and pre-Corded Ware culture (of the Globular Amphora from about 4000 years BC and the Janisławice culture from VI millennium BC) and archeological clear migration route of so-called "inserts type of Dęby" outside the Caucasus through Crimea, the lands of the Black Sea​​, Rudoj Ostrow and Dnieper to Kuyavia (Kujawa), we see that R1a does not drop "of the sky" in the fifth century AD.
I have my doubts about Kuyavia and Janisławice, still I know that R1a doesn't drop "of the sky" :D. That's why I said, that it's a significant Corded lineage.

Hando
09-13-2014, 07:34 PM
That's what I basically said, by writing "They do, especially after Slavic expansion which brought many Corded Ware-derived y-chromosomal lineages." Some R1a lineages, like Z282, were always in the Corded Ware zone (even if covered by R1b's in later times) but Slavic expansion helped to regain it's presence after this demographic crisis you speak of.

I have my doubts about Kuyavia and Janisławice, still I know that R1a doesn't drop "of the sky" :D. That's why I said, that it's a significant Corded lineage.
I didn't fully understand Atimeres' "slavic expansion" post. I understand the Slavic expansion happened around the 7th AD. So I'm confused about the demographic crisis of 2nd millennium BC. Who and what happened in the 2nd millennium BC? Was there a lare scale migration into central European Corded Ware country in the 2nd Millenium BC that threatened the corded ware population's gene pool?

Hando
09-13-2014, 07:42 PM
Modern Central Europeans are in large part of Corded Ware origin. But the population turnover in Central Europe during the Copper Age, in which the mostly G2a descendents of the LBK farmers were absorbed and replaced by the presumably mostly R1a Corded Ware migrants from the east, wasn't the final genetic shift in the region.

The scientists working on these problems are aware of this, and it's likely we'll eventually see something published on the topic. This is a quote from Brandt et al. 2013.

Thank you for the Brandt et al 2013 which stated "Brandt et al. 2013.

Notably, the CEM (Central European Metapopulation) clusters with the late Neolithic cultures and individuals of the BBC in particular (Fig. 2A), suggesting that the Western European mtDNA variability had a stronger influence than the contemporaneous eastern CWC/EBA (Corded Ware/early Bronze Age) complex, implying yet another shift after the EBA."
Not fully comprehending this though. What is BBC? And when it says that modern Central European Metapopulations CEM are more closely related to late Neolithic and BBC than to CWC/EBA is it saying that modern Central Europeans are more closely related to the earlier Neolithic Famers (EEF) than to Corded Ware? If this is the case, then it seems Corded ware had little impact on the EEF they supposedly absorbed and replaced.
I also don't understand why Western European mtDNA comes into this. I assume this Western mtDNA is related to the late Neolithic/BBC and so I assume it means western European mtDNA is EEF here. But the article seems to be implying that this Western European mtDNA was later than CWC?

Artmar
09-13-2014, 09:04 PM
I understand the Slavic expansion happened around the 7th AD.
Slavic expansion possibly started around 5th AD and by the 7th AD Slavic groups already crossed an Elbe river in what is now Germany.


So I'm confused about the demographic crisis of 2nd millennium BC. Who and what happened in the 2nd millennium BC? Was there a lare scale migration into central European Corded Ware country in the 2nd Millenium BC that threatened the corded ware population's gene pool?
I'm just a layman into archeology but I guess it could be something related to the Scythian raids that could've taken place about 800 B.C. Several settlements that belonged to the bronze-age Lusatian Culture like Biskupin, Smuszewo, Izdebno, Tarnowa, Jurkowo, Pudliszki, Sobiejuchy, Ostrowite Trzemeszeńskie and Koziegłowy were deserted in similar period and scythian arrowheads were found in many of them. Unfortunately, we don't have many materials on that and it's still a subject of a scientific research. Maybe Jean Manco can say something more about that.

rms2
09-13-2014, 09:18 PM
Thank you for the Brandt et al 2013 which stated "Brandt et al. 2013.

Notably, the CEM (Central European Metapopulation) clusters with the late Neolithic cultures and individuals of the BBC in particular (Fig. 2A), suggesting that the Western European mtDNA variability had a stronger influence than the contemporaneous eastern CWC/EBA (Corded Ware/early Bronze Age) complex, implying yet another shift after the EBA."
Not fully comprehending this though. What is BBC? And when it says that modern Central European Metapopulations CEM are more closely related to late Neolithic and BBC than to CWC/EBA is it saying that modern Central Europeans are more closely related to the earlier Neolithic Famers (EEF) than to Corded Ware? If this is the case, then it seems Corded ware had little impact on the EEF they supposedly absorbed and replaced.
I also don't understand why Western European mtDNA comes into this. I assume this Western mtDNA is related to the late Neolithic/BBC and so I assume it means western European mtDNA is EEF here. But the article seems to be implying that this Western European mtDNA was later than CWC?

I'm guessing "BBC" stands for Bell Beaker Culture.

I'm also guessing that "individuals of the BBC" who cluster with people of the CEM and late Neolithic cultures were probably females. From what I have read, male Beaker Folk were not like their predecessors. Beaker males were mobile and took wives from among the locals.

alan
09-14-2014, 12:54 AM
Archaeologically there is a fairly fast Neolithic-corded ware-bell beaker sequence between the Rhine and the Elbe and parts of Scandinavia (very approximately speaking). So it is possible there was a sequence of fast genetic changes between 2800BC and 2500BC and beyond. I dont think it would be too difficult to get a decent collection of ancient DNA from those cultures as there were single unburnt graves and I believe there is a vast amount of these bones in museums. Assuming they can get round the contamination problem its simply a matter of money. I would note though there are areas where the bones have generally been dissolved by acid soils such as Holland where it may never be possible to get a decent sample of ancient DNA.

Generalissimo
09-14-2014, 01:55 AM
Not fully comprehending this though. What is BBC? And when it says that modern Central European Metapopulations CEM are more closely related to late Neolithic and BBC than to CWC/EBA is it saying that modern Central Europeans are more closely related to the earlier Neolithic Famers (EEF) than to Corded Ware? If this is the case, then it seems Corded ware had little impact on the EEF they supposedly absorbed and replaced.

I also don't understand why Western European mtDNA comes into this. I assume this Western mtDNA is related to the late Neolithic/BBC and so I assume it means western European mtDNA is EEF here. But the article seems to be implying that this Western European mtDNA was later than CWC?

BBC are Bell Beakers. They weren't early Central European farmers, but a fresh migration from western Europe, probably in large part of early European farmer stock from the Atlantic fringe.

Here's a rough chronology of what might have happened:

- Corded Ware groups pushed in from the east and absorbed and replaced the descendents of early Neolithic farmers

- Bell Beakers pushed in from the west and mixed with the Corded Ware groups and remnants of the early Neolithic farmers

- Some of the resulting hybrid groups, like Bohemian Bell Beakers, Unetice, and then Urnfield and Hallstatt etc., expanded rapidly and eventually formed the modern Western, Central and Eastern European gene pools

This would explain why most Europeans today, all the way from the Atlantic fringe to the Volga, show similar levels of ANE and mtDNA H. In other words, they're mixtures of ancient eastern and western populations in roughly the same proportions.

The mysteries that remain are how exactly did ANE, which presumably came mostly from Corded Ware groups, manage to spread out so evenly across most of Europe, why did the populations of the Atlantic fringe have such a profound impact on European-wide mtDNA, and how does R1b fit into all of this?

The lecture at next month's ASHG will hopefully give us some clues, because the abstract suggests that genome-wide and Y-chromosome data was retrieved from remains well into the Bell Beaker period. But someone with a clue has to be there to note down the main points.

GailT
09-14-2014, 02:05 AM
why did the populations of the Atlantic fringe have such a profound impact on European-wide mtDNA, and how does R1b fit into all of this?


Which mtDNA haplogroups are thought to represent the Atlantic fringe?

Generalissimo
09-14-2014, 02:18 AM
Which mtDNA haplogroups are thought to represent the Atlantic fringe?

At least certain subclades of H, like H1, H3 and H5a maybe?

http://imageshack.com/a/img537/5013/hwhJrs.png

Artmar
09-14-2014, 09:12 AM
At least certain subclades of H, like H1, H3 and H5a maybe?

http://imageshack.com/a/img537/5013/hwhJrs.png

Starcevo - H5
LBK - H1j
LBKT - H5, H5
Rossen - H1, H5,
Schöningen - H1e7
Baalberge - H1e1a5
Blätterhöhle farmer - H5*, H1c3*, H5
Salzmünde - H5, H3, H3
Funnel Beaker / TRB - H1c, H1
Bernburg - H5, H1e1a3
Treilles - H1, H1, H1, H3, H3
Halaf - H3a, H3a, H3a
And dozens of undefined H, that also can be H1, H5, H3 etc. etc.

And those are neolithic cultures outside of Iberia, before Bell-Beaker existence or expansion.

Jean M
09-14-2014, 09:38 AM
I posted this on the news thread, where it generated discussion. Now that it has its own thread, perhaps a kind moderator would move over the relevant posts from http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?97-Genetic-Genealogy-and-Ancient-DNA-in-the-News/page6 [Added - now done thanks!]

Paper to be read in October 2014 at ASHG:
http://www.ashg.org/2014meeting/abst...f140121091.htm
Lazaridis, Haak et al., Capture of 390,000 SNPs in dozens of ancient central Europeans reveals a population turnover in Europe thousands of years after the advent of farming.


To understand the population transformations that took place in Europe since the early Neolithic, we used a DNA capture technique to obtain reads covering ~390 thousand single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from a number of different archaeological cultures of central Europe (Germany and Hungary). The samples spanned the time period from 7,500 BP to 3,500 BP (Early Neolithic to Early Bronze Age periods) and most of them were previously studied using mtDNA (Brandt, Haak et al., Science, 2013). The captured SNPs include about 360,000 SNPs from the Affymetrix Human Origins Array that were discovered in African individuals, as well as about 30,000 SNPs chosen for other reasons (that are thought to have been affected by natural selection, or to have phenotypic effects, or are useful in determining Y-chromosome haplogroups). By analyzing this data together with a dataset of 2,345 present-day humans and other published ancient genomes, we show that late Neolithic inhabitants of central Europe belonging to the Corded Ware culture were not a continuation of the earlier occupants of the region. Our results highlight the importance of migration and major population turnover in Europe long after the arrival of farming.
This is presumably the basis of the lecture that was reported recently in Science: http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2...stry-europeans

Generalissimo
09-14-2014, 09:52 AM
So who's going to this thing anyway? I know Razib is, but he's not well versed in some of these issues yet.

Jean M
09-14-2014, 11:36 AM
I'm really hoping someone tweets or blogs from this conference.

Generalissimo
09-14-2014, 12:45 PM
Starcevo - H5
LBK - H1j
LBKT - H5, H5
Rossen - H1, H5,
Schöningen - H1e7
Baalberge - H1e1a5
Blätterhöhle farmer - H5*, H1c3*, H5
Salzmünde - H5, H3, H3
Funnel Beaker / TRB - H1c, H1
Bernburg - H5, H1e1a3
Treilles - H1, H1, H1, H3, H3
Halaf - H3a, H3a, H3a
And dozens of undefined H, that also can be H1, H5, H3 etc. etc.

And those are neolithic cultures outside of Iberia, before Bell-Beaker existence or expansion.

Yes, I know, but nevertheless their frequencies were relatively low still until the Bell Beaker period, and probably even the Iron Age in many places east of France (and I'd hazard a guess that most of the subclades didn't match anyway).

Also, in the post above I noted that Bell Beaker groups were probably in large part of Neolithic farmer origin from the Atlantic Fringe. And your information backs that up in a way, because Treilles, for instance, looks very western and Bell Beaker-like.

Jean M
09-14-2014, 02:53 PM
Yes, I know, but nevertheless their frequencies were relatively low still until the Bell Beaker period....

It certainly looks (from collated results) as though mtDNA H did not reach its present frequency in Europe in the Neolithic. There is some genetic evidence apparently that it increased in frequency under selective pressure. Michael Hammer, Director of the University of Arizona Genetics Core, mentioned this to me, but said there hadn't been a paper on it. One was published showing a positive correletion between H and better recovery from sepsis, which might be a clue to its gradual rise.

Jean M
09-14-2014, 03:23 PM
BBC are Bell Beakers. They weren't early Central European farmers, but a fresh migration from western Europe, probably in large part of early European farmer stock from the Atlantic fringe. ... This would explain why most Europeans today, all the way from the Atlantic fringe to the Volga, show similar levels of ANE and mtDNA H. In other words, they're mixtures of ancient eastern and western populations in roughly the same proportions.


No it wouldn't. There are large areas of western Europe that were completely Corded Ware free. They had nothing to do with Corded Ware. We cannot have an explanation of the current spread of ANE that relies solely on CW, any more than we can have an explanation of the spread of IE languages that relies solely on CW (even just in Europe). I have said the latter before. Now we have the proof from genetics that the IE langugues of western Europe were not learned in some mysterious way by people of the west who were completely unconnected genetically to the people of the east who supposedly taught them, possibly by correspondence course, or the Internet. ;)

The origins of the Bell Beaker culture lies in Yamnaya, just as CW arose from Yamnaya.

But we must be patient. The paper we are discussing should prove to be the missing link between ANE in Yamnaya and ANE in CW. That's a real pleasure. We can't have everything at once. Western Europe is for another day.

Generalissimo
09-14-2014, 03:55 PM
There are large areas of western Europe that were completely Corded Ware free.

But were they free of the groups that formed in former Corded Ware territory, like Unetice, Nordic Bronze Age and Urnfield? Thanks in advance for your answer.

By the way, the Sepsis theory doesn't explain why mtDNA H was found at ridiculous levels both in Chalcolithic Portugal and among the Bell Beakers.

GailT
09-14-2014, 04:06 PM
I'm not optimistic about using mtDNA to inform the fine details of late/post Neolithic migrations. The mtDNA mutation rate is too slow. If post Neolithic mtDNA distributions were also subject to natural selection, it becomes even more problematic. For any hope that mtDNA will be useful, we will need a large number of ancient full sequences. I expect ancient autosomal DNA will be much more useful.

Generalissimo
09-14-2014, 04:14 PM
I'm not optimistic about using mtDNA to inform the fine details of late/post Neolithic migrations. The mtDNA mutation rate is too slow. If post Neolithic mtDNA distributions were also subject to natural selection, it becomes even more problematic. For any hope that mtDNA will be useful, we will need a large number of ancient full sequences. I expect ancient autosomal DNA will be much more useful.

We do have full sequences from Bell Beakers. These cluster with modern Iberian sequences. On the other hand, Corded Ware and Unetice full sequences are very eastern.

The ASHG abstract on the genome-wide data from Corded Ware, and probably also Bell Beaker and other samples, seems to support the mtDNA results, because the Corded Ware genomes get the mention as the ANE source for Europeans, out of the dozens of individuals tested.

I hope some of you guys don't jump off tall buildings when these results are announced. ;)

Jean M
09-14-2014, 05:27 PM
But were they free of the groups that formed in former Corded Ware territory, like Unetice, Nordic Bronze Age and Urnfield? Thanks in advance for your answer.

I think I understand your reasoning. It may indeed seem logical that every culture that appeared after CW on any part of the territory once CW must be derived from CW. Yet central and eastern BB moved into parts of what had been CW territory, and BB is not derived from CW. Archaeologically these were distinct communities.

Urnfield covers an area previously BB and has generally been assumed to be Celtic-speaking, since the known Celtic cultures of central Europe follow on from it. It probably was Celtic in the main, but like BB, it spread into Italy, so it might be best to see it as covering Celtic, Italic and shades in between. The problem with postulating Urnfield as the vector for Celtic is that it barely entered Iberia, and the area it did enter was Ligurian-speaking when the ancient Greeks first encountered it. Nor did Urnfield have much impact on the British Isles. This is the reason that scholars are turning to BB as the probable vector for Celtic. Personally I go for late BB, with early BB as closer to IE itself.

But as I say - all this is for another day. We are not going to get results about BB from this paper.

Jean M
09-14-2014, 05:34 PM
I'm not optimistic about using mtDNA to inform the fine details of late/post Neolithic migrations.... For any hope that mtDNA will be useful, we will need a large number of ancient full sequences.

I agree entirely. In the main we have small samples, often from a single site. This is much like going to a house in London and sampling the family in it. The results won't tell you the mtDNA frequencies in London, much less in Britain overall. We need collated results from many sites to get to a stage where it is realistic to do statistical analysis of frequencies. We do have mass results now from Saxony-Anhalt, which make it more sensible to do this kind of analysis than it has been in most previous studies.

I have generally stuck to simply looking at when a particular haplogroup first appears. That's most convincing.

rms2
09-14-2014, 07:17 PM
No it wouldn't. There are large areas of western Europe that were completely Corded Ware free. They had nothing to do with Corded Ware. We cannot have an explanation of the current spread of ANE that relies solely on CW, any more than we can have an explanation of the spread of IE languages that relies solely on CW (even just in Europe). I have said the latter before. Now we have the proof from genetics that the IE langugues of western Europe were not learned in some mysterious way by people of the west who were completely unconnected genetically to the people of the east who supposedly taught them, possibly by correspondence course, or the Internet. ;)

The origins of the Bell Beaker culture lies in Yamnaya, just as CW arose from Yamnaya.

But we must be patient. The paper we are discussing should prove to be the missing link between ANE in Yamnaya and ANE in CW. That's a real pleasure. We can't have everything at once. Western Europe is for another day.

That was very well said.

The mystery is R1b. It did not come out of the west, but it was present in Beaker by the time it got to the site near Kromsdorf, Germany, c. 2500-2600 BC.

Hando
09-14-2014, 07:50 PM
I think I understand your reasoning. It may indeed seem logical that every culture that appeared after CW on any part of the territory once CW must be derived from CW. Yet central and eastern BB moved into parts of what had been CW territory, and BB is not derived from CW. Archaeologically these were distinct communities.

Urnfield covers an area previously BB and has generally been assumed to be Celtic-speaking, since the known Celtic cultures of central Europe follow on from it. It probably was Celtic in the main, but like BB, it spread into Italy, so it might be best to see it as covering Celtic, Italic and shades in between. The problem with postulating Urnfield as the vector for Celtic is that it barely entered Iberia, and the area it did enter was Ligurian-speaking when the ancient Greeks first encountered it. Nor did Urnfield have much impact on the British Isles. This is the reason that scholars are turning to BB as the probable vector for Celtic. Personally I go for late BB, with early BB as closer to IE itself.
So how does this relate to the paper that states "Notably, the CEM (Central European Metapopulation) clusters with the late Neolithic cultures and individuals of the BBC in particular (Fig. 2A), suggesting that the Western European mtDNA variability had a stronger influence than the contemporaneous eastern CWC/EBA (Corded Ware/early Bronze Age) complex, implying yet another shift after the EBA."
Is it saying that CW in central Europe was significantly replaced by BB and other cultures? Or did CW remain in large numbers in central Europe and mix with later incoming migrants like BB to become the the hybrids that were ancestral to modern central European populations? I understand your point that BB will not be analyzed and explained in this paper, but my question is whether CW remained in significant numbers in central Europe and mixed with incoming migrants. And whether earlier EEF mtDNA was absorbed by CW men in significant numbers?

Silesian
09-14-2014, 07:55 PM
That was very well said.

The mystery is R1b. It did not come out of the west, but it was present in Beaker by the time it got to the site near Kromsdorf, Germany, c. 2500-2600 BC.
There are many flavors of R1b. For example Kromsdorf R1b defined by 3snp's- 1 sample R1b-M343 + 1 sample R1b-M269 (xU106)
Azerbaijani-Gilaki-Persian-Kurds are R1b* M343*
Kosovo Albanians- Armenians- Zoroastrians in Tehran are R1b1a2* M269(L23)+[R1b-Z2103+]
Kosovo Albanian-Greek-Armenian-R1b-CTS7822+
Hopefully the new samples will show if any of these are found within Corded Ware or Catacomb culture.

R1b1a2 (R-M269)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_%28Y-DNA%29
Zoroastrians- http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041252

Hando
09-14-2014, 07:59 PM
Archaeologically there is a fairly fast Neolithic-corded ware-bell beaker sequence between the Rhine and the Elbe and parts of Scandinavia (very approximately speaking). So it is possible there was a sequence of fast genetic changes between 2800BC and 2500BC and beyond.
I'm sorry but I'm not sure I follow you Alan. How is it possible that there was a significant genetic change during this time period between the Rhine and Elbe if the BB integrated with the prior CW and some Neolithic peoples? If there was a genetic change than wouldn't that mean there was a significant replacement of CW by later migrants like BB?

Jean M
09-14-2014, 08:43 PM
So how does this relate to the paper that states "Notably, the CEM (Central European Metapopulation) clusters with the late Neolithic cultures and individuals of the BBC in particular (Fig. 2A), suggesting that the Western European mtDNA variability had a stronger influence than the contemporaneous eastern CWC/EBA (Corded Ware/early Bronze Age) complex, implying yet another shift after the EBA."
Is it saying that CW in central Europe was significantly replaced by BB and other cultures?

We know already that CW in a large part of central Europe was replaced by BB and Urnfield. That's what archaeology tells us. What the Brandt 2013 study was trying to do was work out whether that archaeological change had genetic consequences. Bear in mind that the Brandt 2013 study concentrated on mtDNA in Saxony-Anhalt. The authors sampled a lot of individuals. This was the study I referred to as having enough samples to warrant statistical analysis of frequencies. They can see differences through time in Saxony-Anhalt. What we don't have are the same kind of studies elsewhere so that we could make proper comparisons.

We should not assume the exact same pattern in other parts of the vast territory in which CW pottery has been found. We certainly should not imagine that the descendants of the CW pottery makers were ousted from Scandinavia by BB pottery makers. There is some BB there, but not enough to outweigh the descendants of CW. It is generally thought that the Nordic Bronze Age was the crucible of pre-Proto-Germanic. By contrast present-day Germany was probably full of Celtic-speakers until the Iron Age.

Generalissimo
09-14-2014, 10:54 PM
I think I understand your reasoning. It may indeed seem logical that every culture that appeared after CW on any part of the territory once CW must be derived from CW.

You don't understand my reasoning.

There's no need for CWC to have covered most of Europe, or even for clearly derived archaeological cultures from CWC to have done so, in order for admixture to spread from former CWC territory to other parts of Europe.


But as I say - all this is for another day. We are not going to get results about BB from this paper.

Yes, we are. The latest samples genotyped are dated to 3500 YBP.

alan
09-15-2014, 01:25 AM
I dont have a problem seeing that western European genes pushed east with beakers to some degree but I still find it fairly hard to feel any confidence that R1b somehow made it to western Europe only to expand back into central Europe with the beaker culture. The trail of the spread of R1b west is just very very subtle if it happened. However, everything about R1b in Europe suggests it originated in the east.

I have said it before that most societies even in the Neolithic were patrilocal. Add to that that pottery was a female craft normally. Put them together and the spread of beakers should correspond with the movement of females. Genetic evidence would seem to suggest a movement of females from west to east. That fits the pottery spreading. This is the easy bit IMO as it makes sense and it all fits together. What I really struggle to understand is how R1b fits in.

What I would then wonder is why was there suddenly such an expanded and widespread network of females movement/marriage network. Although much later, it was common practice in Europe for high level marriages to involve women moving some distance as part of alliances and sealing deals. I wonder if somehow the men were moving west and the women east.

Initially that is hard to understand but if mobile males were offering a service of trading copper that local miners extracted in various areas and were invited to do so in metal rich places like Iberia then the sending of brides back east may have acted almost like a safety guarantee/hostage for the traders making the long journeys back and forth. Perhaps mobility and safe conduct through many areas was a peculiar thing of the R1b group. Mobility after all was something that may have become a feature of farming Europe after the first steppe invasions c. 4200BC. So perhaps the R1b lineages were unusually mobile,perhaps some sort of heritage of role of mobile trading metals using horses inherited from Stredny Stog groups around the Dnieper who spread into the Balkans c. 4200BC.

Generalissimo
09-15-2014, 02:00 AM
Even after all of these years and many thousands of modern R1b sequences, including full sequences, we're not much closer to understanding how R1b entered Central Europe during the late stone age.

But it seems to me that most people are ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the fact that the Bell Beaker population looks like it parachuted into Central Europe from some island in the Atlantic. Perhaps from Atlantis itself, I don't know?

In any case, I'm sure that new Lazaridis study does include Bell Beaker samples, because it's largely based on the dataset from Brandt et al. 2013, which had 29 Bell Beaker mtDNA sequences, and obviously there's no way they would choose not to test Bell Beaker remains. So the only way Bell Beakers are not in the results is if there was a technical problem with them.

I chatted briefly to Lazaridis via e-mail a few months ago, and he seems like a nice enough guy. I'm sure that if no one's there to tweet any of the really juicy stuff from that talk at the ASHG then he'd be happy to reveal a few details via e-mail.

Hando
09-15-2014, 02:46 AM
We know already that CW in a large part of central Europe was replaced by BB and Urnfield. That's what archaeology tells us. What the Brandt 2013 study was trying to do was work out whether that archaeological change had genetic consequences. Bear in mind that the Brandt 2013 study concentrated on mtDNA in Saxony-Anhalt. The authors sampled a lot of individuals. This was the study I referred to as having enough samples to warrant statistical analysis of frequencies. They can see differences through time in Saxony-Anhalt. What we don't have are the same kind of studies elsewhere so that we could make proper comparisons.

We should not assume the exact same pattern in other parts of the vast territory in which CW pottery has been found. We certainly should not imagine that the descendants of the CW pottery makers were ousted from Scandinavia by BB pottery makers. There is some BB there, but not enough to outweigh the descendants of CW. It is generally thought that the Nordic Bronze Age was the crucible of pre-Proto-Germanic. By contrast present-day Germany was probably full of Celtic-speakers until the Iron Age.
So it seems that large swathes of central European CW country, but not all, were replaces by BB, if Saxony Anhalt proves to be representative of the genetic replacement that happened during the 2nd millennium in central Europe. I assume though that the picture is a lot more complicated than wholesale mass replacement, but only more testing will be able to prove or disprove that.
But, since the Nordic Bronze Age was the crucible of pre-Proto-Germanic and since Germanic people spread into present day Germany and Netherlands later on, doesn't it mean that although CW was replaced by BB in Germany before the spread of these Germanics, in a way the CW (pre-Proto Germanic) from Scandinavia reclaimed their former central European CW lands? And that present day Germans and present day inhabitants of other lands occupied by Germanics are descended from CW from Scandinavia? It would be great to find out whether present day Germans are mostly/somewhat/negligibly descended from central European CW, or from Nordic CW or from Celtic speaking Iron Age folk.

rms2
09-15-2014, 07:56 AM
. . .

But it seems to me that most people are ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the fact that the Bell Beaker population looks like it parachuted into Central Europe from some island in the Atlantic. Perhaps from Atlantis itself, I don't know?

. . .

Could you clear up for me what you are talking about?

Is the alleged resemblance to Atlantic populations a mtDNA resemblance or an autosomal resemblance or both?

Generalissimo
09-15-2014, 08:18 AM
Could you clear up for me what you are talking about?

Do I really need to clear anything up after some of the recent papers we've seen? I'll just point you to them.

Ancient DNA Reveals Key Stages in the Formation of Central European Mitochondrial Genetic Diversity (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/257.abstract)

Neolithic mitochondrial haplogroup H genomes and the genetic origins of Europeans (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n4/full/ncomms2656.html)

Mitochondrial DNA from El Mirador Cave (Atapuerca, Spain) Reveals the Heterogeneity of Chalcolithic Populations (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105105)

These papers state very clearly the the Bell Beakers were an Atlantic Fringe population in terms of genetic affinities.

The genome-wide data from Bell Beakers is in all likelihood coming next month, and it'll show the same thing.

Generalissimo
09-15-2014, 08:37 AM
It's kind of funny when people are in denial. But it gets boring after a while. I think this quote from Gomez-Sanchez et al. sums up very nicely the current mainstream view of Bell Beaker migrations.


While many H haplogroup (the most common in modern Europeans, with frequencies around 40%) lineages were established by the Middle Neolithic period, a subsequent migration movement in the Late Neolithic associated to the Bell Beaker culture added further genetic complexity to the present-day populations. The genetic signature of H haplogroups increased up to 48.3% during the Bell Beaker period with respect to previous European cultures, suggesting a population expansion from Iberia to Central Europe [21].

However, another recent study based on the analysis of 629,443 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from 934 individuals belonging to 53 human populations has uncovered a previously unrecognized signature of Northern European genes into the Iberian Peninsula [36]. Based on the length distribution of the linkage-disequilibrium blocks, it has been possible to date this admixture event to about 4,000 years BP, a figure roughly coincident with the spread of the Bell Beaker culture [36]. They interpret this signal as the result of a reverse migration from central Europe into Iberia after an initial Bell Beaker culture expansion from Iberia. This has been previously hypothesized from archaeological data [37] but so far has not been observed with ancient genetic data due to the current lack of genetic information from Iberian Bell Beaker groups.

Jean M
09-15-2014, 09:10 AM
Yes, we are. The latest samples genotyped are dated to 3500 YBP.

What I meant was the whole southern trail is not going to get sorted out. But not to worry. The paper is certainly something to look forward to.

Jean M
09-15-2014, 09:12 AM
But, since the Nordic Bronze Age was the crucible of pre-Proto-Germanic and since Germanic people spread into present day Germany and Netherlands later on, doesn't it mean that although CW was replaced by BB in Germany before the spread of these Germanics, in a way the CW (pre-Proto Germanic) from Scandinavia reclaimed their former central European CW lands?

Yes indeed. I do explain all that in AJ.

Hok
09-15-2014, 09:55 AM
By contrast present-day Germany was probably full of Celtic-speakers until the Iron Age.

Whole Germany was Celtic speaking?(Northern germany included?)

rms2
09-15-2014, 12:10 PM
Do I really need to clear anything up after some of the recent papers we've seen? I'll just point you to them.

Ancient DNA Reveals Key Stages in the Formation of Central European Mitochondrial Genetic Diversity (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/257.abstract)

Neolithic mitochondrial haplogroup H genomes and the genetic origins of Europeans (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n4/full/ncomms2656.html)

Mitochondrial DNA from El Mirador Cave (Atapuerca, Spain) Reveals the Heterogeneity of Chalcolithic Populations (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105105)

These papers state very clearly the the Bell Beakers were an Atlantic Fringe population in terms of genetic affinities.

The genome-wide data from Bell Beakers is in all likelihood coming next month, and it'll show the same thing.

Thanks. Yes, I would not have asked you if I did not need that cleared up for me.

I don't usually follow mtDNA stuff that closely.

Generalissimo
09-15-2014, 12:39 PM
What I meant was the whole southern trail is not going to get sorted out. But not to worry. The paper is certainly something to look forward to.

The southern trail theory doesn't work with what we know about the ANE spread in Europe, because ANE dips in Southwestern Europe. Note that Sardinians, Basques, Southwest French and North Italians are the only Europeans who can be modeled as 0% ANE.

The reflux Bell Beaker migration model works much better, because there's a strong signal of the spread of ANE into Iberia sometime during the metal ages, but certainly before the migration period. This also fits with data from Bell Beaker tooth morphology.

So the earliest Bell Beakers don't look like a population with ties to Yamnaya. But the later, particularly Bohemian and Carpathian Basin, and even eastern German, Bell Beakers might be very different story.

It seems to me that the model being considered at this stage by Lazaridis et al. is exactly this...

http://imageshack.com/a/img673/9550/ZBbpcw.png

Europe during the third millennium BC and Bell Beaker Culture phenomenon: Peopling history through dental non-metric traits study (http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:12933)

ADW_1981
09-15-2014, 01:18 PM
Even after all of these years and many thousands of modern R1b sequences, including full sequences, we're not much closer to understanding how R1b entered Central Europe during the late stone age.

But it seems to me that most people are ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the fact that the Bell Beaker population looks like it parachuted into Central Europe from some island in the Atlantic. Perhaps from Atlantis itself, I don't know?

In any case, I'm sure that new Lazaridis study does include Bell Beaker samples, because it's largely based on the dataset from Brandt et al. 2013, which had 29 Bell Beaker mtDNA sequences, and obviously there's no way they would choose not to test Bell Beaker remains. So the only way Bell Beakers are not in the results is if there was a technical problem with them.

I chatted briefly to Lazaridis via e-mail a few months ago, and he seems like a nice enough guy. I'm sure that if no one's there to tweet any of the really juicy stuff from that talk at the ASHG then he'd be happy to reveal a few details via e-mail.

This is most likely incorrect based on the recent data. The Bell Beaker group followed the Iberian neolithic and is considered a new population to the region.

Jean M
09-15-2014, 01:45 PM
Whole Germany was Celtic speaking?(Northern germany included?)

We cannot be certain of dialects/languages in the Bronze Age, but it seems most likely that all Germany was part of the Celtic area, while pre-Proto-Germanic was developing in the more contained area of the Nordic Bronze Age. Then there was a strong movement south out of Scandinavia (following climate change) into what is now northern Germany and northern Poland, coming into contact with the iron-working Hallstatt culture to create the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_culture . It seems most likely that Jastorf and the Pomeranian equivalent represent the time and place in which Proto-Germanic developed; Proto-Germanic borrowed the word for 'iron' from Celtic.

Jean M
09-15-2014, 02:06 PM
The southern trail theory doesn't work with what we know about the ANE spread in Europe, because ANE dips in Southwestern Europe.

I thought that we were agreed that we are not going to get any further using modern DNA to work out the specifics of past migrations. I really admired your good sense in saying that what we need now is more ancient genomes. And we are getting them. This pending paper is very welcome. I'm personally thrilled to find that it confirms the deduction that I went to print with in AJ i.e. that CW was not genetically the same as Funnel Beaker.

The irony here is that traditionally (prior to the anti-migrationist clampdown) it was taken for granted that BB represented a new Post-Neolithic population, since the "BB Folk" in most places looked obviously different from Neolithic populations. There was much more reluctance to see CW as a new population. The standard position was continuity, with perhaps just a new Yamnaya-derived elite bringing an IE language. Ha! :) So this paper is really important. Let's not lose sight of that in a welter of speculation about what was going on in other parts of Europe.

soulblighter
09-15-2014, 03:00 PM
I wonder if the Jomon, CW and Koldihwah (http://www.himalayanlanguages.org/files/hazarika/Cord%20impressed%20Pottery%20in%20Neolithic%20Chal colithic%20Context%20of%20Eastern%20India%20by%20M anjil%20Hazarika.pdf) culture in India (Northern Vindhyas, and extending to eastern India) are connected through corded ware pottery or if they are independent developments.

Jean M
09-15-2014, 03:11 PM
I wonder if the Jomon, CW and Koldihwah culture in India (Northern Vindhyas, and extending to eastern India) are connected through corded ware pottery or if they are independent developments.

I am not familiar with the type in India, so thanks for that. The other two can trace a common ancestor in the first pottery in Eurasia, made in the Far East long before farming. It had a pointed base. Though it was often left undecorated, this early pottery could have cord impressions. It gave rise to the earliest pottery in Europe which arrived in the Samara area on the Volga around 7000 BC, which gave rise to the Yamnaya (3300 BC+) pottery with cord impressions, which gave rise to both CW (2700 BC+) and the cord impressed type of BB (2800 BC+).

Atimeres
09-15-2014, 03:28 PM
I'm personally thrilled to find that it confirms the deduction that I went to print with in AJ i.e. that CW was not genetically the same as Funnel Beaker..
No, they are not identical. CW is the horizon of cultures. FB is a culture which in some time became a part of the horizon CW. In addition to FB, in this horizon are still other cultures, for example the Culture of Individual Graves or Globular Amphora.

Jean M
09-15-2014, 03:40 PM
No, they are not identical. CW is the horizon of cultures. FB is a culture which in some time became a part of the horizon CW. In addition to FB, in this horizon are still other cultures, for example the Culture of Individual Graves or Globular Amphora.

FB was earlier than CW, so it is more a case of the CW horizon absorbing remnants of FB, but I know what you mean and agree. Linguistically the Proto-Germanic lexicon contains a lot of vocabulary borrowed from a farming culture. FB is the obvious candidate. This implies mixing of the incoming and pre-existing populations. However it certainly looks as though there was a very significant genetic input from Yamnaya into CW. I deduced that simply from the fact that the early Scandinavian farmer already tested when I went to print was closer to present-day southern European and Anatolian populations than present-day Scandinavians. This coming paper promises to clarify the situation. Y-DNA R1a1 appears to enter present-day north Central Europe with CW, so it seems likely that the migration north was male-led, perhaps taking some local wives.

By the way Single Grave Culture is just another term for CW, or at least it belongs to the same raft of cultures descended from Yamnaya.

rms2
09-15-2014, 03:47 PM
Three questions:

1. Do we have a specific date in October for the presentation of this paper?

2. Are we pretty sure we will hear enough detail about its contents at that time to get much out of it?

3. When will the paper be made public?

R.Rocca
09-15-2014, 03:47 PM
The southern trail theory doesn't work with what we know about the ANE spread in Europe, because ANE dips in Southwestern Europe. Note that Sardinians, Basques, Southwest French and North Italians are the only Europeans who can be modeled as 0% ANE.

The reflux Bell Beaker migration model works much better, because there's a strong signal of the spread of ANE into Iberia sometime during the metal ages, but certainly before the migration period. This also fits with data from Bell Beaker tooth morphology.

So the earliest Bell Beakers don't look like a population with ties to Yamnaya. But the later, particularly Bohemian and Carpathian Basin, and even eastern German, Bell Beakers might be very different story.

It seems to me that the model being considered at this stage by Lazaridis et al. is exactly this...



David, there are several problems with the "R1b from Iberia" scenario:

I. What is the probability that an IE speaking R1a population of horse riding males moved from NE Europe and an IE speaking R1b population of horse riding males moved from SW Europe at exactly the same time (~2700 BC) from two completely opposite ends of Europe? To me, the probability of this happening is close to zero, even if you want to believe that expert mariners were also expert horse riders and lugged all of their horses and cows on small boats across the Mediterranean and did not stop anywhere in between. One can argue about Bell Beakers being non-IE speaking Basques, but Basque is a spec on the map of IE speaking Western Europe, and we can easily negate the Basque argument with a just-as-high R1b speaking population in Ireland, where continual IE speech from the time of Bell Beakers is uncontested (unlike Basque country). Paleo-Basque has recently been linked to Proto-Sardinian, and we know that Sardinians are extremely high in haplogroup I2a and have the lowest R1b frequency in Western Europe. The western Pyrenees also have a spike in I2a when compared to the rest of Western Europe. The Basque-Sardinian-I2a link is a near certainty IMO. The fact that the Basques ended up high in DF27 is an anomaly in 99% of Western Europe. Arguing a Basque speaking origin for R1b is arguing by exception.

II. The phylogeny of R1b resoundingly contradicts a west>east movement from Iberia. Based on modern day frequency hotspots, the M269(xL23) split is somewhere in the Western Balkans, the L23(xL51) split is somewhere in the Adriatic, the L51(xL11) split is somewhere between northern Italy and central France and the L11(xP312,xU106) split is somewhere in the Rhine or the Low Countries. It is this last split (L11+) that represents almost all of Western Europeans, from Ireland down to Iberia. If there was a male-heavy, out-of Iberia Bell Beaker movement, it was likely the result of P312's subclade DF27. We know that DF27 is overwhelmingly found in Iberia and SW France - the areas where the Iberian Bell Beaker archaeological group is strongest. The Iberian Bell Beaker group is distinct and different from the one that is found in the Rhine. The Dutch Bell Beaker model fits the R1b phylogeny to a tee, with the Iberian model only fitting the DF27 subclade. The problem is that the Dutch model was replaced by the Iberian model about ten years ago based on one of the shoddiest papers on C14 dating one will ever come across (J. Müller/Van Willigen 2001).

III. If we look at autosomal components, and if your synthetic populations are directionally sound, it is clear that the heaviest component in the heaviest areas of modern day R1b is resoundingly WHG-UHG, which in all honesty is what distinguishes Europeans from non-Europeans and ANE is clearly not. That ANE is a few percentage points higher in NE Europe than NW Europe is not significant enough for me to get all excited about it and just points to a greater distance from the "R" source than anything else. Certainly nothing that R1a alone can explain anyway. There is a much more noticeable ANE drop-off between Northern and Southern Europe than there is between NE Europe which is where R1a peaks and NW Europe where R1b peaks. Contrary to what you may think, R1b is not necessary in the least bit to explain ENF in Europe. It is clear that the areas where ENF is heaviest in Europe is southern Europe and from a purely Y-DNA perspective maps perfectly with the concatenation of Middle Eastern haplogroups as shown on the map below, even when some are missing (like Y-DNA haplogroup L).

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_EGJT.gif

Atimeres
09-15-2014, 04:13 PM
By the way Single Grave Culture is just another term for CW, or at least it belongs to the same raft of cultures descended from Yamnaya.
A good expert in this topic J. Czebreszuk (2001, p. 88-89), writes that the thesis of the identity of the CWC and Single Graves culture has already become a little current, as noted a significant division of CWC on two zones: the northern, where SGC is an important feature and the southern zone, where the trait does not play a role.
I would add that Malopolska, Silesia, Saale, Middle Elbe and the Middle Rhine belong to the southern zone (ibidem).

Atimeres
09-15-2014, 04:27 PM
By the way Single Grave Culture is just another term for CW, or at least it belongs to the same raft of cultures descended from Yamnaya.
Moreover, according to J. Czebreszuk, SGC is not Eastern (from Yamnya) origin, but the cradle is rather Jutland...

Jean M
09-15-2014, 04:36 PM
A good expert in this topic J. Czebreszuk (2001, p. 88-89), writes that the thesis of the identity of the CWC and Single Graves culture has already become a little current, as noted a significant division of CWC on two zones: the northern, where SGC is an important feature and the southern zone, where the trait does not play a role. I would add that Malopolska, Silesia, Saale, Middle Elbe and the Middle Rhine belong to the southern zone (ibidem).

I suspect some confusion here. J. Czebreszuk 2004* treats the SGC as just a variety of CW, which is noted for single graves. I quote:


The term "Corded Ware culture" (die Schnurkeramikkultur) was introduced by the German archaeologist Friedrich Klopfleisch in 1883. The name is taken from cord impressions found on the surface of vessels found in archaeological sites across a large portion of central and eastern Europe. Researchers were able to recognize relatively early, at the beginning of the twentieth century, that the Corded Ware phenomenon was widespread and culturally important. Subsequently, a number of groups that inhabited the region in the third millennium B.C. have been identified as belonging to the Corded Ware culture.

Cord impressions were easy to identify on the surface of vessels. It should be noted, however, that later research has revealed that cord ornamentation was connected not only to the Corded Ware culture; it was also known to the Funnel Beaker culture, Globular Amphora culture, and various steppe cultures. In addition, not every Corded Ware vessel had this ornamental decoration. However, a basic list of artifacts associated with the Corded Ware culture was compiled in the early twentieth century and included stone axes, beakers, amphorae, arrowheads, and flint flakes. These were usually found in single-burial tombs covered by a barrow....

In the 1930s archaeologists began studying the stylistic sequences within individual regions. In the lead of this movement were Danish (C. J. Becker in 1936; P. V. Glob in 1945) and German (K. W. Struve in 1955) archaeologists, who studied the northern area of the Corded Ware culture that was considered a separate unity called the Single Grave culture (die Einzelgrabekultur)....

The question of the origins of the Corded Ware culture has absorbed the attention of many archaeologists. In the mid-twentieth century, it appeared that the initial phase of Corded Ware was similar across Europe at roughly the same time, and thus the concept of a "Pan-European Horizon" (also known as the "A-Horizon") emerged. The Pan-European Horizon was characterized by distinctive amphorae, beakers, and axe forms, with single burials under barrows sometimes surrounded by a palisade. ... Małopolska Corded Ware in southern Poland is known mainly from cemeteries, where at most a few dozen individuals were buried (the largest number of graves in one place totaled sixty-four at Zerniki Górne). These were single-burial graves..

* Janusz Czebreszuk, Corded Ware from East to West, in Pam Crabtree & Peter Bogucki (eds), Ancient Europe, 8000 B.C. to A.D. 1000: An Encyclopedia of the Barbarian World (2004). Can be read in full online here: http://librarum.org/book/43668/493

Silesian
09-15-2014, 04:40 PM
...... the M269(xL23) split is somewhere in the Western Balkans.....

http://r1b.org/imgs/M269_without_L23.png

Are you showing that M269(xL23) R1b1a2* migrated East from the Western BalkansR1b1a2 (2011 name) is defined by the presence of SNP marker M269. R1b1a2* or M269(xL23) is found at highest frequency in the central Balkans notably Kosovo with 7.9%, Macedonia 5.1% and Serbia 4.4%.[7], to groups such as Zoroastrianism in Iran.
15.4%-17N
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041252
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_%28Y-DNA%29


Variance of R1b-Z2103
[4 branches-L584+/L277+/CTS-9219+/ CTS8966+] branches can be found [Bulgaria/Ukraine region] in the East ,above M269(XL23) map.

How can variance of R1b-z2103 be greater to the East, if M269[L23X] originates in West Balkan(Kosovo Albanian for example)?

Jean M
09-15-2014, 04:41 PM
Moreover, according to J. Czebreszuk, SGC is not Eastern (from Yamnya) origin, but the cradle is rather Jutland...

Good grief. J. Czebreszuk certainly did not say anything like that in the 2004 chapter that I cite. Single graves under round barrows are the best-known feature of Yamnaya. They mark a break from the collective burials under long barrows typical of the Neolithic. Czebreszuk is well aware of the Yamnaya connection. I quote again from Czebreszuk 2004:


The genesis of the Corded Ware culture must have been a protracted and complicated process that involved representatives of the traditional central European cultures as well as peoples who came from the steppes near the Black Sea....

the Corded Ware culture played a most important role in long-term social development. The appearance of individualization, as illustrated in Corded Ware burials, was an undoubted breakthrough. With this development, the individual (especially the adult male, the hunter-warrior) became an active object in the process of social change. The field for competition between individuals began to open. An increasingly complicated social hierarchy developed, and with it grew the demand for items and raw materials that raised the status of their owners.

Atimeres
09-15-2014, 04:57 PM
“Given the above, now It is considered Ekumen SGC included, apart from Jutland, lowland areas of Europe from the Lower Elbe river basin in the west to Pomerania (the areas of the mouth of the Vistula) and Kuyavia in the East.” Czebreszuk, p.92
I think that there is no complete identity in the cultures of individual graves. The pulses may have come from different sides!

palamede
09-15-2014, 04:57 PM
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_EGJT.gif

There are no correct studies for the Y frequencies in France, except for some peripherical regions done by non-french universities. All studies which required help by french instituts and universities (except an old study done in West Britany by U. Brest) are wrong. To understand, it needs to know the state of mind of french institutions controlled by the marxist trade-unions and the studies are sabotaged very often, these groups did the war to all which can resemble to racist studies for their view with clear conscience.

I think skin colour in Europe has a very strong corolation with the sum E+G+J+T(+L) and skin, hair and eye colours in France (before migrations of the 20th and 21th centuries AD) didn't comply with Eupedia map at all. The real clines were north-east to south-west from the fairest to the brownest (maybe exception for the Basque regions) and also browner along the Med. coast.

I am almost certain the dark stain (for E+G+J+T) in France didn't exist before contemporary migrations from South Europe and farther.

parasar
09-15-2014, 05:10 PM
...

I am almost certain the dark stain (for E+G+J+T) in France didn't exist before contemporary migrations from South Europe and farther.

I do not think that J and T belong in the same grouping - T especially.

Jean M
09-15-2014, 05:33 PM
I think that there is no complete identity in the cultures of individual graves. The pulses may have come from different sides!

It looks to me as though you assumed that only the SGC had single graves. These were in fact common to all varieties of CW, as my quotations from the same author make clear. Fortunately people can read Prof. Czebreszuk's entire 2004 chapter in full online free: http://librarum.org/book/43668/493

Czebreszuk 2004 took the stance on CW that has been common among archaeologists for decades. He stressed continuity from FB to CW, while recognising both an influence from Yamnaya and the common theory that CW was a vector of Indo-European.


It may be said with regard to the Indo-European problem that the Corded Ware culture was in the right place at the right time. The widely accepted hypothesis that the people of the Corded Ware culture were animal breeders or herders appeals to the imagination of the researchers as far as the oldest Indo-Europeans are concerned. Corded Ware is also the first culture in central Europe whose characteristics are visibly linked to the Indo-European examples.

Genetics takes us further than the theorising from archaeology alone. That is the importance of the paper to be read next month.

R.Rocca
09-15-2014, 05:54 PM
I am almost certain the dark stain (for E+G+J+T) in France didn't exist before contemporary migrations from South Europe and farther.

Until E or G or J or T are found in European hunter-gatherers, I completely disagree, especially since G and E have already been found in Western European Neolithic contexts.

palamede
09-15-2014, 06:52 PM
Until E or G or J or T are found in European hunter-gatherers, I completely disagree, especially since G and E have already been found in Western European Neolithic contexts.

Be serious, I haven't never claimed there was no presence of E, G, T and L since Neolithic in France and certainly the presence of E+G+J+T+L varied from 10% (less in West Brittany) to 25% in Continental France before 1914.
In Continental France there was no area for more than 30% and the area for more than 20% should be smaller and more southernly .Probably the highest frequence of E+G+J+T+L was in Coastal Provence with the same frequencies than the Italian coastal Liguria.

You can see for the remaining Europe with a lot more correct results, the strong correlation between skin ,hair and eye colors and E+G+J+T(+L) is remarkable and certainly it must be the same thing in France.

Centre and East France were less brown than North Italy and North East Spain (don't speak of the brown North West Spain), and North France a lot fairer as the old anthropological studies and profane observations showed.

I understand you cannot admit the scholar studies of the old french population are complete fraudes (except Balaresque et al and Myres et al studies and some other studies of peripherical french populations (like Gascons, Basquesor Corsicans) but no study for North and Center France is right ).

Atimeres
09-15-2014, 07:01 PM
I think that there is no complete identity in the cultures of individual graves. The pulses may have come from different sides!
I think that the ambiguity lies in the fact that Czebreszuk uses extensive terminology horizon, culture, circle, package.
If I understand it, the culture is inspired by the ideology of human group band's own material creations of the community and its rituals.
The package is a set of products of the material loosely associated with each other and a group of people. Elements of the package are replaceable copper groups.
Culture can be both a package, the band artifacts.
Individual tombs culture is a package, like the Bell Beaker Culture or culture unietycka. Between the element and the cord-burials no ideological connection.
Therefore, C14 dating of graves in Europe does not exceed nowhere 2300 years BC, while, dating CWC reaches 4500 or 4600 BC (Czebreszuk p. 209).
Between the ropes and the graves unless there is an ideological relationship. The idea of individual graves did not have to migrate a group of people.
I do not know how well I think.

Atimeres
09-15-2014, 07:07 PM
Genetics takes us further than the theorising from archaeology alone. That is the importance of the paper to be read next month.
Yes, in fact we here dreaming to know the history of man, not the "pots".
Long live the genetics!

R.Rocca
09-15-2014, 07:20 PM
Be serious, I haven't never claimed there was no presence of E, G, T and L since Neolithic in France and certainly the presence of E+G+J+T+L varied from 10% (less in West Brittany) to 25% in Continental France before 1914....

I would've been more serious if you had made your point clearer. Now that you have made your point clearer, I see what you mean.



I understand you cannot admit the scholar studies of the old french population are complete fraudes (except Balaresque et al and Myres et al studies).


I think you are the only one who loses sleep over the fact that the percentages in Central France might be wrong. :rolleyes: Even if they are incorrect, it doesn't change the point I made about R1b, Bell Beaker and YDNA/auDNA components.

vettor
09-15-2014, 07:24 PM
Be serious, I haven't never claimed there was no presence of E, G, T and L since Neolithic in France and certainly the presence of E+G+J+T+L varied from 10% (less in West Brittany) to 25% in Continental France before 1914.
In Continental France there was no area for more than 30% and the area for more than 20% should be smaller and more southernly .Probably the highest frequence of E+G+J+T+L was in Coastal Provence with the same frequencies than the Italian coastal Liguria.

You can see for the remaining Europe with a lot more correct results, the strong correlation between skin ,hair and eye colors and E+G+J+T(+L) is remarkable and certainly it must be the same thing in France.

Centre and East France were less brown than North Italy and North East Spain (don't speak of the brown North West Spain), and North France a lot fairer as the old anthropological studies and profane observations showed.

I understand you cannot admit the scholar studies of the old french population are complete fraudes (except Balaresque et al and Myres et al studies and some studies of peripherical french populations (like Gascony, Basque Country or Corsica) but no study for North and Center France is right ).

the 2012 french study has minimal T and zero L in coastal france, it does have 4.5% in both alsace and Avignon...both came via southern germany

Y-chromosomal DNA analysis in French male lineages.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24528594

http://secherbernard.blog.free.fr/index.php?post/2013/11/20/Phylog%C3%A9ographie-des-lignages-masculins-fran%C3%A7ais

above is Luis ramos 2009 numbers....his late 2013 to early 2014 is slightly different

palamede
09-15-2014, 07:37 PM
I think you are the only one who loses sleep over the fact that the percentages in Central France might be wrong. :rolleyes: Even if they are incorrect, it doesn't change the point I made about R1b, Bell Beaker and YDNA/auDNA components.

You used the Eupedia map which gives the strange result for France and a lot of your readers have never come in France and seen the French by origin. he mustn't wait for several generations because they will be difficult to find . Several people (french or foreign) observed Maciamo what the results of Y frequency the center of France (in fact two third of the superficy) were improbable and the best thing ro leave blank this area as unknown.

When you said "I think you are the only one who loses sleep over the fact ..)" it is still means to avoid take a position. If you consider it is normal when the most lost tribe of the eart got the frequency result , french people has not the right to know their old histories, forbidden by a political minority more known by their crimes than the respect of the human beings. But it is true if foreign countries don't know this type of new totalitarism, the minority remains powerful in the intellectual and scholar worlds (there is a remarkable book of Alexandre Soljenitsyne abouth the mediatic leaders in Occident and the problems he encountered with their trickeries; in french " Le grain tombé entre les meules", I haven't succeeded to find in Englisk wikipedia.

Of course, the right attitude should be to require a real scientific study checked by known international scientific authorities.

As half french by origin, I consider your comments are insulting.

R.Rocca
09-15-2014, 07:53 PM
You used the Eupedia map with the strange result for France and a lot of your readers have never come in France and seen the French by origin. he mustn't wait for several generations because they will be difficult to find . Several people (french or foreign) observed Maciamo what the results of Y frequency the center of France (in fact two third of the superficy) were improbable and the best thing ro leave blank this area as unknown.

When you said "I think you are the only one who loses sleep over the fact ..)" it is still means to avoid take a position. It is normal when the most lost tribe of the eart got the frequency result , french people has not the right to know, forbidden by a political minority more known by their crimes than the respect of the human beings. But it is true if foreign countries don't know this totalitarism, the minority remains powerful in the intellectual and scholar worlds.

As half french by origin, I consider your comments are insulting.

I have said in the past that Bell Beakers are notoriously absent from central France, so I don't know one way or another if the map for Central France is correct or not. It could very well be that those groups are elevated in Central France at the expense of R1b. So until another study comes out to the contrary, I am not going to lose sleep over it, but you can keep obsessing over it. If you find my comments insulting, then all I can say is that you are very easily insulted individual. Hopefully you'll get over it soon and post something about the topic that is being discussed like I tried to do.

palamede
09-15-2014, 08:03 PM
the 2012 french study has minimal T and zero L in coastal france, it does have 4.5% in both alsace and Avignon...both came via southern germany

Y-chromosomal DNA analysis in French male lineages.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24528594

http://secherbernard.blog.free.fr/index.php?post/2013/11/20/Phylog%C3%A9ographie-des-lignages-masculins-fran%C3%A7ais

above is Luis ramos 2009 numbers....his late 2013 to early 2014 is slightly different
If you observe Luis Ramos study for Ile De France, you will see there are 22% haplogroup E (with 10,99% sub-saharian subclade ExE1b1b1), it is the most and very visible blatant result, but not the only strange results.

In 18th and 19th centuries writers flaunted the fairness of the young ladies of Ile De France, maybe with some exaggeration.

palamede
09-15-2014, 08:39 PM
Read "Memories of Exile" by Alexandre Soljenitsyne a great book which you learn a lot of truthes about the Occidental World to avoid you to die wondering and to believe all the lies of the occidental mediatic world and the cowardices of the politicians.

One of the volume is "The Grain Caught Between Two Millstones" ("Ugodilo Zyornyshko Promezh Dvukh Zhernovov").

Jean M
09-15-2014, 09:45 PM
C14 dating of graves in Europe does not exceed nowhere 2300 years BC, while, dating CWC reaches 4500 or 4600 BC (Czebreszuk p. 209).


So in 2001 the good professor made a lot of statements about CW that make him sound like a confused amateur at best and a complete lunatic at worst, then in 2004 he told the story of CW like an expert professional archaeologist? And here he is in 2011 sounding totally sane: https://www.academia.edu/1777361/Identities_Differentition_and_Interactions_on_the_ Central_European_Plain_in_the_3rd_millennium_BC
Identities, Differentition and Interactions on the Central European Plain in the 3rd millennium BC.

The most recent papers on the dating of CW are:
Piotr Włodarczak, 2009. Radiocarbon and dendrochronological dates of the Corded Ware culture, Radiocarbon, 51 (2), 737-749.
https://www.academia.edu/2917472/RADIOCARBON_AND_DENDROCHRONOLOGICAL_DATES_OF_THE_C ORDED_WARE_CULTURE

Piotr Włodarczak, 2008. Corded Ware and Baden Cultures. Outline of chronological and genetic relations based on the finds from western Little Poland, in The Baden Culture and the Outside World [In which he concludes that many characteristics of the CW burial ritual appeared earlier in the Baden Culture]
https://www.academia.edu/3025811/Corded_Ware_and_Baden_Cultures._Outline_of_chronol ogical_and_genetic_relations_based_on_the_finds_fr om_western_Little_Poland

Generalissimo
09-16-2014, 12:04 AM
This is most likely incorrect based on the recent data. The Bell Beaker group followed the Iberian neolithic and is considered a new population to the region.

Which part is wrong?

Bell Beaker DNA looks more western than that of early Neolithic farmers. The fact that Bell Beakers were an intrusive element in late Neolithic Iberia doesn't change that. Hence my comment that they might have come from Atlantis, which was obviously a joke, but to be honest, I am yet to see a better explanation of where they were before they presumably landed on the beaches of Portugal.


David, there are several problems with the "R1b from Iberia" scenario.

But Richard, I didn't say anywhere in this thread that R1b came from Iberia.

R.Rocca
09-16-2014, 12:13 AM
Which part is wrong?

Bell Beaker DNA looks more western than that of early Neolithic farmers. The fact that Bell Beakers were an intrusive element in late Neolithic Iberia doesn't change that. Hence my comment that they might have come from Atlantis, which was obviously a joke, but to be honest, I am yet to see a better explanation of where they were before they presumably landed on the beaches of Portugal.

But Richard, I didn't say anywhere in this thread that R1b came from Iberia.

I think I inferred it based on your instance that folks would jump off bridges if Bell Beaker geneflow will be proven to come out of Iberia. I don't think anyone has sold the farm on specific haplogroup H sub-groups not expanding from Iberia ;)

rms2
09-16-2014, 12:18 AM
I think I inferred it based on your instance that folks would jump off bridges if Bell Beaker geneflow will be proven to come out of Iberia. I don't think anyone has sold the farm on specific haplogroup H sub-groups not expanding from Iberia ;)

I got the same impression, so you weren't alone.

alan
09-16-2014, 12:47 AM
I must admit something along the lines of a reflux model is tempting with the pots and mtDNA coming from SW Europe heading east and perhaps meeting R1b somewhere in central Europe coming from the east of south-east. It does seem to fit thing together in a simple way. There have been hints in the past that beaker use and horse use were linked so perhaps R1b in contrast to what went before it typically in western Europe was a highly mobile group of traders who a great deal of the time acted as go-betweens rather than primary extractors thus providing a new and useful service to the latter. If the mt DNA and pots flowed west to east and R1b from east to west then that could make sense. They would essentially be alliance brides heading back towards the R1b clans as a kind of guarantee for the safety of the R1b men as the headed west to primary copper extraction areas like Iberia before returning east and in other directions. In such a model it kind of makes sense and would place the R1b population somewhere to the east. So, essentially the spread of beakers and mtDNA is a sort of mirror opposite of the spread of R1b. At some point in time however the practice of making beakers was copied by locals.

The crucial thing that R1b lines brought to the table could have been their ability to be very mobile perhaps travelling on horses and possessing food on the hoof in the form of cattle herds. This would make some sense as beaker people did not actually really bring anything new in terms of metallurgical or mining skills to much of southern and central Europe. What sets beaker apart from all that went before is extraordinary mobility. Maybe R1b was extraordinarily mobile too.

So perhaps this also gives us a clue as to the original origin of European R1b i.e. it lay within a culture who were mobile due to horses but likely not actual waggon dwellers. It also came from a culture with a deeper heritage of acting as go-betweens who got copper from a primary mining area but did not mine themselves originally. There main role was to distribute using the one thing they had that the more sophisticated farmer-copper workers did not have - mobility.

Now there is one group that ticks all of those boxes. The elite of Sredny Stog sometimes known as Skelya. They spread into the Balkans in Suvorovo guise c. 4200BC. They didnt have the wheel bit they likely did ride horses. Could L23 derived R1b have arisen or expanded in the Balkans from these groups before expanding west?

alan
09-16-2014, 01:02 AM
I have no problem with beakers pots originally being linked to mt DNA and therefore also some autosomal DNA coming from SW Europe. It fits together well with the fact beakers are female driven. I think this is looking likely.

However, I do have problems in seeing R1b as connected to a west to east movement. That seems virtually impossible based on what we know about R1b. R1b was apparently new to farming Europe at the end of the Neolithic/copper age and western forms are relatively young. So, I believe the SW European women and pots spread first before meeting with R1b somewhere else like the Alps or central Europe. However I believe that wherever pots spread there were R1b men following exactly the same trails in reverse. It may have all been part of a safe conduct marriage network for highly mobile R1b men to through and to the territories the SW women with the pots had previously lived. The result is you can see the networks in the beakers but the men followed the network in the opposite direction from the pots.

If the idea that they were specialists involved more often in trading and transporting rather than extraction is correct then it all kind of works.

I think I am in broad agreement with Generalisimo and RR but I am not sure I understand fully what the latter means by the concept of an Atlantic population distinct from the farmers due to their peripeheral fringe location. What made them different from the farmers?

Generalissimo
09-16-2014, 01:24 AM
I think I am in broad agreement with Generalisimo and RR but I am not sure I understand fully what the latter means by the concept of an Atlantic population distinct from the farmers due to their peripeheral fringe location. What made them different from the farmers?

Early European farmers, including those in Iberia, showed clear affinities to the Near East in terms of mtDNA. Most Bell Beaker mtDNA samples are much less Near Eastern. This paper discusses the topic in detail.

Mitochondrial DNA from El Mirador Cave (Atapuerca, Spain) Reveals the Heterogeneity of Chalcolithic Populations (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105105)

My hunch is that Bell Beaker genomes won't be all that different from present-day Basques, but probably even more western.

VinceT
09-16-2014, 01:32 AM
... Now there is one group that ticks all of those boxes. The elite of Sredny Stog sometimes known as Skelya. They spread into the Balkans in Suvorovo guise c. 4200BC. They didnt have the wheel bit they likely did ride horses. Could L23 derived R1b have arisen or expanded in the Balkans from these groups before expanding west?

Fascinating! Coincidentally, there was a Mennonite presence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chortitza_Colony) (from whom my sister-in-law descends) located near this isle (Khortytsia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khortytsia)) during the late 18th to mid 20th centuries, until the Russian government evacuated them.

GailT
09-16-2014, 04:28 AM
I think I inferred it based on your instance that folks would jump off bridges if Bell Beaker geneflow will be proven to come out of Iberia. I don't think anyone has sold the farm on specific haplogroup H sub-groups not expanding from Iberia ;)

mtDNA H expanded from the Middle East to Europe (including Iberia) in the Neolithic, perhaps reaching Iberia by a Mediterranean route, and then expanding from Iberia into other parts of Europe post-Neolithic. But H was almost certainly expanding from the MIddle East and the Steppe via multiple routes and multiple waves of migration during the last 8000 years. But as Rich suggests, we really need to discuss these migrations in terms of specific subclades of H because H is extremely diverse with hundreds of subclades, most of which are not yet named.

For those who argue that H arrived in Europe in the Mesolithic (which has been debated many times here) - yes, this is possible, but we still don't have well documented evidence for this. Perhaps more full sequence samples will show some H arriving before the first farmers, but it's now clear that it H arrived primarily with farmers.

parasar
09-16-2014, 04:51 AM
mtDNA H expanded from the Middle East to Europe (including Iberia) in the Neolithic, perhaps reaching Iberia by a Mediterranean route, and then expanding from Iberia into other parts of Europe post-Neolithic. But H was almost certainly expanding from the MIddle East and the Steppe via multiple routes and multiple waves of migration during the last 8000 years. But as Rich suggests, we really need to discuss these migrations in terms of specific subclades of H because H is extremely diverse with hundreds of subclades, most of which are not yet named.

For those who argue that H arrived in Europe in the Mesolithic (which has been debated many times here) - yes, this is possible, but we still don't have well documented evidence for this. Perhaps more full sequence samples will show some H arriving before the first farmers, but it's now clear that it H arrived primarily with farmers.

If there were any farmers arriving from the Mid East to Europe. Expanded in the Neolithic within Europe, yes that looks very likely.

Atimeres
09-16-2014, 07:30 AM
I think that the ambiguity lies in the fact that Czebreszuk uses extensive terminology horizon, culture, circle, package.
If I understand it, the culture is inspired by the ideology of human group band's own material creations of the community and its rituals.
The package is a set of products of the material loosely associated with each other and a group of people. Elements of the package are replaceable copper groups.
Culture can be both a package, the band artifacts.
Individual tombs culture is a package, like the Bell Beaker Culture or culture unietycka. Between the element and the cord-burials no ideological connection.
Therefore, C14 dating of graves in Europe does not exceed nowhere 2300 years BC, while, dating CWC reaches 4500 or 4600 BC (Czebreszuk p. 209).
Between the ropes and the graves unless there is an ideological relationship. The idea of individual graves did not have to migrate a group of people.
I do not know how well I think.
"Therefore, C14 dating of graves in Europe does not exceed nowhere 2300 years BC, while, dating CWC reaches 4500 or 4600 BC (Czebreszuk p. 209). "
Oh, Jean, it's not of the professor, but my ugly mistake!
Correct: 2500 or 2600 BC!

Hok
09-16-2014, 08:42 AM
We cannot be certain of dialects/languages in the Bronze Age, but it seems most likely that all Germany was part of the Celtic area, while pre-Proto-Germanic was developing in the more contained area of the Nordic Bronze Age. Then there was a strong movement south out of Scandinavia (following climate change) into what is now northern Germany and northern Poland, coming into contact with the iron-working Hallstatt culture to create the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_culture . It seems most likely that Jastorf and the Pomeranian equivalent represent the time and place in which Proto-Germanic developed; Proto-Germanic borrowed the word for 'iron' from Celtic.

I believe that there were more dialects/languages in the Bronze Age in modern Germany/Netherlands. There is also an interesting hypothesis the so called ''Northwestblock''.


The Nordwestblock (English: "Northwest Block"), is a hypothetical cultural region, that several 20th century scholars propose as a prehistoric culture, thought to be roughly bounded by the rivers Meuse, Elbe, Somme and Oise (the present-day Netherlands, Belgium, northern France and western Germany) and possibly the eastern part of England during the Bronze and Iron Ages (3rd to 1st millennia BC, up to the gradual onset of historical sources from the 1st century).
The theory was first proposed by two authors working independently, Hans Kuhn,[1] and Maurits Gysseling, who was partly influenced by Belgian archeologist Siegfried De Laet. Gysseling's proposal included research indicating that another language may have existed somewhere in between Germanic and Celtic in the Belgian (sic) region.[2]
The term itself Nordwestblock was coined by Hans Kuhn,[3] who considered the inhabitants of this area neither Germanic nor Celtic, thus attributing to the people a distinct ethnicity or culture. According to Kuhn and his followers, the region was Germanised from the beginning of the Common Era, at the latest.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock

Jean M
09-16-2014, 09:46 AM
I believe that there were more dialects/languages in the Bronze Age in modern Germany/Netherlands. There is also an interesting hypothesis the so called ''Northwestblock''.

I am aware of it. It is further proof of how desperately some people want to believe in continuity against all the evidence of place-names, personal names, tribal names etc. The name for the river Rhine is Celtic.

Jean M
09-16-2014, 09:59 AM
Oh, Jean, it's not of the professor, but my ugly mistake! Correct: 2500 or 2600 BC!

So I assumed. I'm so glad that you volunteered to exonerate the poor professor, who might have been laid open to ridicule that he does not deserve. He is an expert in his field. He may have pressed the case for a greater degree of continuity from FB to CW than I feel can be supported by the ancient DNA evidence, but we have only just begun to get that ancient DNA evidence in the last few years. It will change the way that we look at the whole prehistory of Europe. A new look at CW is just one part of this upheaval.

I suspect that CW is a complex phenomenon and it will take some time to get to grips with what was going on in terms of migration. There may have been some earlier IE migration into some part(s) of the territory that became CW. So we really need to look at ancient DNA from Baden and other cultures.

Generalissimo
09-16-2014, 10:09 AM
Interestingly, when this paper was waiting to be published, the Corded Ware genomes were probably already sequenced and analyzed. So I'd say the results should match those from Brandt et al. 2013.


In a single geographic region in present day Germany, mtDNA has been obtained from hundreds of human samples from archaeological cultures ranging from the early Neolithic to the Bronze Age [56]. There is an apparent genetic discontinuity between people of early and late Neolithic cultures. In particular, people of late Neolithic cultures bear more relatedness to the present-day populations of Eastern Europe and Russia than do people of early Neolithic cultures. Thus, demographic turnover has apparently occurred at least twice over the course of the past 8000 years of European prehistory.

They even discuss the methodology they used on the Samara and Corded Ware samples, as if it were a promising option. But they probably already knew it worked a treat. I'll never read another David Reich paper in the same way again. :P


We ourselves are particularly enthusiastic about the possibility of adapting a technology such as that described above to enrich human samples for panels of several hundred thousand SNPs that have already been genotyped on present-day samples. This is a sufficient number of SNPs that it would allow for high-resolution analysis of how an ancient sample relates to present-day as well as other ancient samples. The strategy has two potential advantages. First, through enrichment, it allows analysis of samples with much less than 10% human DNA, which are not economical for whole-genome sequencing studies. Second, assuming that it works, it requires about two orders of magnitude less sequencing per sample to saturate all its targets (Table 1).

Toward a new history and geography of human genes informed by ancient DNA (http://www.cell.com/trends/genetics/abstract/S0168-9525%2814%2900120-6)

rms2
09-16-2014, 12:22 PM
. . .
My hunch is that Bell Beaker genomes won't be all that different from present-day Basques, but probably even more western.

From the context of your recent posts, I take it you mean in terms of mtDNA, but when you say "genomes" you seem to be implying the whole ball of wax, so to speak.

I think you place far too much emphasis on the Basques, as Rich Rocca pointed out. The reason for doing that seems fairly transparent.

Anyway, it seems to me that, if you are right, we should see a fairly distinct dichotomy between Beaker males and Beaker females, at least between the early and later groups, with the females displaying the western affinity of which you speak and the males having much less of it.

Generalissimo
09-16-2014, 12:58 PM
Anyway, it seems to me that, if you are right, we should see a fairly distinct dichotomy between Beaker males and Beaker females, at least between the early and later groups, with the females displaying the western affinity of which you speak and the males having much less of it.

I suspect the dichotomy will be between early/western Bell Beakers and late/eastern Bell Beakers.

I don't believe there will be any differences between the early/western Bell Beaker women and men, because although the culture was defined primarily by beakers, it's actually known as something of an archeological macho male culture. So if the women made the pots, then the Bell Beakers had to travel as family groups, in which case the very western mtDNA of these groups should also be reflected in their genome-wide genetic structure. Hence my comment that I expect them to be very Basque-like.

In any case, Bell Beakers are very conspicuous by their absence from that ASHG abstract. But I have a really hard time believing that none of their genomes were sequenced as part of the study. So the only other option is that they didn't stick out from the dataset as much as the, presumably much more eastern-like, Corded Ware genomes.

I guess we might find out next month. And someone should definitely e-mail Lazaridis if the tweets from the talk don't reveal anything. I've already pestered him about other stuff, so one of you guys should do it.

Isidro
09-16-2014, 01:25 PM
How interesting, back in the day to explain R1b amongst Basques had to resort to explain their language survival to their women, now in these new theories they are (with their pots mind you) ravaging Europe as Amazons or simple slaves, always of course with no R1b around them. It is getting too old to have the same script with different characters.

R.Rocca
09-16-2014, 01:28 PM
Changing the focus back to Corded Ware a little bit, is there any "guestimates" on the ANE-WHG split of the incoming R1a horse riders from the East that led to Corded Ware?

Generalissimo
09-16-2014, 02:19 PM
Changing the focus back to Corded Ware a little bit, is there any "guestimates" on the ANE-WHG split of the incoming R1a horse riders from the East that led to Corded Ware?

My guess is the Corded Ware genomes will be around 30% ANE. The rest should be mostly WHG, even if it's the Lazaridis et al. WHG.

The Samara genomes should, in theory, have higher ANE.

jeanL
09-16-2014, 02:20 PM
mtDNA H expanded from the Middle East to Europe (including Iberia) in the Neolithic, perhaps reaching Iberia by a Mediterranean route, and then expanding from Iberia into other parts of Europe post-Neolithic. But H was almost certainly expanding from the MIddle East and the Steppe via multiple routes and multiple waves of migration during the last 8000 years. But as Rich suggests, we really need to discuss these migrations in terms of specific subclades of H because H is extremely diverse with hundreds of subclades, most of which are not yet named.

For those who argue that H arrived in Europe in the Mesolithic (which has been debated many times here) - yes, this is possible, but we still don't have well documented evidence for this. Perhaps more full sequence samples will show some H arriving before the first farmers, but it's now clear that it H arrived primarily with farmers.

Needless to say I disagree based on the presence of mt-DNA H in Guipuzcoa(Unpublished from Thesis), Karelia, and the Samara(David Reich personal communication) Mesolithic Samples.

R.Rocca
09-16-2014, 02:22 PM
How interesting, back in the day to explain R1b amongst Basques had to resort to explain their language survival to their women, now in these new theories they are (with their pots mind you) ravaging Europe as Amazons or simple slaves, always of course with no R1b around them. It is getting too old to have the same script with different characters.

Sorry, but the original "script" has been around for many decades longer than the ones you've mentioned. It told us that Basque speaking men repopulated all of Western Europe right after the Ice Age. R1b was brilliantly incorporated into the original "script" by academics and testing companies alike. Life was much simpler when my male ancestors were the "original" Europeans and were painting the caves at Lascaux.

vettor
09-16-2014, 06:36 PM
How interesting, back in the day to explain R1b amongst Basques had to resort to explain their language survival to their women, now in these new theories they are (with their pots mind you) ravaging Europe as Amazons or simple slaves, always of course with no R1b around them. It is getting too old to have the same script with different characters.

Most people here seem to forget that HIJTLG haplogroups had over 30000 years to establish themselves in Europe before R haplogroup even entered Europe. ( of the K (ydna) family group )

Atimeres
09-16-2014, 06:50 PM
I didn't fully understand Atimeres' "slavic expansion" post. I understand the Slavic expansion happened around the 7th AD. So I'm confused about the demographic crisis of 2nd millennium BC. Who and what happened in the 2nd millennium BC? Was there a lare scale migration into central European Corded Ware country in the 2nd Millenium BC that threatened the corded ware population's gene pool?
So it's my fault that you did not understand me, and probably not just because they know little English (I am a former Esperantist, once very involved in international Esperanto movement, and former Esperantists always questioned the "English-language cultural imperialism":P).
..............
You do not understand me too because when I talk about the Slavs, he meant not only those whose Jordanes or Prokopius bestowed by "Slavs", but also their ancestors, to their beginning, their separation from the Proto-Indo-group Europeans. Or maybe even within this group.
That's why I talked about them (Proto-Slavic) demographic crisis in the second millennium BC.
Is the crisis was?
I used many times about this crisis A.Klyosov posted. He attributed his actions had come to the House of Europe 1b (which in readers, for example, on Rootsweb, provoked opposition).
A crisis, however, was. We see it in the diagram phylogenetic tree: the long lines of SNPs without branching (branches had to be, but it died!).
For example. In a group called the mid-euroopejska (M458) at the top of the tree, we see childless sections: 18SNPs + 19SNPs + 6SNPs = 43. Counting 154 years (currently in the YFull) for one SNP get 6622 years. - almost no "children".

http://eng.molgen.org/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=1460&start=90

Here you can see that in this branch of the Central-European and West-Slavic demographic crisis lasted until around 200 AD! Only then is the tree began to branch (offspring survived to this day).Well, at least in the other three European branches of the family R1a was much better.

alan
09-16-2014, 07:19 PM
Early European farmers, including those in Iberia, showed clear affinities to the Near East in terms of mtDNA. Most Bell Beaker mtDNA samples are much less Near Eastern. This paper discusses the topic in detail.

Mitochondrial DNA from El Mirador Cave (Atapuerca, Spain) Reveals the Heterogeneity of Chalcolithic Populations (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105105)

My hunch is that Bell Beaker genomes won't be all that different from present-day Basques, but probably even more western.

So would it be fair to say that the bell beaker group might have been a rather exclusive in-breeding group.

alan
09-16-2014, 07:30 PM
Early European farmers, including those in Iberia, showed clear affinities to the Near East in terms of mtDNA. Most Bell Beaker mtDNA samples are much less Near Eastern. This paper discusses the topic in detail.

Mitochondrial DNA from El Mirador Cave (Atapuerca, Spain) Reveals the Heterogeneity of Chalcolithic Populations (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105105)

My hunch is that Bell Beaker genomes won't be all that different from present-day Basques, but probably even more western.

So what is that extra element that is less near eastern? Sorry to press you but I am too busy to dig into this right now.

BTW I dont think anyone has a problem that bell beaker has a SW European aspect as its currently believe the pots developed there - although I do believe the model it is derived from came from central Europe where similar forms are known earlier. I am perfectly happy with the concept of a genetic imput from there. What I struggle with is how R1b fits in. IMO it is pretty likely that R1b only joined to beaker somewhere further east. I personally suspect that the plano-occupital skulls are likely linked to R1b and these only join with beaker a century or two after the invention of the pots. I predict very early beaker males are G people and the joining of R1b with beakers and SW European mtDNA happened not only after the earliest phase but in a region further to the east - probably where the distinctive skulls appear around the Alps, central Europe, the Rhine etc.

ADW_1981
09-16-2014, 08:06 PM
So what is that extra element that is less near eastern? Sorry to press you but I am too busy to dig into this right now.

BTW I dont think anyone has a problem that bell beaker has a SW European aspect as its currently believe the pots developed there - although I do believe the model it is derived from came from central Europe where similar forms are known earlier. I am perfectly happy with the concept of a genetic imput from there. What I struggle with is how R1b fits in. IMO it is pretty likely that R1b only joined to beaker somewhere further east. I personally suspect that the plano-occupital skulls are likely linked to R1b and these only join with beaker a century or two after the invention of the pots. I predict very early beaker males are G people and the joining of R1b with beakers and SW European mtDNA happened not only after the earliest phase but in a region further to the east - probably where the distinctive skulls appear around the Alps, central Europe, the Rhine etc.

The Iberian Neolithic mtDNA is similar to that found in LBK, and presumably the LBKT and the Starcevo cultures presented a few weeks back. It should be noted, without any surprise, that the primary male package that came along with farmers was G-P15, and F* (F3?). Since we've already seen G-P15 appear in Iberian neolithic context, along with hunter-gatherer I-M26, the data all ties out nicely.

None of this actually answers anything about Bell Beaker, other than it doesn't appear to be linked genetically to the intial neolithic package.

Generalissimo
09-16-2014, 10:52 PM
So would it be fair to say that the bell beaker group might have been a rather exclusive in-breeding group.

I don't know, but it certainly wasn't a maternal culture of pot making women. In fact, it's often described as a culture of "big men", because the burials of Bell Beaker males were usually very elaborate.

So I'd say it was an expansion of men, who took women from Iberia with them into Central and Eastern Europe, but very quickly began mixing with local women in the east. This is probably why we can track the Bell Beaker expansion out of Iberia via mtDNA H, and in particular certain Atlantic-specific lineages of mtDNA H. But then we also see some surprising results, like those from the Kromsdorf burial site, where the mtDNA is very eastern, and none of the women are related to each other.

As things stand now, the Bell Beakers just appeared in Portugal out of nowhere, and then went on to have a profound impact on most of Europe. But they did carry R1b, as we know, and probably also were very similar to Basques in other ways, like mtDNA and genome-wide genetic structure. In fact, Bell Beaker mtDNA H lineages from Germany do cluster with those from Iberia, including Basque country.

The two most plausible theories I've seen posit that the pre-proto-Bell Beakers expanded from the Aegean region or from Northwest Africa. You'd think it'd be easy to work out by now whether one or the other was correct, but nope. Maybe it was both?

alan
09-17-2014, 12:07 AM
I don't know, but it certainly wasn't a maternal culture of pot making women. In fact, it's often described as a culture of "big men", because the burials of Bell Beaker males were usually very elaborate.

So I'd say it was an expansion of men, who took women from Iberia with them into Central and Eastern Europe, but very quickly began mixing with local women in the east. This is probably why we can track the Bell Beaker expansion out of Iberia via mtDNA H, and in particular certain Atlantic-specific lineages of mtDNA H. But then we also see some surprising results, like those from the Kromsdorf burial site, where the mtDNA is very eastern, and none of the women are related to each other.

As things stand now, the Bell Beakers just appeared in Portugal out of nowhere, and then went on to have a profound impact on most of Europe. But they did carry R1b, as we know, and probably also were very similar to Basques in other ways, like mtDNA and genome-wide genetic structure. In fact, Bell Beaker mtDNA H lineages from Germany do cluster with those from Iberia, including Basque country.

The two most plausible theories I've seen posit that the pre-proto-Bell Beakers expanded from the Aegean region or from Northwest Africa. You'd think it'd be easy to work out by now whether one or the other was correct, but nope. Maybe it was both?

The R1b bit is very hard to believe. Everything points east and south-east in terms of phylogeny and the spread west seems to be post or very end of the Neolithic. I am open to some sort of maritime Balkans to north Italy etc heading west model as a possible option among others which is similar to your Aegean suggestion. Problem is there is no simple clearcut evidence for such a movement archaeologically speaking.

I tend to look at the various branch shedding events like M73 and M269 from a branch then M269xL23 and L23xL51 and L51xL11 and although very hard to understand now these branchings do look like they took place progressively from east or SE to west. The various branch sheddings could have been very very gradual with the M73/M269 shedding probably happening way to the east in central Asia in the Mesolithic or earlier then the M269/L23 branching happening much further west in eastern or SE Europe in the Neolithic somewhere not on the main path of the farmers and so on with L51xL11 branch shed somewhere around Tyrol in the copper age. P312 of course seems to have been shed even a little further west. I think the basic pattern is pretty clear. I dont rule out entirely the possibility that P312 expanded from SW Europe with beakers but how on earth did it get there without leaving any strong signal? Right now the closest archaeological signal that matches M269 and its downstream spread and chronology, and its a rather vague on rather than a culture, is the tracking of copper spreading west. It does fit rather well.

R.Rocca
09-17-2014, 12:48 AM
I don't know, but it certainly wasn't a maternal culture of pot making women. In fact, it's often described as a culture of "big men", because the burials of Bell Beaker males were usually very elaborate.

So I'd say it was an expansion of men, who took women from Iberia with them into Central and Eastern Europe, but very quickly began mixing with local women in the east. This is probably why we can track the Bell Beaker expansion out of Iberia via mtDNA H, and in particular certain Atlantic-specific lineages of mtDNA H. But then we also see some surprising results, like those from the Kromsdorf burial site, where the mtDNA is very eastern, and none of the women are related to each other.

As things stand now, the Bell Beakers just appeared in Portugal out of nowhere, and then went on to have a profound impact on most of Europe. But they did carry R1b, as we know, and probably also were very similar to Basques in other ways, like mtDNA and genome-wide genetic structure. In fact, Bell Beaker mtDNA H lineages from Germany do cluster with those from Iberia, including Basque country.

The two most plausible theories I've seen posit that the pre-proto-Bell Beakers expanded from the Aegean region or from Northwest Africa. You'd think it'd be easy to work out by now whether one or the other was correct, but nope. Maybe it was both?

So you think there was an expansion of primarily WHG horse riders expanding out of NW Africa? You think that is a plausible scenario?

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 01:06 AM
So you think there was an expansion of primarily WHG horse riders expanding out of NW Africa? You think that is a plausible scenario?

It's very difficult to have clear cut opinions on this issue right now. But it's not impossible that the pre-Bell Beakers moved across the Sahara or Mediterranean, fused with native groups in parts of the Portuguese Atlantic coast, where perhaps WHG ancestry was at that time at a much higher level in the region than it is now, and then expanded as the Bell Beakers proper into Europe.

Maybe the clue is in the mtDNA of the Portuguese Chalcolithic population, which from memory shows a lot of U and clusters close to Hunter-Gatherer South (HGS) samples in a couple of studies.

And I don't know much about Iberian horses, but one thing that is certain is that modern DNA won't crack this mystery.

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 01:12 AM
This might be the BBC-WHG link.

http://imageshack.com/a/img631/9648/Nkhz89.png

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 01:25 AM
Hmm...


"Previous analysis on mitochondrial DNA from modern Iberian horses pointed to the D1 haplogroup as the most likely group involved in an independent domestication event, maybe in Iberia or in North Africa" explains Anders Götherström from the Department of Evolutionary Biology at Uppsala University, who headed the project together with Juan Luis Arsuaga of the Centro Mixto UCM-ISCIII from Madrid (Spain).

Wild Iberian horses contributed to origin of current Iberian domestic stock (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107114431.htm)

R.Rocca
09-17-2014, 01:29 AM
It's very difficult to have clear cut opinions on this issue right now. But it's not impossible that the pre-Bell Beakers moved across the Sahara or Mediterranean, fused with native groups in parts of the Portuguese Atlantic coast, where perhaps WHG ancestry was at that time at a much higher level in the region than it is now, and then expanded as the Bell Beakers proper into Europe.

Maybe the clue is in the mtDNA of the Portuguese Chalcolithic population, which from memory shows a lot of U and clusters close to Hunter-Gatherer South (HGS) samples in a couple of studies.

And I don't know much about Iberian horses, but one thing that is certain is that modern DNA won't crack this mystery.

Modern DNA does tell us one thing...that there is an easily observable trail of incremental R1b splits from the Balkans to Western Europe that do not exist in North Africa. It would take one about 5 minutes to understand it if one really wanted to.

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 02:13 AM
Modern DNA does tell us one thing...that there is an easily observable trail of incremental R1b splits from the Balkans to Western Europe that do not exist in North Africa. It would take one about 5 minutes to understand it if one really wanted to.

The trail might be buried underground, or even long gone with the wind, and the above mentioned impression of "incremental splits" might be the result of isolation-by-distance.

I think that when this story is finally cracked, it'll come out looking stranger than fiction, because the clues we have so far are pointing that way.

nuadha
09-17-2014, 02:24 AM
The trail might be buried underground, or even long gone with the wind, and the above mentioned impression of "incremental splits" might be the result of isolation-by-distance.

I think that when this story is finally cracked, it'll come out looking stranger than fiction, because the clues we have so far are pointing that way.

so you're going for the least likely explanation? forget that taunt. What would possible suggest north africa?

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 03:53 AM
so you're going for the least likely explanation? forget that taunt. What would possible suggest north africa?

For starters the archeology. Bell Beakers had a very early presence in North Africa, but this hasn't been studied very well yet.

The other reason is that the western Sahara is a totally different world to what it was during the Neolithic. In fact some breeds of cattle are thought to have entered Europe from North Africa via Iberia. Another potential link is mtDNA H.

It might seem a stretch now to think that a large part of the Western European gene pool is of ancient Saharan and Portuguese origin, and the emphasis there is on ancient, but it's not impossible. The secondary products revolution might have encouraged various groups from the Balkans and West Asia to push into the fertile Sahara and across the Mediterranean, and the proto-Bell Beakers might have been one of these groups.

nuadha
09-17-2014, 06:07 AM
For starters the archeology. Bell Beakers had a very early presence in North Africa, but this hasn't been studied very well yet.

The other reason is that the western Sahara is a totally different world to what it was during the Neolithic. In fact some breeds of cattle are thought to have entered Europe from North Africa via Iberia. Another potential link is mtDNA H.

It might seem a stretch now to think that a large part of the Western European gene pool is of ancient Saharan and Portuguese origin, and the emphasis there is on ancient, but it's not impossible. The secondary products revolution might have encouraged various groups from the Balkans and West Asia to push into the fertile Sahara and across the Mediterranean, and the proto-Bell Beakers might have been one of these groups.

Im pretty sure i sense trolling. Even your way of phrasing things seems a bit different here; I could be wrong though...

you think beakers came from north africa and they had r1b? but why?

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 06:48 AM
you think beakers came from north africa and they had r1b? but why?

I just said why. Or are you wanting a source?


It is therefore possible that the origin of the Bell Beaker phenomenon was based on the cultural communication between the northwest Africa and Estramadura.

Jan Turek, Origin of the Bell Beaker phenomenon: The Moroccan connection (https://www.academia.edu/1988928/Turek_J._2012_Chapter_8_-_Origin_of_the_Bell_Beaker_phenomenon._The_Morocca n_connection_In_Fokkens_H._and_F._Nicolis_eds_2012 _Background_to_Beakers._Inquiries_into_regional_cu ltural_backgrounds_of_the_Bell_Beaker_complex._Lei den_Sidestone_Press)

And why R1b? Two Bell Beaker skeletons belonged to R1b, and modern Basques and certain Iberian groups that share close links with Bell Beakers via specific mtDNA H lineages carry a lot of R1b.

Basques are basically dead ringers for Bell Beakers, as far as I can see right now. We should have evidence to that effect very soon.

alan
09-17-2014, 07:44 AM
Modern DNA does tell us one thing...that there is an easily observable trail of incremental R1b splits from the Balkans to Western Europe that do not exist in North Africa. It would take one about 5 minutes to understand it if one really wanted to.

I agree. I cannot see any reason for the completely counterintuitive idea of a spread across north Africa when there is a perfectly good trail of progressively shedding branches across Europe that goes from east to west. I dont think that can really be disputed. Its also getting very hard due to ancient DNA and various dating techniques to dispute the general timing of the spread from one of the shores around the Black Sea to the Atlantic must have fallen within the period 4000-2500BC. That does not rule out subsequent movement from SW Europe after R1b arrived there of course

alan
09-17-2014, 08:03 AM
I just said why. Or are you wanting a source?



Jan Turek, Origin of the Bell Beaker phenomenon: The Moroccan connection (https://www.academia.edu/1988928/Turek_J._2012_Chapter_8_-_Origin_of_the_Bell_Beaker_phenomenon._The_Morocca n_connection_In_Fokkens_H._and_F._Nicolis_eds_2012 _Background_to_Beakers._Inquiries_into_regional_cu ltural_backgrounds_of_the_Bell_Beaker_complex._Lei den_Sidestone_Press)

And why R1b? Two Bell Beaker skeletons belonged to R1b, and modern Basques and certain Iberian groups that share close links with Bell Beakers via specific mtDNA H lineages carry a lot of R1b.

Basques are basically dead ringers for Bell Beakers, as far as I can see right now. We should have evidence to that effect very soon.

That was an incredibly unconvincing article though. Anyone can see even at a glance that Bell beakers form much more closely resembles Corded Ware - which even dates to the right period to be have provided the prototype. The most obvious scenario I can think of is some corded ware women ended up heading west in some sort of networking between west central Europe and Iberia - probably seeking to get its hands on Iberias metal wealth. Indeed I still think a lot of the beaker phenomenon could be explained by specialist mobile clans in west central Europe acting as go betweens supplying their own zone in west central Europe by making journeys west and back to obtain metals produced by Iberia mines initially and then extending to other areas. At least in that sort of role we can explain the genes flow of mtDNA from west to east as well as R1b from east to west. It also explains the very very faint archaeological imprint of any such movement. After all it is the unprescidented mobility and networking that marks beaker apart rather than their metalwork which was not an advance on what went before. So, to me beaker clans provided mobility. That was their real advantage. Some of that could have been down to horses.

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 08:42 AM
That was an incredibly unconvincing article though.

Apparently it's convincing enough to get published in a major book about Bell Beakers. But in any case, it doesn't have to be convincing if it's true, because it's already happened.

What I find perplexing is how the Bell Beakers became women in the minds of some here, when for decades they were primarily known as the "big men" of the Copper Age, who even took their booze with them in their beakers into the afterlife and also, judging by their daggers, didn't mind a bit of biffo?

Why the need to feminize this culture all of a sudden?

palamede
09-17-2014, 09:17 AM
Don't forget Aquitani/Vasconi/Basque was not the only non indo-european language spoken in western europe signalled by antique erudition : Iberian, Tartessian ?, Sicane, Etruscan, Rhetian plus maybe local isolates ignored by greco-latin authors. A lot of greco-latin writers were compilers and not real searchers and small isolates could be ignored by the transmission (selected by Middle Age erudites) of antique knowledge.

The status of Ligurians remains incertain although the dominant idea gives Ligurian in Italo-celtic branch.

Other thinks I want to insist :
- People repeat the discovery of G2 and E-V13 in neolithic skeletons proves the origin from the Fertile Crescent. Not at all, before 7000BC, E-V13 and branchs of G2a were already in Balkans , E-V13 in South Balkans (including Greece) , G2a in lower Danube.
In fact, The haplogroup discoveries in Starcevo culture (the origin of linear pottery) are I2 the autochtonous paleolithic haplogroup and G2 the autochtonous mesolithic haplogroup which comes from Easter Black Sea to the mouthes of Danube probably before the flood of Black Sea by the break of Bosphorus.
South Balkans and Anatolian haplogroups were not concerned (or at a low level) by the initial birth and expansion of the Linear Pottery and certainly not immigrants from Fertile Crescent. There have been continental expansion of these haplogroups later.

- According to your opinion (Maybe based of your genetic datings), wave of IE languages could be come during Bell Beaker time; Maybe they propagate during Bell Beker time (2800-2000BC) but their archeology remains are not enough to say they imposed at the time. The turmoils of Bronze Age can hide a lot of things.


- Without intellectual rigour in the treatemnt of each subclade, it is possible to tell anything about mt H hapllogroup.

I am intrigued what the antique very numerous Lugians have become after antiquity and their connection with CW and Lusation cultures. Also the origin of Vandali (germanized Lugi or scandinavian migrants ? I prefer the first option).

Jean M
09-17-2014, 09:53 AM
What I find perplexing is how the Bell Beakers became women in the minds of some here, when for decades they were primarily known as the "big men" of the Copper Age, who even took their booze with them in their beakers into the afterlife and also, judging by their daggers, didn't mind a bit of biffo? Why the need to feminize this culture all of a sudden?

I know this will come as a big surprise to you David, but all cultures contain both men and women. :biggrin1: While the men are out strutting their stuff and waving their weapons about, someone has to keep the home fires burning, cook the food on them and stop the children running into them, otherwise you don't get another generation of he-men waggling their daggers. Pottery-making comes into the domestic sphere until it gets made on an industrial scale i.e. by specialist potters. CW pottery was hand-made by women in the home, as far as we know. It is not wheel-made. So there is no difference between CW and BB in that respect, although it is possible that the earliest Maritime BB pottery (in Portugal) was made by specialist potters. It is very regular.

As you so rightly say, pottery is only one aspect of a culture. Because pottery sherds are generally plentiful on archaeological sites, pottery has become the easiest way to identify a culture, but it can be a massive mistake to simply focus on pottery and nothing else in the attempt to find the origins of a culture. That has caused huge confusion in the case of Bell Beaker. Jan Turek's article is just one example of this trend. If we instead look at features that are really crucial to the economy and way of life of a culture, we would not make such egregious errors. Bell Beaker is found everywhere with evidence of metallurgy. That means that the people who made it originated in a metal-working zone. Metal-working did not start in Iberia. Nor did it travel there via Morocco.

We can follow the trail of a particular type of metallurgy (arsenic-copper alloys) from the steppe up the Danube into the Carpathian Basin and via northern Italy (Remedello) into southern France and then Iberia. Conveniently for us the trail is marked by several other features that make its origin in the steppe absolutely clear, most obviously anthropomorphic stelae of a particular type. The first copper-workers who reached Iberia were joined by others in a stream over the next three centuries or so, which included some women who made the first Bell Beaker ware, which has features found in the steppe and Carpathian Basin. Around 2400 BC the main centres in Portugal, such as Zambujal, were deserted, and Bell Beaker appeared at Ross Island arsenic-copper mine in Ireland, and at Csepel Island in the Carpathian Basin. These moves were probably marked mainly by R1b-DF27. But Bell Beaker was taken up by other P312 people in the Carpathian Basin (distant relatives), so the streams that moved out of the Basin and down the Rhine and also eastwards did not just carry DF27. One movement was back into Iberia, but the NE this time.

In short, it is all too complicated to burden this thread with. I scarcely dare hope that this paper will actually test any BB samples in Saxony-Anhalt to a deep enough level to be useful.

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 10:55 AM
We can follow the trail of a particular type of metallurgy (arsenic-copper alloys) from the steppe up the Danube into the Carpathian Basin and via northern Italy (Remedello) into southern France and then Iberia. Conveniently for us the trail is marked by several other features that make its origin in the steppe absolutely clear, most obviously anthropomorphic stelae of a particular type. The first copper-workers who reached Iberia were joined by others in a stream over the next three centuries or so, which included some women who made the first Bell Beaker ware, which has features found in the steppe and Carpathian Basin. Around 2400 BC the main centres in Portugal, such as Zambujal, were deserted, and Bell Beaker appeared at Ross Island arsenic-copper mine in Ireland, and at Csepel Island in the Carpathian Basin. These moves were probably marked mainly by R1b-DF27. But Bell Beaker was taken up by other P312 people in the Carpathian Basin (distant relatives), so the streams that moved out of the Basin and down the Rhine and also eastwards did not just carry DF27. One movement was back into Iberia, but the NE this time.

My impression is that copper smelting clearly precedes the Bell Beakers in Iberia, at settlements like Los Millares (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Millares), which eventually became part of the Bell Beaker world.


In short, it is all too complicated to burden this thread with. I scarcely dare hope that this paper will actually test any BB samples in Saxony-Anhalt to a deep enough level to be useful.

All we need is a couple hundred SNPs from several Bell Beakers to see if they land in the Atlantic or not. I bet they will.

Jean M
09-17-2014, 11:08 AM
My impression is that copper smelting clearly precedes the Bell Beakers in Iberia, at settlements like Los Millares, which eventually became part of the Bell Beaker world.

Exactly. That is just the point that I am making, which so many people find difficult to grasp, because they use pottery to identify cultures. It requires a mental readjustment to see that a culture does not necessarily start with a particular pottery style. People don't always behave in ways convenient for archaeologists! ;)

Jean M
09-17-2014, 11:19 AM
.. if they land in the Atlantic or not.

David you are still not getting the point. Suppose we have DF27 from ancient DNA in Saxony-Anhalt. That would be quite likely in my model. Today we have lots of DF27 in Iberia, and subclades of DF27 both in the south and north of Europe. We even have some from Poland. That scatter is what suggests that DF27 formed part of the movement of Bell Beaker makers from Iberia to the Carpathian Basin. But it does not tell us how R1b-P312 (parent of DF27) got to Iberia. It wasn't born in Iberia. The trail of R1b subclades leads from the east westwards in Europe, as Richard Rocca has been trying to explain.

L21 for example is the main R1b subclade in the British Isles. It does not decend from DF27. U152 is a common subclade of R1b in Italy. It does not descend from DF27.

I realise that this is all very complex to follow without a map, so here is one, though pretty out of date:

2627

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 11:48 AM
Suppose we have DF27 from ancient DNA in Saxony-Anhalt.

What if we have an R1b-M269* from ancient DNA in Saxony-Anhalt, and this sample clusters near Sardinians, Basques and Northwest Africans on a West Eurasian PCA?

That'll be interesting. Probably as interesting as an Upper Paleolithic Siberian with R* closely related to both Europeans and Native Americans. Interesting stuff like that happens when ancient DNA is tested.

Let's reconvene in four weeks.

parasar
09-17-2014, 01:40 PM
What if we have an R1b-M269* from ancient DNA in Saxony-Anhalt, and this sample clusters near Sardinians, Basques and Northwest Africans on a West Eurasian PCA?

That'll be interesting. Probably as interesting as an Upper Paleolithic Siberian with R* closely related to both Europeans and Native Americans. Interesting stuff like that happens when ancient DNA is tested.

Let's reconvene in four weeks.

Quite possible as R1b in Europe correlates best with EEF rather than ANE.

ADW_1981
09-17-2014, 01:49 PM
Quite possible as R1b in Europe correlates best with EEF rather than ANE.

I think we'll find at the time when R1b entered Europe and took wives wherever they settled, they were already a mosaic of WHG/EEF/ANE. Probably in that order.

alan
09-17-2014, 01:53 PM
Apparently it's convincing enough to get published in a major book about Bell Beakers. But in any case, it doesn't have to be convincing if it's true, because it's already happened.

What I find perplexing is how the Bell Beakers became women in the minds of some here, when for decades they were primarily known as the "big men" of the Copper Age, who even took their booze with them in their beakers into the afterlife and also, judging by their daggers, didn't mind a bit of biffo?

Why the need to feminize this culture all of a sudden?

There simply has to be a way of splicing a west to east pot type with an east to west phylogeny of R1b. There is no problem is saying P312 got could have expanded from SW Europe - its a possibility. That is not the problem at all. However, there is a problem in explaining how R1b got there in the first place when it clearly came from somewhere way to the east in the copper age. It could be linked to the spread of copper smelting which did go roughly from Balkans (and possible Iran and Anatolia) c.5000BC and crossed the Alps and made it to Portugal in the period c. 4000-3000BC. That is a possibility. If its just a lineage of copper traders and workers then they would melt into whatever culture they moved into. I have also suggested that the big change we see in the beaker phase is not copper but mobility. So, whoever added new things such as horse riding clearly could be related to that mobility. Often these days it is transpiring that a lot of change has to do with technological innovation and the change between the pre-beaker copper using groups and the beaker network could be something as simple as horses.

R.Rocca
09-17-2014, 01:54 PM
The trail might be buried underground, or even long gone with the wind, and the above mentioned impression of "incremental splits" might be the result of isolation-by-distance.

It looks like you are the only one burying it underground. You can argue for isolation-by-distance all you want, but it does not explain five incremental splits going from east-to-west (M269 > L23 > L51 > L11 > P312/U106) and six if you want to throw the Central Asian M73 in there for good measure.


For starters the archaeology. Bell Beakers had a very early presence in North Africa, but this hasn't been studied very well yet.

Again, you are arguing by exception. Show me one credible archaeologist that thinks Bell Beaker started in NW Africa and I'll show you 100 that believe in either an Iberian or Dutch origin for Bell Beakers, with a minority placing it in Hungary.


What I find perplexing is how the Bell Beakers became women in the minds of some here, when for decades they were primarily known as the "big men" of the Copper Age, who even took their booze with them in their beakers into the afterlife and also, judging by their daggers, didn't mind a bit of biffo?

The dagger trail from North-West Italy > Southern France > Los Millares has been covered quite well here, and would follow the L23(xL51) > L51(xL11) split quite well without some fantasy about mythical north Africans that spontaneously learned how to ride horses and smelt copper into prestige knives and axes.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1361-A-deeper-think-about-beakers-and-genes&p=14465&viewfull=1#post14465

http://r1b.org/imgs/Pre-Beaker_Copper_Daggers_Spread.png


What if we have an R1b-M269* from ancient DNA in Saxony-Anhalt, and this sample clusters near Sardinians, Basques and Northwest Africans on a West Eurasian PCA?

Considering that we already know that Moroccan and Maghreb populations do not plot anywhere near Basques, and that Basques do not plot with Sardinians on a European scale, your scenario is a complete impossibility.

alan
09-17-2014, 01:57 PM
My impression is that copper smelting clearly precedes the Bell Beakers in Iberia, at settlements like Los Millares (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Millares), which eventually became part of the Bell Beaker world.



All we need is a couple hundred SNPs from several Bell Beakers to see if they land in the Atlantic or not. I bet they will.

We know P312 'landed' in the Atlantic. That is not really in question. What is in question is

1. How did it get there and where did it comes from - I would say its first position within Old Europe was the Balkans for a number of different models and it fits the phylogenic geography of European M269.

2. Was there then a secondary expansion from Iberia or was Iberia just another terminus.

alan
09-17-2014, 02:06 PM
It looks like you are the only one burying it underground. You can argue for isolation-by-distance all you want, but it does not explain five incremental splits going from east-to-west (M269 > L23 > L51 > L11 > P312/U106) and six if you want to throw the Central Asian M73 in there for good measure.



Again, you are arguing by exception. Show me one credible archaeologist that thinks Bell Beaker started in Africa and I'll show you 100 believe in either an Iberian or Dutch origin for Bell Beakers, with a minority placing it in Hungary.



The dagger trail from North-West Italy > Southern France > Los Millares has been covered quite well here, and would follow the L23(xL51) > L51(xL11) split quite well without some fantasy about mythical north Africans that spontaneously learned how to ride horses and smelt copper into prestige knives and axes.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1361-A-deeper-think-about-beakers-and-genes&p=14465&viewfull=1#post14465

http://r1b.org/imgs/Pre-Beaker_Copper_Daggers_Spread.png



Considering that we already know that Moroccan and Maghreb populations do not plot anywhere near Basques, and that Basques do not plot with Sardinians on a European scale, your scenario is a complete impossibility.


I have wondered about the significance of that map myself and posted it before. I think it could represent a spread of a lineage with a particular warrior ideology. )Its also spread in tandem with the spread of copper past the Adriatic and of course the the Remedello dagger does appear on stelae the whole length of the Alps. Remedello has been described by some people as a southern equivalent of corded ware in terms of the changes in behavour and evidence of warrior elite and individualism. There are also those beaker type skulls in that culture which appear from nowhere.

What is clear is there is no evidence of a unifying complete culture wave so if this really was the spread of R1b west it could only be small clans who quickly took on local cultural 'clothes' making the trail a lot more fuzzy than is desirable. I think unless something off the wall like R1b turns up in corded ware then we are looking at a low visibility spread of R1b from SE Europe to the west and it remains hard to see until beaker pottery becomes attached to R1b and acts as a kind of tracking device.

parasar
09-17-2014, 02:18 PM
I think we'll find at the time when R1b entered Europe and took wives wherever they settled, they were already a mosaic of WHG/EEF/ANE. Probably in that order.

Does not look like it. Populations (Basques, Sardinians) even today that have a lot of R1b, have low ANE, and can be modeled as a simple WHG+EEF admixture. IMO, R1b is some parts of Europe has to be older than the period when ANE entered the central regions of Europe.

nuadha
09-17-2014, 02:28 PM
And why R1b? Two Bell Beaker skeletons belonged to R1b, and modern Basques and certain Iberian groups that share close links with Bell Beakers via specific mtDNA H lineages carry a lot of R1b.

Basques are basically dead ringers for Bell Beakers, as far as I can see right now. We should have evidence to that effect very soon.

ok, so its just because you think bell beakers started out in north africa not r1b itself.

nuadha
09-17-2014, 02:48 PM
Needless to say I disagree based on the presence of mt-DNA H in Guipuzcoa(Unpublished from Thesis), Karelia, and the Samara(David Reich personal communication) Mesolithic Samples.

wow, thats really cool. can you give links and a quote?

jeanL
09-17-2014, 03:58 PM
wow, thats really cool. can you give links and a quote?

To which one specifically?

jeanL
09-17-2014, 04:13 PM
It looks like you are the only one burying it underground. You can argue for isolation-by-distance all you want, but it does not explain five incremental splits going from east-to-west (M269 > L23 > L51 > L11 > P312/U106) and six if you want to throw the Central Asian M73 in there for good measure.

Considering R1b-M269(xL23), R1b-L23(xL51), R1b-L51(xL11), and even R1b-P25* parahaplogroup found in Europe by numerous studies, the trail vanishes. All the trail hangs on is an inflated frequency of R1b-P312+, R1b-U106+ derived clades in Western Europe, thus all we can conclude from the trail was that R1b-P312/U106 were not born outside of Europe. None of the R1b-M269*, R1b-L23*, etc are ancestral to anything, they are derived lineages with their own private, and non-private SNPs, and that is what we have seen now with full genome sequencing of the Y-Chromosome. East Europe/West Asia has greater proportions of the pre-L11 clades, but frequency does not equal origin, which is why the argument of R1b=Basques=Paleolithic fails right?? Also why some people can envision the steppe as the place of origin of R1b-PIE link, even though there is barely any R1b clades in there, because modern frequencies are not useful in this case. Thus the fact that Western Europe does show pre-L11 clades, albeit at much lower frequency is a testament that such clades were widespread. All we know for sure the following in Western Europe Mr.P312 was a whole lot more successful that his cousins at producing offsprings, in Iberia Mr-DF27 was a lot more successful that his cousin in producing offsprings.

The point is, either we stick to frequency doesn't matter(i.e. Basques/English/Irish= high R1b-P312+=/=Origin there||Eastern Europe/West Asia relatively higher R1b-(xL11) clades=/=origin there), or with stick with it does matter, we stick with modern frequencies(Basques/English/French frequencies vs. Steppe frequency), or we don't count it. Let's stay consistent in the arguments!

What's my take on this mess? The modern distribution of the R1b clades are the byproduct of them being in the right place at the right time.

ADW_1981
09-17-2014, 04:42 PM
Does not look like it. Populations (Basques, Sardinians) even today that have a lot of R1b, have low ANE, and can be modeled as a simple WHG+EEF admixture. IMO, R1b is some parts of Europe has to be older than the period when ANE entered the central regions of Europe.

These algorithms will spit out results differently depending on how you model the data. I agree that there would be low % ANE with R1b, but I don't think using endogamous or isolated populations is really a good measure of the ancient populations. Some of the modeling show low % ANE with the Basque.

In the case of Sardinia which is modeled as 0% ANE, across the water in Italy where there is much higher R1b content, we have low % ANE rather than flat out zero. I don't think most people consider R1b a neolithic age immigrant to Sardinia anymore.

ADW_1981
09-17-2014, 04:47 PM
Also why some people can envision the steppe as the place of origin of R1b-PIE link, even though there is barely any R1b clades in there, because modern frequencies are not useful in this case

We actually have very little steppe YDNA, despite all these studies. There has been some Tarim Basin & Siberian R1a1a aDNA retrieved, but I don't suspect that's conclusive of the very wide region that is Central Asia.

Joe B
09-17-2014, 04:54 PM
Considering R1b-M269(xL23), R1b-L23(xL51), R1b-L51(xL11), and even R1b-P25* parahaplogroup found in Europe by numerous studies, the trail vanishes. All the trail hangs on is an inflated frequency of R1b-P312+, R1b-U106+ derived clades in Western Europe, thus all we can conclude from the trail was that R1b-P312/U106 were not born outside of Europe. None of the R1b-M269*, R1b-L23*, etc are ancestral to anything, they are derived lineages with their own private, and non-private SNPs, and that is what we have seen now with full genome sequencing of the Y-Chromosome. East Europe/West Asia has greater proportions of the pre-L11 clades, but frequency does not equal origin, which is why the argument of R1b=Basques=Paleolithic fails right?? Also why some people can envision the steppe as the place of origin of R1b-PIE link, even though there is barely any R1b clades in there, because modern frequencies are not useful in this case. Thus the fact that Western Europe does show pre-L11 clades, albeit at much lower frequency is a testament that such clades were widespread. All we know for sure the following in Western Europe Mr.P312 was a whole lot more successful that his cousins at producing offsprings, in Iberia Mr-DF27 was a lot more successful that his cousin in producing offsprings.

The point is, either we stick to frequency doesn't matter(i.e. Basques/English/Irish= high R1b-P312+=/=Origin there||Eastern Europe/West Asia relatively higher R1b-(xL11) clades=/=origin there), or with stick with it does matter, we stick with modern frequencies(Basques/English/French frequencies vs. Steppe frequency), or we don't count it. Let's stay consistent in the arguments!

What's my take on this mess? The modern distribution of the R1b clades are the byproduct of them being in the right place at the right time.
Just wanted to make the point that the R1b-Z2103 (L23*) subclades in western Europe look like fairly recent arrivals. What I can't figure out is how did R1b-U106 and R1b-P312 get to Western Europe and not take the R1b-L23* subclades like R1b-Z2103 with them?

jeanL
09-17-2014, 05:05 PM
I have collected the following averages for ANE in different Spanish subpopulation ordered from most to least ANE, given that R1b shows a distribution pattern in Iberia, anyone want to take a look at the correlation between R1b-ANE in Iberia.

Population n ANE
Spanish_Cataluna (n=5) 8.71%
Spanish_Baleares (n=8) 8.43%
Spanish_Cantabria (n=6) 8.41%
Spanish_Extremadura (n=8) 8.33%
Spanish_Valencia (n=10) 8.30%
Spanish_Galicia (n=8) 8.15%
Spanish_Pais_Vasco (n=8) 7.93%
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha (n=4) 7.88%
Spanish_Aragon (n=5) 7.72%
Spanish_Andalucia (n=4) 7.66%
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon (n=12) 7.63%
French_Basque (n=21) 7.24%
Spanish_Murcia (n=6) 7.09%
Spanish_Canarias (n=2) 5.98%

jeanL
09-17-2014, 05:06 PM
Just wanted to make the point that the R1b-Z2103 (L23*) subclades in western Europe look like fairly recent arrivals. What I can't figure out is how did R1b-U106 and R1b-P312 get to Western Europe and not take the R1b-L23* subclades like R1b-Z2103 with them?

Based on what are you assuming that R1b-Z2103 clades in Western Europe look like recent arrivals?

R.Rocca
09-17-2014, 05:12 PM
Considering R1b-M269(xL23), R1b-L23(xL51), R1b-L51(xL11), and even R1b-P25* parahaplogroup found in Europe by numerous studies, the trail vanishes. All the trail hangs on is an inflated frequency of R1b-P312+, R1b-U106+ derived clades in Western Europe, thus all we can conclude from the trail was that R1b-P312/U106 were not born outside of Europe. None of the R1b-M269*, R1b-L23*, etc are ancestral to anything, they are derived lineages with their own private, and non-private SNPs, and that is what we have seen now with full genome sequencing of the Y-Chromosome. East Europe/West Asia has greater proportions of the pre-L11 clades, but frequency does not equal origin, which is why the argument of R1b=Basques=Paleolithic fails right?? Also why some people can envision the steppe as the place of origin of R1b-PIE link, even though there is barely any R1b clades in there, because modern frequencies are not useful in this case. Thus the fact that Western Europe does show pre-L11 clades, albeit at much lower frequency is a testament that such clades were widespread. All we know for sure the following in Western Europe Mr.P312 was a whole lot more successful that his cousins at producing offsprings, in Iberia Mr-DF27 was a lot more successful that his cousin in producing offsprings.

The point is, either we stick to frequency doesn't matter(i.e. Basques/English/Irish= high R1b-P312+=/=Origin there||Eastern Europe/West Asia relatively higher R1b-(xL11) clades=/=origin there), or with stick with it does matter, we stick with modern frequencies(Basques/English/French frequencies vs. Steppe frequency), or we don't count it. Let's stay consistent in the arguments!

What's my take on this mess? The modern distribution of the R1b clades are the byproduct of them being in the right place at the right time.

Sorry, to disappoint you, but I didn't say any of those clades weren't born in Europe, as I have been favoring the Balkans for the earlier clades for years. What I said is that the splits mark a clear east to west pattern. Certainly those splits produce other brother clades, but you can't argue that Iberia kept throwing incremental R1b subclades out to the rest of Europe every thousand years or so, only to have all of Iberia's old clades die off with only the descendants of the most recent split (P312) surviving. And to boot, all of those earlier out-of-Iberia movements somehow escape ancient DNA? Again...probability=zero. The earliest possible subclade of R1b that has a shot at being born in Iberia in something like a Los Millares context is P312*, and even that would only work with an L11 origin somewhere more to the east.

jeanL
09-17-2014, 05:26 PM
Sorry, to disappoint you, but I didn't say any of those clades weren't born in Europe, as I have been favoring the Balkans for the earlier clades for years. What I said is that the splits mark a clear east to west pattern. Certainly those splits produce other brother clades, but you can't argue that Iberia kept throwing incremental R1b subclades out to the rest of Europe every thousand years or so, only to have all of Iberia's old clades die off with only the descendants of the most recent split (P312) surviving. And to boot, all of those earlier out-of-Iberia movements somehow escape ancient DNA? Again...probability=zero. The earliest possible subclade of R1b that has a shot at being born in Iberia in something like a Los Millares context is P312*, and even that would only work with an L11 origin somewhere more to the east.

1-Your assumption that I believe R1b was born in Iberia==Wrong! I never express such beliefs.

2-Probability=0 is a pretty bold statement. Wanna see a non-zero probability scenario for R1b-M269 being born in Western Europe:

R1b-M269 10,000 BC-6000 BC found in European hunter gatherers becomes widespread in Europe and Western Asia, albeit in low frequency.
R1b-L23 is born in Western Europe at some point 5000 BC again widespread in Europe and Western Asia, albeit in low frequency
R1b-L11 is born in Western Europe at some point 4000 BC.
R1b-P312 takes part in the Beaker process, out reproduces its cousins in most of Western Europe.
Result of such process: The current day distribution of R1b subclades.

Yes scenario is simplistic(We are by far very complex beings, thus anything could have happened it terms of the migrations of R1b inside of Europe), now it definitely doesn't have zero probability. Don't really have much time right now to discuss the issue, but I'll be lurking around from time to time, so if anything, I'll reply over the weekend.

R.Rocca
09-17-2014, 05:36 PM
1-Your assumption that I believe R1b was born in Iberia==Wrong! I never express such beliefs.

2-Probability=0 is a pretty bold statement. Wanna see a non-zero probability scenario for R1b-M269 being born in Western Europe:

R1b-M269 10,000 BC-6000 BC found in European hunter gatherers becomes widespread in Europe and Western Asia, albeit in low frequency.
R1b-L23 is born in Western Europe at some point 5000 BC again widespread in Europe and Western Asia, albeit in low frequency
R1b-L11 is born in Western Europe at some point 4000 BC.
R1b-P312 takes part in the Beaker process, out reproduces its cousins in most of Western Europe.
Result of such process: The current day distribution of R1b subclades.

Yes scenario is simplistic(We are by far very complex beings, thus anything could have happened it terms of the migrations of R1b inside of Europe), now it definitely doesn't have zero probability. Don't really have much time right now to discuss the issue, but I'll be lurking around from time to time, so if anything, I'll reply over the weekend.

If you add to your scenario the relatively close relation of R1a and R1b on the tree, that both wind up being overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking and expanding from opposite direction at exactly the same time, and that both have been absent in pre-Copper Age ancient DNA...yeah I would say the probability is pretty close to zero.

Joe B
09-17-2014, 06:39 PM
Based on what are you assuming that R1b-Z2103 clades in Western Europe look like recent arrivals?Lack of numbers. There is no reason why the R1b-Z2103 subclades shouldn't be as numerous as the R1b-U106 and R1b-P312 subclades if they arrived at the same time. Infact, the numbers are even lower if you factor out the surname projects. Furthermore, most of the haplotypes that site a West European ancestry are American or Caribbean colonial without a strong linneage in Western Europe. They are mostly R1b-Z2110/CTS7822 and R1b-CTS9219 and these subclades are found with greater numbers in the Balkans and Eastern Europe. There is nothing to suggest that good numbers of R1b-Z2110/CTS7822 and R1b-CTS9219 will not be found in Anatolia too, just like the other R1b-Z2103 subclades. One Armenian has tested Z2110/CTS7822 positive already.
There just is not any evidence to suggest that R1b-L584 and R1b-L277 are indigenous to Europe without a stretch of logic.
Have a look at the R1b1a2 (P312- U106-) DNA Project and it's obvious that Western Europe just does not have the diversity of subclades or STRs that we find in Anatolia, the Caucasus or the Balkans
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/default.aspx?section=yresults

MJost
09-17-2014, 06:47 PM
Since there is a discussion concerning BB trade relationships and cultural preferences I would like to know if there are any other correlating patterns of amber supply and use?

Amber Sources and Trade in the Prehistory of the Iberian Peninsula
MERCEDES MURILLO-BARROSO and MARCOS MARTINÓN-TORRES
European Journal of Archaeology 15 (2) 2012, 187–216
Published by Maney (c) European Association of Archaeologists

https://www.academia.edu/1223052/AMBER_BETWEEN_THE_BALTIC_AND_THE_AEGEAN

"The use of amber is documented in the Iberian peninsula since the Palaeolithic. The procurement and trade of this fossil resin has often been considered in discussions of long-distance trade and the emergence of social complexity, but so far no comprehensive view of the Iberian evidence has been produced to allow a more overarching interpretive model. This paper presents the Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) characterization of archaeological amber from three Iberian prehistoric sites: a necklace recovered from the megalithic site of Palacio III (Almadeń de la Plata, Sevilla), a pommel from PP4 Montelirio (Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla), and a necklace from the Muricecs de Cellers cave (Llimiana, Pallars Jussà, Lleida). Based on these new data and a review of the literature, we present an overview that outlines fluctuations in the use of amber since the Upper Palaeolithic and demonstrates long-distance amber exchange connecting Iberia with northern Europe and the Mediterranean region since the Chalcolithic period at least. We discuss changes in the origins and cultural use of amber and their implications for the consolidation of trade networks."

MJost

Atimeres
09-17-2014, 07:08 PM
......... Its also getting very hard due to ancient DNA and various dating techniques to dispute the general timing of the spread from one of the shores around the Black Sea to the Atlantic must have fallen within the period 4000-2500BC. That does not rule out subsequent movement from SW Europe after R1b arrived there of course
We look at this experimental table of the haplogroups time:
http://www.tropie.tarnow.opoka.org.pl/images/hg_time.jpg
In the vertical betwen R1-M173 (split) and R1a-Z280 (emersion) we see 30 SNPs.
R1a-Z280 emergence 3200 yBC.

In the vertical betwen R1-M173 (split) and R1b-U106 or P312 (emersion) is 29 SNPs

R1a-Z280 and R1b-U106, and R1b-P312 that's peers.
Their ascent of about 3200 yBC

( The numbers of SNPs according to the tree Yfull: http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1 )

vettor
09-17-2014, 08:03 PM
We look at this experimental table of the haplogroups time:
http://www.tropie.tarnow.opoka.org.pl/images/hg_time.jpg
In the vertical betwen R1-M173 (split) and R1a-Z280 (emersion) we see 30 SNPs.
R1a-Z280 emergence 3200 yBC.

In the vertical betwen R1-M173 (split) and R1b-U106 or P312 (emersion) is 29 SNPs

R1a-Z280 and R1b-U106, and R1b-P312 that's peers.
Their ascent of about 3200 yBC

( The numbers of SNPs according to the tree Yfull: http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1 )


so the 1 SNP between K-M9 to K2-M526 which is 2800 years means what?..................is 2800 years a long time for 1 SNP to emerge?

vettor
09-17-2014, 08:07 PM
I have collected the following averages for ANE in different Spanish subpopulation ordered from most to least ANE, given that R1b shows a distribution pattern in Iberia, anyone want to take a look at the correlation between R1b-ANE in Iberia.

Population n ANE
Spanish_Cataluna (n=5) 8.71%
Spanish_Baleares (n=8) 8.43%
Spanish_Cantabria (n=6) 8.41%
Spanish_Extremadura (n=8) 8.33%
Spanish_Valencia (n=10) 8.30%
Spanish_Galicia (n=8) 8.15%
Spanish_Pais_Vasco (n=8) 7.93%
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha (n=4) 7.88%
Spanish_Aragon (n=5) 7.72%
Spanish_Andalucia (n=4) 7.66%
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon (n=12) 7.63%
French_Basque (n=21) 7.24%
Spanish_Murcia (n=6) 7.09%
Spanish_Canarias (n=2) 5.98%

big numbers in an area does not indicate origin of that marker............there is 17% R1a in Berber land ( morocco ), this is a product of vandal settlement from the barbarian invasion times .....

vettor
09-17-2014, 08:14 PM
What if we have an R1b-M269* from ancient DNA in Saxony-Anhalt, and this sample clusters near Sardinians, Basques and Northwest Africans on a West Eurasian PCA?

That'll be interesting. Probably as interesting as an Upper Paleolithic Siberian with R* closely related to both Europeans and Native Americans. Interesting stuff like that happens when ancient DNA is tested.

Let's reconvene in four weeks.

In human genetics, * is used to denote that someone is a member of a haplogroup and not any of its subclades

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragroup

R* is noted as such because it will never have any subclades from it and none have ever been found

So, its neither R1 or R2 , it has no association with either

RCO
09-17-2014, 08:38 PM
Just wanted to make the point that the R1b-Z2103 (L23*) subclades in western Europe look like fairly recent arrivals. What I can't figure out is how did R1b-U106 and R1b-P312 get to Western Europe and not take the R1b-L23* subclades like R1b-Z2103 with them?

They were different waves, they were different mobile pulses of R1b. They were in different places because they took different routes. European R1b-U106 and R1b-P312 arrived directly from the R1b-L11 Eastern European Steppes through the Middle Danube Valley towards Austria, Southern Germany and Northern Italy while Z2103 made their way to the Caucasus, Anatolia, Balkans and the Northern Middle East. I think the movements of R1b were more like pulses (just like the movement of R1b-V88 in Africa) than an entire regular moving frontier. Whenever R1b met established agricultural organized density (just like the old peopled Middle Eastern regions ) R1b circumnavigated towards new sparsely populated spaces. In Europe we can observe the R1b-U106 concentration in Germany and the R1b-U152, R1b-L21 and specially the R1b-DF27 (reaching Iberia and bouncing back to the North) pulses in Western Atlantic Europe also expanding the old H and H1 mtDNA.

Generalissimo
09-17-2014, 09:01 PM
Again, you are arguing by exception. Show me one credible archaeologist that thinks Bell Beaker started in NW Africa and I'll show you 100 that believe in either an Iberian or Dutch origin for Bell Beakers, with a minority placing it in Hungary.

Bell Beakers started in Portugal, but proto-Bell Beakers might have been partly of North African origin. I already posted one excerpt from a book on Bell Beakers to that effect, and here's another one:


Although the origin of the Bell Beakers was at the Tagus estuary, I take it that a major decorative inspiration came from North Africa, where copper metallurgy may already have been in progress in the fourth millennium BC.
Link (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=qKSVAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=Bell+Beaker+North+Africa+copper&source=bl&ots=0ePs_8yztU&sig=nWO8GlG1ad_WdB1_ttQKGIgEIW0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LPMZVN_YLoGi8AXNyYGwBg&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Bell%20Beaker%20North%20Africa%20copper&f=false)

It seems like Jean's criticism of Turek's theories might have been premature.

Also...


However, at Bolores there is some indication that there may have been demographic exchanges between southern Iberian and North African populations during the Late Neolithic/Copper Age.

Link (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X13001613)


The dagger trail from North-West Italy > Southern France > Los Millares has been covered quite well here, and would follow the L23(xL51) > L51(xL11) split quite well without some fantasy about mythical north Africans that spontaneously learned how to ride horses and smelt copper into prestige knives and axes.

Although interesting, this is not the proto-Beaker trail.


Considering that we already know that Moroccan and Maghreb populations do not plot anywhere near Basques, and that Basques do not plot with Sardinians on a European scale, your scenario is a complete impossibility.

That's not true. Basques, Sardinians and Northwest Africans are very similar, with the main difference being that the latter have relatively high levels of Sub-Saharan ancestry.

All three groups share the same ancient West Mediterranean genetic components, and can be modeled as 0% ANE, which is why they come out so western on West Eurasian PCA.

nuadha
09-17-2014, 11:31 PM
To which one specifically?

both! I'd like to know about the H in Spain and the H at Samara, and what Reich said

nuadha
09-17-2014, 11:59 PM
Does not look like it. Populations (Basques, Sardinians) even today that have a lot of R1b, have low ANE, and can be modeled as a simple WHG+EEF admixture. IMO, R1b is some parts of Europe has to be older than the period when ANE entered the central regions of Europe.

The basque are at the western end. Clearly eastern beakers autosomal component could get diluted while still carrying significant r1b westwards. You should not lose site of the big picture. Western europe needs r1b, ANE, and indo-european, around the same time. These three things show strong connections overall.

but if you do expect the ydna to tell the autosomal story in every instance, face value, then you reach a dead end right away. there is no ydna lineage absent in basque and present, uniformly, in other europeans around 14%.

R.Rocca
09-18-2014, 12:17 AM
Bell Beakers started in Portugal, but proto-Bell Beakers might have been partly of North African origin. I already posted one excerpt from a book on Bell Beakers to that effect, and here's another one:

Link (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=qKSVAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=Bell+Beaker+North+Africa+copper&source=bl&ots=0ePs_8yztU&sig=nWO8GlG1ad_WdB1_ttQKGIgEIW0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LPMZVN_YLoGi8AXNyYGwBg&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Bell%20Beaker%20North%20Africa%20copper&f=false)

It seems like Jean's criticism of Turek's theories might have been premature.

Also...

Link (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X13001613)



Like I said, I can post several hundred resources that favor an Iberian or Dutch origin for Bell Beaker for every North African one that you can produce, so it's pretty pointless.


Although interesting, this is not the proto-Beaker trail.

It's infinitely more probable than anything you've posted so far as it has male Y-DNA phylogeny on its side. Considering you are as genetics-obsessed as we all are, you have yet to produce anything based on Y-DNA genetics that supports your North African idea, or to refute the Y-DNA trail I mentioned.


That's not true. Basques, Sardinians and Northwest Africans are very similar, with the main difference being that the latter have relatively high levels of Sub-Saharan ancestry.

Maybe it's a matter of semantics, but when a population has substantial levels of a component that another lacks, then they are not "very similar".


All three groups share the same ancient West Mediterranean genetic components, and can be modeled as 0% ANE, which is why they come out so western on West Eurasian PCA.

Scientifically speaking, when a population "can be" modeled without a certain component, does it mean that they "should be"?

Generalissimo
09-18-2014, 12:46 AM
Like I said, I can post several hundred resources that favor an Iberian or Dutch origin for Bell Beaker for every North African one that you can produce, so it's pretty pointless.

There is a very solid grounding to the possibilty that Bell Beakers formed as a result of cultural and genetic contacts between parts of Portugal and North Africa. This is not pointless. Why would you suggest it's pointless?

Perhaps you find it offensive in some way? But if it's true, then it's already happened, so discussing it won't change the outcome and there's no point getting annoyed about it.


It's infinitely more probable than anything you've posted so far as it has male Y-DNA phylogeny on its side. Considering you are as genetics-obsessed as we all are, you have yet to produce anything based on Y-DNA genetics that supports your North African idea, or to refute the Y-DNA trail I mentioned.

That's your opinion, and you're free to express it here if you like. But don't try and convince me, for instance, that Chalcolithic Northwest Africans didn't know copper or horses and then attempt to use that as part of your argument, because mainstream academic sources suggest otherwise.


Maybe it's a matter of semantics, but when a population has substantial levels of a component that another lacks, then they are not "very similar".

Look, Basques, Sardinians and Northwest Africans share some very obvious and recent ancestry, and not even the substantial Sub-Saharan African admixture among the Northwest Africans can mask this in many analyses. This fact can't be ignored when looking at the population history of the western Med.


Scientifically speaking, when a population "can be" modeled without a certain component, does it mean that they "should be"?

Sure, why not test all the possibilites?

Atimeres
09-18-2014, 05:31 AM
so the 1 SNP between K-M9 to K2-M526 which is 2800 years means what?..................is 2800 years a long time for 1 SNP to emerge?No!
From the K-M9 emergence to the K-M9 split (i.e. to K2-M526) is 17 SNPs.
17 SNPs x 154 is 2600 years.
The table is just showing.

aarnisotka
09-18-2014, 07:27 AM
Quite possible as R1b in Europe correlates best with EEF rather than ANE.

Well bit of a stretch. If you absolutely want to connect R1b with a autosomal component, then perhaps the Basque like EEF component could be a candidate. But note that the Basque like EEF component is not the only EEF component in Europe, there exist at least two major farmer components in Europe, one being Basque like and the other mideast proper/caucasus like. R1b today correlates somewhat only with the Basque like EEF component.

Jean M
09-18-2014, 11:53 AM
But don't try and convince me, for instance, that Chalcolithic Northwest Africans didn't know copper or horses

Of course they did know about copper after the Bell Beaker people arrived. That's what the word Chalcolithic means. But they didn't know before. The pottery that caught Jan Turik's eye was Late Neolithic.

Generalissimo
09-18-2014, 12:01 PM
Of course they did know about copper after the Bell Beaker people arrived. That's what the word Chalcolithic means. But they didn't know before. The pottery that caught Jan Turik's eye was Late Neolithic.

Copper metallurgy was known in Iberia, and as per my link above, probably in North Africa, before the appearance of the Bell Beakers.

Jean M
09-18-2014, 12:27 PM
Copper metallurgy was known in Iberia, and as per my link above, probably in North Africa, before the appearance of the Bell Beakers.

Copper metallurgy arrived in Iberia by the trail I explained. It did not go via North Africa. No other element of the culture that became BB went via North Africa. Jan Turek did not attempt to claim that it did. He was just looking in the known BB region near Portugal for a pottery type that he could suggest as one influence on the BB type, since (as he so rightly says) the initial types of Chalcolithic pottery in Portugal do not contain all the elements that we see in BB. So he deduced that the influences probably came from various directions further afield. Thus far I agree with him entirely. But the signifant features of the pottery of the Late Neolithic in Morocco can be found in lots of other pottery all over the place. That's the problem with his article.

I have pointed out exact precedessors for all the BB ware elements actually along the trail that what I call the Stelae People followed from the steppe via the Carpathians. Along that route we can tie it up with the other elements of the culture.

Generalissimo
09-18-2014, 01:02 PM
I have pointed out exact precedessors for all the BB ware elements actually along the trail that what I call the Stelae People followed from the steppe via the Carpathians. Along that route we can tie it up with the other elements of the culture.

It's actually Jan Turek. The other book I quoted was by Janusz Czebreszuk.

I've looked over their theories and yours, and I don't think yours is better. The main reason is that I know for a fact that copper metallurgy spread across the Mediterranean in large part independently of the Bell Beakers.

There's evidence of copper smelting in the fortified towns of ancient Iberia before any signs of the Bell Beakers show up there. Also, I think it's interesting that Oetzi the Iceman carried a copper axe. He lived just before the major genetic shift(s) across Europe that we're now learning about.

R.Rocca
09-18-2014, 01:41 PM
It's actually Jan Turek. The other book I quoted was by Janusz Czebreszuk.

I've looked over their theories and yours, and I don't think yours is better. The main reason is that I know for a fact that copper metallurgy spread across the Mediterranean in large part independently of the Bell Beakers.

There's evidence of copper smelting in the fortified towns of ancient Iberia before any signs of the Bell Beakers show up there. Also, I think it's interesting that Oetzi the Iceman carried a copper axe. He lived just before the major genetic shift(s) across Europe that we're now learning about.

...and Oetzi's axe was made by the Remedello Culture (of which he was not a part of). This, along with the contemporary Rinaldone Culture are credited as being Italy's first two Indo-European cultures and they both predate the existence of Bell Beakers anywhere in Europe by several hundred years. The Remedello Culture daggers appear on the anthropomorphic stelae that Jean credits as the first R1b to migrate from the Alps into France and then Iberia.

Jean M
09-18-2014, 02:11 PM
It's actually Jan Turek.

I will correct. More haste less speed.


The main reason is that I know for a fact that copper metallurgy spread across the Mediterranean in large part independently of the Bell Beakers.

Yes it has been very difficult for even intelligent archaeologists to understand that it was descendants of the people who brought the copper metallurgy to Iberia who made the first Bell Beaker pottery, even though this has actually been stated in several publications by archaeologists e.g. those working on Zambujal and other Portuguese Copper Age sites. The Stelae People turned into the Bell Beaker Folk.

The habit of thinking that a culture must start with a new type of pottery is so ingrained that people just can't get their heads around the idea that this culture started with metallurgy, stelae, archery etc and developed a new tableware later. Even after the connection between the Stelae People and Bell Beaker was made by a brilliant paper by Harrison and Heyd in 2007, a number of people were still struggling with the concept. I had to explain it countless times. Half of them still think there must be some other explanation. :biggrin1:

Why worry about it anyway? R1b is not your main interest, or the main interest of the paper we are supposed to be discussing on this thread.

parasar
09-18-2014, 02:45 PM
The basque are at the western end. Clearly eastern beakers autosomal component could get diluted while still carrying significant r1b westwards. You should not lose site of the big picture. Western europe needs r1b, ANE, and indo-european, around the same time. These three things show strong connections overall.

but if you do expect the ydna to tell the autosomal story in every instance, face value, then you reach a dead end right away. there is no ydna lineage absent in basque and present, uniformly, in other europeans around 14%.

No such expectation on my part.
Just pointing to the correlations. The way I see it, for Lazaridis' components, R1a in Europe correlates positively with ANE, I to some extent with WHG, and R1b with EEF. Since significant time has passed since these elements admixed, such correlations are weak (both +&-), but still discernible.

R1b logically should have as much to do with ANE as say Q, R1a, and R-2, all P derivatives, but it appears that R1b very early merged with EEF elements somewhere in the Mediterranean region. A prong V88 going towards western Africa is consistent with this scenario. I have not seen the breakdown of these V88 populations, but perhaps someone can look to see if EEF or ANE there is perceptible.

This also indicates to me that perhaps it is an EEF element that is PIE, and not an ANE one, though it appears that upcoming papers on Corded Ware and Samara are to claim otherwise.


Well bit of a stretch. If you absolutely want to connect R1b with a autosomal component, then perhaps the Basque like EEF component could be a candidate. But note that the Basque like EEF component is not the only EEF component in Europe, there exist at least two major farmer components in Europe, one being Basque like and the other mideast proper/caucasus like. R1b today correlates somewhat only with the Basque like EEF component.

I was referring to the Lazaridis EEF. I do not know of any other EEF or that it now has a Basque like component.

aarnisotka
09-18-2014, 03:14 PM
No such expectation on my part.
Just pointing to the correlations. The way I see it, for Lazaridis' components, R1a in Europe correlates positively with ANE, I to some extent with WHG, and R1b with EEF. Since significant time has passed since these elements admixed, such correlations are weak (both +&-), but still discernible.

R1b logically should have as much to do with ANE as say Q, R1a, and R-2, all P derivatives, but it appears that R1b very early merged with EEF elements somewhere in the Mediterranean region. A prong V88 going towards western Africa is consistent with this scenario. I have not seen the breakdown of these V88 populations, but perhaps someone can look to see if EEF or ANE there is perceptible.

This also indicates to me that perhaps it is an EEF element that is PIE, and not an ANE one, though it appears that upcoming papers on Corded Ware and Samara are to claim otherwise.



I was referring to the Lazaridis EEF. I do not know of any other EEF or that it now has a Basque like component.

As you can see from this West Eurasia specific PCA there seems to exist two parallel farmer type clines within Europe. The first starting from Basques and ending with Finns, and the second from the Mideast to Balts. Y-axis peaks with Basques whereas the X represents a northern dimension.

http://oi58.tinypic.com/2rxk8jr.jpg

Silesian
09-18-2014, 03:21 PM
.... V88 going towards western Africa is consistent with this scenario. I have not seen the breakdown of these V88 populations, but perhaps someone can look to see if EEF or ANE there is perceptible.

What about R1b in the Caucasus?
Tabassarans Caucasian (Northeast) R1b-39.5% R1a-2.3% J-51.2%
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v4zYizoWtsoW1MNBN7SUrLf8R62NHPbMRySUJ2J48_Q/edit?pli=1#gid=1410860471
Tabassaran tabassaran17_1m 0.271601
Tabassaran tabassaran4_1m 0.280185
Tabassaran tabassaran5_1m 0.270369
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_ethnic_group

Piquerobi
09-18-2014, 03:28 PM
People should not forget that ANE, WHG and EEF are statistical constructs based on a relatively few samples. To jump in and assume that there ever were 100% ANE, 100% WHG and 100% EEF peoples is a premature conclusion IMO.

Silesian
09-18-2014, 03:31 PM
No such expectation on my part.

How about a single unifying R1a snp?

One single R1a snp found within Albanians-Greeks-Armenians and Corded Ware region?
Something like R1a-458-397N+/-

R1a-M458+, CTS11962+, L1029-
R1a-M458+, CTS11962+, L1029?
R1a-M458+, CTS11962+, L1029+

http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/haplotypes/

parasar
09-18-2014, 03:44 PM
What about R1b in the Caucasus?
Tabassarans Caucasian (Northeast) R1b-39.5% R1a-2.3% J-51.2%
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v4zYizoWtsoW1MNBN7SUrLf8R62NHPbMRySUJ2J48_Q/edit?pli=1#gid=1410860471
Tabassaran tabassaran17_1m 0.271601
Tabassaran tabassaran4_1m 0.280185
Tabassaran tabassaran5_1m 0.270369
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_ethnic_group

How many Tabassarans are there? I think it is problematic to pick up small populations and look for trends, especially mountainous ones who tend to run up numbers. We can't say for example that as Tabassarans are are Caucasian speaking, and high in R1b, there R1b is Caucasian.
Orcadians, Kalash, Ongee, etc. all have the same problem in population studies.

Silesian
09-18-2014, 03:49 PM
How many Tabassarans are there? I think it is problematic to pick up small populations and look for trends, especially mountainous ones who tend to run up numbers. We can't say for example that as Tabassarans are are Caucasian speaking, and high in R1b, there R1b is Caucasian.
Orcadians, Kalash, Ongee, etc. all have the same problem in population studies.

What about dessert tribes high in R1a? Do you think the same branch of R1a-Z93/94 is found in Tabassarans as Shimar tribe?
The Shimar sample carried two main haplogroups—J1 (at 52.3%) and R1a1 (at 42.8%)—with a small percentage of G2 (4.76%)
Do you think they will score higher than normal bedouins?
Bedouin HGDP00610 1.00E-05

parasar
09-18-2014, 03:58 PM
People should not forget that ANE, WHG and EEF are statistical constructs based on a relatively few samples. To jump in and assume that there ever were 100% ANE, 100% WHG and 100% EEF peoples is a premature conclusion IMO.

I would take even one sample from say South Asia or Africa from that period!

While the samples are few, the trends are consistent. If you compare AG2 with MA1, though from different locations, and spaced 7000 years apart, they still cluster closely. We are seeing consistent results with most WHG and EEF samples too.

parasar
09-18-2014, 04:06 PM
What about dessert tribes high in R1a? Do you think the same branch of R1a-Z93/94 is found in Tabassarans as Shimar tribe?
The Shimar sample carried two main haplogroups—J1 (at 52.3%) and R1a1 (at 42.8%)—with a small percentage of G2 (4.76%)
Do you think they will score higher than normal bedouins?
Bedouin HGDP00610 1.00E-05

Why should they score differently from Bedouins if they are Bedouins themselves and have been living as part of that group for thousands of years? If they had been genetically isolated for some reason, then yes we could discern something meaningful in terns of ANE.

Silesian
09-18-2014, 04:51 PM
Why should they score differently from Bedouins if they are Bedouins themselves and have been living as part of that group for thousands of years? If they had been genetically isolated for some reason, then yes we could discern something meaningful in terns of ANE.
Here are groups not isolated.Kurgan-Corded Ware
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WJjd-NdaOzA/TUzMgrKiqGI/AAAAAAAAAW0/Qsafb4DFb9k/s1600/kurgan%252520hypothesis-1.jpg
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1a1a1g.jpg

Here is list R1a maybe 1000+/- samples. Can you show one common R1a snp that connect Kurgan;Corded Ware from list below in following 3 regions Albanian-Armenian-Greek?

R1a-CTS1211+, CTS3402? YP340?
R1a-CTS1211+, CTS3402-, YP340
R1a-CTS1211+, CTS3402-, YP340
R1a-CTS1211+, CTS3402-, YP340- (Karelian-Finnish)
R1a-CTS1211+, CTS3402-, YP340-
R1a-CTS1211+, L784+
R1a-CTS1211+, YP340+, P278+ (Old-Carpathian)
R1a-CTS1211+, YP340+ (P278-, YP371-) (Old-Carpathian)
R1a-CTS1211+, YP340+, YP371+, YP380- (Old-Carpathian)
R1a-CTS1211+, YP340+, YP371+, YP380??? (Old-Carpathian)
R1a-CTS1211+, YP340+, YP371+, YP380+ (Old-Carpathian)
R1a-CTS3402+ (CTS3402_)
R1a-CTS3402+ (CTS3402_)
R1a-CTS3402+, Y2613+ (Malopolska Moravia)
R1a-CTS3402+, Y2613? Y33? YP237?
R1a-CTS3402+, Y33+, CTS8816- (branch_A)
R1a-CTS3402+, Y33+, CTS8816+, L1280+ Map
R1a-CTS3402+, Y33+, CTS8816+, L1280+, FGC11555+
R1a-CTS3402+, Y33+, CTS8816+, S18681+
R1a-CTS3402+, Y33+, CTS8816- Ungrouped
R1a-CTS3402+, Y33+, CTS8816+, Y1392+, Y2902+ (Volga-Carpathian)
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+ (Malopolska Silesia)
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP234+, L365+, F2686+ (Pomeranian)
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP234+, L365+ (Pomeranian)
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP234+, YP295+, L366+ (Prussian)
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP234+, YP295+, YP335+ (CTS3402_A)
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP419+
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP578+ (Vjatichi-North)
R1a-CTS4385+, L664-
R1a-CTS4385+, L664+ (NW)
R1a-M458+, CTS11962+, L1029-
R1a-M458+, CTS11962+, L1029?
R1a-M458+, CTS11962+, L1029+
R1a-M458+, CTS11962-, L260-
R1a-M458+, L260+, CTS11962-
R1a-Relicts (M198+, M417-)
R1a-Relicts (SRY10831+, M198-)
R1a-Unknown
R1a-Unknown-37
R1a-Unknown-short
R1a-Z280+, S24902+, YP469+
R1a-Z280+, S24902+, YP561 or YP469? (probably YP561)
R1a-Z280+, S24902+, YP561+, YP658-
R1a-Z280+, S24902+, YP561+, YP658+
R1a-Z280+ (Z92-, CTS1211-) EastEuropean
R1a-Z280+, Z92? CTS1211? S24902?
R1a-Z280+ (Z92-, CTS1211-, S24902-) Ungrouped
R1a-Z280+ (Z92-, CTS1211-, S24902-) WestEuropean
R1a-Z283*/Z282*
R1a-Z284+ [0]
R1a-Z284+, CTS4027+ [V.3]
R1a-Z284+, S5301+, L448+
R1a-Z284+, S5301+, L448+ CTS4179+, F1493+
R1a-Z284+, S5301+, L448+ CTS4179+, L176+
R1a-Z284+, S5301+, S6842+ [V.4A]
R1a-Z284+, S5301+, S6842+ [V.4B]
R1a-Z284+ Ungrouped
R1a-Z284+ [V.1]
R1a-Z284+ [V.2]
R1a-Z284+ [V.5]
R1a-Z284+, Z287+ (North Sea)
R1a-Z284+, Z287+ [NS.1]
R1a-Z92+, YP4459presumably (Veneds[2])
R1a-Z92+, YP4459+ (Veneds)
R1a-Z92+, Z685+, YP270+, YP350+ (Neuri)
R1a-Z92+, Z685+, YP270+, YP350? or YP350- (Neuri)
R1a-Z92+, Z685? YP4459? Ungrouped
R1a-Z93+
R1a-Z93+, Z94-
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, L657+, Y6+
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, L657+, Y7+
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, L657+, Y7-, Y6?
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, L657+, Y7? Y6?
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, L657-, Z2124-, Y40-
R1a-Z93+, Z94+ (Tamim)
R1a-Z93+, Z94+ Ungrouped
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+ (Kyrgyzs)
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, S23201+
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2122+
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2122+, F1345*
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2122+, F1345+, CTS6+ (AL)
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2122+, F1345+, F2935+
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2122+, Y57+
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2122-, Z2125-
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2122? Z2125?
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2125+, Z2123+ (Ashkenazi)
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2125+, Z2123+ (Karachay)
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2125+, Z2123+ Ungrouped
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2125+, Z2123+, Y2632+ (Baskirs-2)
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2125+, Z2123+, Y934+, Y874+
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2125+, Z2123+, Y934+, Y874- (Baskirs-1)
R1a-Z93+, Z94+, Z2124+, Z2125+, Z2123+, Y934+, YP520, YP526


http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/haplotypes/

parasar
09-18-2014, 06:17 PM
...
Here is list R1a maybe 1000+/- samples. Can you show one common R1a snp that connect Kurgan;Corded Ware from list below in following 3 regions Albanian-Armenian-Greek?

...

If there is a common SNP related to IE, it would date to the PIE time-frame.
The only one that I can think of in that time-frame is M417. The date for M417 as per Underhill 2014 is:

Whole Y-chromosome sequence analysis of eight R1a and five R1b individuals suggests a divergence time of ~25 000 (95% CI: 21 300–29 000) years ago and a coalescence time within R1a-M417 of ~5800 (95% CI: 4800–6800) years...

we estimate that diversification downstream of M417/Page7 occurred ~5800 years ago. This suggests the possibility that R1a lineages accompanied demic expansions initiated during the Copper, Bronze, and Iron...

Silesian
09-18-2014, 06:53 PM
If there is a common SNP related to IE, it would date to the PIE time-frame.
The only one that I can think of in that time-frame is M417. The date for M417 as per Underhill 2014 is:

2635

Should we expect to find some R1a- M417 and elevated ANE, in Osset's? It looks pretty close to where the marker is placed?

parasar
09-18-2014, 07:24 PM
2635

Should we expect to find some R1a- M417 and elevated ANE, in Osset's? It looks pretty close to where the marker is placed?

I do not find this map persuasive as yet. We have to wait and see the Samara Y results. I would place M417 further east - somewhere between South Asia and the Baikal.

I would also add that the map may well be right as it places M417 between the 2600bc Eulau R1a1 (Haak et. al.) and the Mongolian 1371bc R1a1-Z93 (Hollard et. al).

Atimeres
09-18-2014, 08:24 PM
Here are groups not isolated.Kurgan-Corded Ware
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WJjd-NdaOzA/TUzMgrKiqGI/AAAAAAAAAW0/Qsafb4DFb9k/s1600/kurgan%252520hypothesis-1.jpg
If PIE are descendants of a single ancestor, M417,
So who are the people besides him are on this great space that shows the map?

nuadha
09-19-2014, 04:27 AM
No such expectation on my part.
Just pointing to the correlations. The way I see it, for Lazaridis' components, R1a in Europe correlates positively with ANE, I to some extent with WHG, and R1b with EEF. Since significant time has passed since these elements admixed, such correlations are weak (both +&-), but still discernible.

No, you're pointing to a relatively small population and ignoring the general trend.

Somehow you think its easier to disassociate ANE and r1a for the whole of western europe than to disassociate ANE and r1b for the basque region, despite the spectacular timing of the two newcomers (in masse). That makes no sense.

Ebizur
09-19-2014, 04:40 AM
I do not find this map persuasive as yet. We have to wait and see the Samara Y results. I would place M417 further east - somewhere between South Asia and the Baikal.

I would also add that the map may well be right as it places M417 between the 2600bc Eulau R1a1 (Haak et. al.) and the Mongolian 1371bc R1a1-Z93 (Hollard et. al).I find it interesting that R1a1 has been found in samples of ancient remains from Mongolia, yet R1b1 may be much more widespread and frequent than R1a1 among modern Mongol inhabitants of Mongolia.

Consider the Mongolian data of Di Cristofaro et al. (2013) for example:

1/160 = 0.6% R2a-M124 [Found in 1/23 Mongols from Southeast Mongolia]

2/160 = 1.3% R1a1a-M198/M17 [Found in 2/97 Mongols from Northwest Mongolia]

5/160 = 3.1% R1b1a1-M478/M73 [Found in 2/18 Mongols from Central, 1/23 Mongols from Southeast, and 2/97 Mongols from Northwest Mongolia]
1/160 = 0.6% R1b1a2-M269(xR1b1a2a-L23) [Found in 1/23 Mongols from Southeast Mongolia]
1/160 = 0.6% R1b1a2a-L23 [Found in 1/97 Mongols from Northwest Mongolia]
7/160 = 4.4% R1b1a total
10/160 = 6.3% R total

The R1b1/R1a1 ratio may have turned out to be even greater if the researchers had not oversampled northwestern Mongolia to such a high degree.

If eastward-moving Indo-Europeans have introduced only R1a1 to ancient Mongolia, then who has introduced R1b1 to Mongolia, and in what era have they done so? Furthermore, what has happened to the descendants of those ancient R1a1 individuals whose remains have been discovered in Mongolia: have they all or mostly been massacred, have they simply been "bred out," or have they emigrated elsewhere?

Atimeres
09-19-2014, 01:38 PM
The R1b1/R1a1 ratio may have turned out to be even greater if the researchers had not oversampled northwestern Mongolia to such a high degree.
If eastward-moving Indo-Europeans have introduced only R1a1 to ancient Mongolia, then who has introduced R1b1 to Mongolia, and in what era have they done so? Furthermore, what has happened to the descendants of those ancient R1a1 individuals whose remains have been discovered in Mongolia: have they all or mostly been massacred, have they simply been "bred out," or have they emigrated elsewhere?
Here it is necessary to know that R1a and R1b were probably the south-eastern Asia, close of Sundlanad, as the haplogroups K2 and P.
So we must carefully discern which met in Mongolia SNPs are Asian, and that Europe!

parasar
09-19-2014, 02:11 PM
I find it interesting that R1a1 has been found in samples of ancient remains from Mongolia, yet R1b1 may be much more widespread and frequent than R1a1 among modern Mongol inhabitants of Mongolia...

If eastward-moving Indo-Europeans have introduced only R1a1 to ancient Mongolia, then who has introduced R1b1 to Mongolia, and in what era have they done so? Furthermore, what has happened to the descendants of those ancient R1a1 individuals whose remains have been discovered in Mongolia: have they all or mostly been massacred, have they simply been "bred out," or have they emigrated elsewhere?

Or others moved in. R1a and Q consistently show up but not R1b. So maybe R1b was not present in ancient times but moved in later. R1b's just trace presence in India is also consistent. Generalissimo's point at this thread - http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2658-Chatter-about-a-possible-Afanasievo-Culture-link-to-R1b&p=42787&highlight=hollard#post42787 - make sense.

we'd have to assume that it's just a fluke that not a single R1b has been caught in any of the Eurasian steppe aDNA studies so far, despite the fact that R1a, Q, N and C have all made many appearances now.

rms2
09-19-2014, 02:43 PM
Or others moved in. R1a and Q consistently show up but not R1b. So maybe R1b was not present in ancient times but moved in later. R1b's just trace presence in India is also consistent. Generalissimo's point at this thread - http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2658-Chatter-about-a-possible-Afanasievo-Culture-link-to-R1b&p=42787&highlight=hollard#post42787 - make sense.

we'd have to assume that it's just a fluke that not a single R1b has been caught in any of the Eurasian steppe aDNA studies so far, despite the fact that R1a, Q, N and C have all made many appearances now.


All of those Eurasian steppe aDNA results are relatively late, are they not? The oldest I know of are circa 1800-1400 BC.

It also appears that R1b thrust west, not east, and earlier rather than later.

However, if the rumors about Kovalev's recovery of R1b among Afanasievo and Okunevo remains in the Altai are true - and they are significantly older than the aDNA results you and Generalissimo are talking about - that changes all that.

R.Rocca
09-19-2014, 02:53 PM
I know that auDNA components are not a perfect match with Y-DNA groups, but I'll ask this anyway...Is there a good argument one way or another that the few percentage points of ANE that are higher in modern NE Europeans vs. NW Europeans may be due to elevate levels of haplogroup N and/or haplogroup Q in the former?

parasar
09-19-2014, 03:08 PM
All of those Eurasian steppe aDNA results are relatively late, are they not? The oldest I know of are circa 1800-1400 BC.

It also appears that R1b thrust west, not east, and earlier rather than later.

However, if the rumors about Kovalev's recovery of R1b among Afanasievo and Okunevo remains in the Altai are true - and they are significantly older than the aDNA results you and Generalissimo are talking about - that changes all that.

Yes that is indeed a big if, and we should have been hearing a lot about it. The silence here is deafening!


I know that auDNA components are not a perfect match with Y-DNA groups, but I'll ask this anyway...Is there a good argument one way or another that the few percentage points of ANE that are higher in modern NE Europeans vs. NW Europeans may be due to elevate levels of haplogroup N and/or haplogroup Q in the former?

Yes. There have been multiple movements from eastern Asia.


gene flow into some northeastern Europeans after the initial ANE admixture, and may be related to the fact that Y-chromosome haplogroup N 30, 31 is shared between Siberian and northeastern Europeans 32, 33 but not with western Europeans. There may in fact be multiple layers of Siberian gene flow into northeastern Europe after the initial ANE gene flow, as our analyses reported in SI 12 show that some Mordovians, Russians and Chuvash have Siberian-related admixture that is significantly more recent than that in Finns (SI12).

Silesian
09-19-2014, 03:44 PM
Or others moved in. R1a and Q consistently show up but not R1b. So maybe R1b was not present in ancient times but moved in later. R1b's just trace presence in India is also consistent. Generalissimo's point at this thread - http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2658-Chatter-about-a-possible-Afanasievo-Culture-link-to-R1b&p=42787&highlight=hollard#post42787 - make sense.

Tracking trace amounts [30+/-] of newly listed ISOGG R1b1a2a2d1. The same pattern of DYS-446-14-16 found in Bezmein, Ahal-Turkmenistan,Chuvash, Russia,Carpathian, Kuban-North Caucasus, Ossets,Armenian,Albanian,Greek, Northern Ireland.

rms2
09-19-2014, 04:00 PM
Yes that is indeed a big if, and we should have been hearing a lot about it. The silence here is deafening!

. . .

Not really. Given the current state of relations between Russia and the West, the absence of news of Kovalev's discoveries and/or a translation of his most recent work into English is not surprising.

The truly deafening silence with regards to R1b is the silence coming from Neolithic and earlier grave sites in Europe.

dp
09-19-2014, 05:43 PM
I know that auDNA components are not a perfect match with Y-DNA groups, but I'll ask this anyway...Is there a good argument one way or another that the few percentage points of ANE that are higher in modern NE Europeans vs. NW Europeans may be due to elevate levels of haplogroup N and/or haplogroup Q in the former?
If interesting in present ANE percentages check out http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?30-Eurogenes-Project-thread&p=52670&viewfull=1#post52670
-dp

T101
09-24-2014, 06:22 AM
Over at Anthropologie there is more on Corded Ware and Lengyel with the focus being on health and agricultural subsistence versus mixed subsistence:

http://puvodni.mzm.cz/Anthropologie/article.php?ID=1549

An analysis by David on the topic over at Polishgenes Blog.

Corded Ware people: more versatile and healthier than Neolithic farmers

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2014/09/corded-ware-people-more-versatile-and.html

nuadha
09-24-2014, 01:28 PM
Tracking trace amounts [30+/-] of newly listed ISOGG R1b1a2a2d1. The same pattern of DYS-446-14-16 found in Bezmein, Ahal-Turkmenistan,Chuvash, Russia,Carpathian, Kuban-North Caucasus, Ossets,Armenian,Albanian,Greek, Northern Ireland.

im not sure what you're saying here since I don't know haplogroups that well. Are you saying that R1b1a2a2d1 or something similar to it is found in trace amounts in all these places? R1b1a2a2d1 looks to be highly evolved/mutated r1b which makes it look fairly recent. Can you tell me when and where you think R1b1a2a2d1 popped up?

Silesian
09-24-2014, 04:30 PM
im not sure what you're saying here since I don't know haplogroups that well. Are you saying that R1b1a2a2d1 or something similar to it is found in trace amounts in all these places? R1b1a2a2d1 looks to be highly evolved/mutated r1b which makes it look fairly recent. Can you tell me when and where you think R1b1a2a2d1 popped up?

Yes it is L51-, and found in the above regions. The vast majority of samples are in Carpathian-Balkan-Ural region which I think will also yield the most variance. So far, none has been found in South West Asia; we will have to wait results from Assyrians and other South West Asian groups. It looks like A. Klyosov might have been partially correct about R1b(R1b-Z2103) path, although I think he attributed it with Turkmens. For whatever reason it is found in Albanians, Greeks, [Armenians probable] I have been looking for a branch of R1a that also fits in these 3 separate groups but have not found any, do you know of any recent or ancient R1a branches that are found amongst Albanian Armenian Greek ?
R1b1a2a2d1 [R1b-CTS9219]was accepted ISOGG 2+years after his paper, Arbin & R1b-Z2103 age estimates.
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19567#.VCLsoxZrhl4
R1b variance
2670


R1b1a2a2d1 [R1b-CTS9219]
2671


2672

ADW_1981
09-24-2014, 04:48 PM
Yes it is L51-, and found in the above regions. The vast majority of samples are in Carpathian-Balkan-Ural region which I think will also yield the most variance. So far, none has been found in South West Asia; we will have to wait results from Assyrians and other South West Asian groups. It looks like A. Klyosov might have been partially correct about R1b(R1b-Z2103) path, although I think he attributed it with Turkmens. For whatever reason it is found in Albanians, Greeks, [Armenians probable] I have been looking for a branch of R1a that also fits in these 3 separate groups but have not found any, do you know of any recent or ancient R1a branches that are found amongst Albanian Armenian Greek ?
R1b1a2a2d1 [R1b-CTS9219]was accepted ISOGG 2+years after his paper, Arbin & R1b-Z2103 age estimates.


I think you'll find CTS9219 is a missing link of old IE speaking tribes who moved to the Balkans from the steppes of Russia, probably a founding people of Albanians and some Greeks. It doesn't have a pattern like M458 has, which is likely due to much later Slavic migration. I don't see why these tribes would necessarily be Corded Ware. We need to remember these are loosely related people, not necessarily a single tribe moving from A->B->C. Nothing is that linear. Kylosov should never be taken seriously. He's not worth mentioning.

vettor
09-24-2014, 06:47 PM
I think you'll find CTS9219 is a missing link of old IE speaking tribes who moved to the Balkans from the steppes of Russia, probably a founding people of Albanians and some Greeks. It doesn't have a pattern like M458 has, which is likely due to much later Slavic migration. I don't see why these tribes would necessarily be Corded Ware. We need to remember these are loosely related people, not necessarily a single tribe moving from A->B->C. Nothing is that linear. Kylosov should never be taken seriously. He's not worth mentioning.

for what its worth, the site silesian mentioned only accepts tested 67 or more markers only .............so there will always be a discrepancy

ADW_1981
09-24-2014, 07:25 PM
for what its worth, the site silesian mentioned only accepts tested 67 or more markers only .............so there will always be a discrepancy

For what it's worth, SNPs are always more reliable than STR markers. It's not that likely CTS9219+ is popping up independently all over the place. However, this digresses from the Corded Ware discussion. For all intents and purposes, an early branch of R1a1a may represent Corded Ware expansion, although there were no SNPs tested and the STR markers were minimal if I recall. I wonder if its more related to the Scandinavian R1a1 type.

Generalissimo
09-25-2014, 12:22 AM
For what it's worth, SNPs are always more reliable than STR markers. It's not that likely CTS9219+ is popping up independently all over the place. However, this digresses from the Corded Ware discussion. For all intents and purposes, an early branch of R1a1a may represent Corded Ware expansion, although there were no SNPs tested and the STR markers were minimal if I recall. I wonder if its more related to the Scandinavian R1a1 type.

It's highly unlikely that a single R1a lineage can be used to represent the Corded Ware horizon.

Also, Scandinavian R1a-Z284 is too young to be a Corded Ware marker. But its ancestral mutation, Y2395, is probably old enough, and currently has the right geographic range (Poland, Germany and Scandinavia). Other likely Corded Ware markers are R1a-Z280 and R1a-PF6155, the predecessor of M458.


I know that auDNA components are not a perfect match with Y-DNA groups, but I'll ask this anyway...Is there a good argument one way or another that the few percentage points of ANE that are higher in modern NE Europeans vs. NW Europeans may be due to elevate levels of haplogroup N and/or haplogroup Q in the former?

Only present and former Uralic and Turkic groups in Northeastern Europe fall away from the ANE vs. ENA >1 slope, which must mean that the ANE across much of Eastern Europe is native to the area or it came with someone who had no ENA, like presumably the Indo-Europeans. Its levels could not have been bumped up by the Uralic and Turkic expansions, except among the present and former Uralic and Turkic groups. This issue is covered in Lazaridis et al.

http://imageshack.com/a/img661/183/aEg4RI.png

Shaikorth
09-25-2014, 06:07 AM
We know there's been absorbtion of N-carrying Uralic-speaking groups in IE-speaking regions richest in ANE, no ancient DNA needed to confirm that since it's historically documented and continued to modern times. These areas include northern/eastern regions of Latvia, Norway, Sweden and Russia. But indeed, all these areas had ANE before modern language groups were spoken there if the Swedish hunter-gatherers are of any indication, possibly more than in the AJV's and Motala if the ANE increase along southwest/northeast axis we see today held true then.

Generalissimo
09-25-2014, 07:24 AM
We know there's been absorbtion of N-carrying Uralic-speaking groups in IE-speaking regions richest in ANE, no ancient DNA needed to confirm that since it's historically documented and continued to modern times. These areas include northern/eastern regions of Latvia, Norway, Sweden and Russia. But indeed, all these areas had ANE before modern language groups were spoken there if the Swedish hunter-gatherers are of any indication, possibly more than in the AJV's and Motala if the ANE increase along southwest/northeast axis we see today held true then.

It's hard to say where the Balto-Slavic N1c came from. It might have arrived in the East Baltic with Uralic speakers, or it might be a marker of forest zone foragers who interacted with the Battle-Axe culture groups in Northwestern Russia. But in any case, it looks like a very strong founder effect that only really left an impact on the Balto-Slavic, and especially Baltic, Y-chromosomes.

So the point I was making was that the levels of ANE in most Northeast European groups could not have been raised by the major post-Indo-European expansions across Eastern Europe, like the Uralic and Turkic migrations west, because these would have certainly left a clear signal of ENA.

Indeed, in order for this to be true, we'd have to come up with some explanation why the ANE remained and the ENA was purged or not passed on in the first place. I can't think of anything that would make much sense, except maybe some very strong selection for ANE/against ENA, but even that doesn't seem plausible.

Finnish admixture in many parts of Sweden and Norway is a different story though, and that did leave both the N1c and ENA admixture.

Shaikorth
09-25-2014, 08:40 AM
One explanation, looking at Hungarians (who for some reason have high ANE in Lazaridis fits), is that mixture with a more EEF-rich population rapidly reduces ENA signals to the range where they can fit into the model. Closer inspection of the samples reveals that the three-way model does have a tolerance range for ENA, one of the seven Finnish individuals is in the range of Estonian samples which in turn as a whole fit into the model. ANE would not dilute as fast as ENA because both populations have it, and in much greater amounts than ENA involved.

Even a 50/50 mix of Mordovian and Portuguese would likely fit without any problems, and for a Mordovian/Sardinian it'd be even more likely. In case of Eastern Europe, historical population sizes would mean the ratio would not favour anyone coming from (or living in, the ENA presence could predate modern language groups too according to the abstract about the Samara samples) the far Northeast so smallest components would dilute rapidly.

If that's the case, ENA corresponds with geography in that region and is inversely correlated with effective population sizes there, peaking in Saami, and possibly was much higher in the population that preceded the Saami - the Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov sample had a mtdna composition that looked like eastern-shifted Yeniseian (http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003296.g002&representation=PNG_L). Founder effects can reduce uniparental markers much faster than autosomal DNA which explains Saamis' mostly U5b1b-V split now, but they do have both D and Z (prevalent in aBOO) still.

Generalissimo
09-25-2014, 09:04 AM
Even a 50/50 mix of Mordovian and Portuguese would likely fit without any problems, and for a Mordovian/Sardinian it'd be even more likely.

But they'd deviate from the ANE vs. ENA >1 slope line. Take a look at the graph above and imagine where a 50/50 Mordovian/Sardinian mix would fall. It'd certainly stick out from the slope line just right of the French_South.

So it's not just about fitting models, which do have a tolerance range, but actually showing no ENA in various sensitive tests. Btw, Estonians do show a very minor signal of ENA, which is mentioned in the paper and makes sense, since they're Uralic speakers living close to other Uralic speakers.

vettor
09-25-2014, 09:16 AM
It's highly unlikely that a single R1a lineage can be used to represent the Corded Ware horizon.

Also, Scandinavian R1a-Z284 is too young to be a Corded Ware marker. But its ancestral mutation, Y2395, is probably old enough, and currently has the right geographic range (Poland, Germany and Scandinavia). Other likely Corded Ware markers are R1a-Z280 and R1a-PF6155, the predecessor of M458.



Only present and former Uralic and Turkic groups in Northeastern Europe fall away from the ANE vs. ENA >1 slope, which must mean that the ANE across much of Eastern Europe is native to the area or it came with someone who had no ENA, like presumably the Indo-Europeans. Its levels could not have been bumped up by the Uralic and Turkic expansions, except among the present and former Uralic and Turkic groups. This issue is covered in Lazaridis et al.

http://imageshack.com/a/img661/183/aEg4RI.png

update your map......stuttgart moved away from sardinian markers and into mainly bergamo markers last week by mr. Reich

Shaikorth
09-25-2014, 10:01 AM
But they'd deviate from the ANE vs. ENA >1 slope line. Take a look at the graph above and imagine where a 50/50 Mordovian/Sardinian mix would fall. It'd certainly stick out from the slope line just right of the French_South.

So it's not just about fitting models, which do have a tolerance range, but actually showing no ENA in various sensitive tests. Btw, Estonians do show a very minor signal of ENA, which is mentioned in the paper and makes sense, since they're Uralic speakers living close to other Uralic speakers.

As I said the ratio would not be close to 50-50 in far NE Europe, add another Sardinian to the mix and it would not stand out in a relevant way in that PCA or one of your own Eurasian PCA's like this one (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQelNRZ01MOU1hTVk/edit?pli=1). As for ADMIXTURE and f3, with proper references one can get ENA to show in French in tiny amounts and some Estonians show no more than, say, West Scottish.

About languages and genes, dating of the spread of Uralic languages suggest they are far too recent to account for apparent ENA in ancient remains of far NE Europe. So there genes would now correspond to geography more than anything, with Saamis who lived there after the aBOO-type groups rich in East Eurasian mtDNA having the most and those who lived closest to them coming second. Saami range extended much further to Finland and NW Russia just a thousand years ago. If the suspicions of Reich and company are correct, ENA was there in the Mesolithic and thus predates Indo-Europeans and Uralics by millennia as ANE did, and the inferences about language groups and autosomal components that could be correct for Central Europe do not work there.

Generalissimo
09-25-2014, 10:29 AM
As I said the ratio would not be close to 50-50 in far NE Europe, add another Sardinian to the mix and it would not stand out in a relevant way in that PCA or one of your own Eurasian PCA's like this one (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQelNRZ01MOU1hTVk/edit?pli=1).

You've just lost me. There's no way a 50/50 Sardinian/Mordovian mix would fall within the >1 slope. It's ENA would show on that graph.

Shaikorth
09-25-2014, 11:35 AM
You've just lost me. There's no way a 50/50 Sardinian/Mordovian mix would fall within the >1 slope. It's ENA would show on that graph.

I did write that ratio would not be 50-50 because the populations of the far northeast would be considerably smaller in size. I'll be more precise then, "adding another Sardinian" to the 50/50 mix makes it 75/25.

Returning to the original topic, if for instance a population with 5% ENA and 20% ANE is diluted to 1/16 of its original, with a population that has less of both, the end result is an addition of ~0,3% ENA (noise level in ADMIXTURE/PCA's) and 1,25% ANE which is small but has some statistical significance especially when we are talking about the minor ANE differences of NW and NE Europeans.

Generalissimo
09-25-2014, 11:47 AM
I did write that ratio would not be 50-50 because the populations of the far northeast would be considerably smaller in size. I'll be more precise then, "adding another Sardinian" to the 50/50 mix makes it 75/25.

Returning to the original topic, if for instance a population with 5% ENA and 20% ANE is diluted to 1/16 of its original, with a population that has less of both, the end result is an addition of ~0,3% ENA (noise level in ADMIXTURE/PCA's) and 1,25% ANE which is small but has some statistical significance especially when we are talking about the minor ANE differences of NW and NE Europeans.

Well, I'm pretty sure that a 75/25 Sardinian/Mordovian mix wouldn't fall within the >1 slope. It'd be just out by a little right of the Tuscans.

Let's do 90/10, and you might have something.


update your map......stuttgart moved away from sardinian markers and into mainly bergamo markers last week by mr. Reich

I have absolutely no idea what you are attempting to communicate to me.

Shaikorth
09-25-2014, 12:35 PM
Well, I'm pretty sure that a 75/25 Sardinian/Mordovian mix wouldn't fall within the >1 slope. It'd be just out by a little right of the Tuscans.

Let's do 90/10, and you might have something.



I think it would still go within individual variation, in your Eurasian PCA it'd fit with Bulgarians and not just the easternmost ones either. A 75/25 of either Spanish or English and Mordovians would go better into that Lazaridis cline than a Sardinian-based mix, the latter would cluster a tiny bit "west" of Norwegians, so we are talking small differences.

vettor
09-25-2014, 07:07 PM
I have absolutely no idea what you are attempting to communicate to me.

the continuation of the latest lazaridis/reich paper as over a week ago said:
Stuttgart shares more large segments with mainland Italians under Bergamo group than under the Sardinian group

parasar
10-01-2014, 12:25 AM
big numbers in an area does not indicate origin of that marker............there is 17% R1a in Berber land ( morocco ), this is a product of vandal settlement from the barbarian invasion times .....

17% R1a1 in Morocco? All over or an isolated sample?
http://www.fsigeneticssup.com/article/S1875-1768(08)00205-9/pdf
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/Snqpb1qFPpI/AAAAAAAAB7Y/jlu9SZ3yhcM/s1600/morocco_tunisia.jpg

Generalissimo
10-01-2014, 12:54 AM
the continuation of the latest lazaridis/reich paper as over a week ago said:
Stuttgart shares more large segments with mainland Italians under Bergamo group than under the Sardinian group

The figure I posted doesn't have anything to do with the segment sharing analysis in Lazaridis et al. It's a plot of f4 stats, and it's identical to the one that appeared in the Nature version of the paper.

Yet again, you don't have a clue what you're talking about and you're being incoherent. This is a problem, because you create a lot of noise everywhere, including on this forum.

vettor
10-01-2014, 07:22 AM
17% R1a1 in Morocco? All over or an isolated sample?
http://www.fsigeneticssup.com/article/S1875-1768(08)00205-9/pdf
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/Snqpb1qFPpI/AAAAAAAAB7Y/jlu9SZ3yhcM/s1600/morocco_tunisia.jpg

It was suppose to be ........R1-M173 @ 7% and 5% of R1a1 (SRY10831.2) for Bouhria berbers .........
http://eprints.uniss.it/2783/1/Francalacci_P_Articolo_2008_History.pdf
http://ethiohelix.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/berber-ydna.html
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0056775

I have anothe r2 links which I will need to refind to

I presume as all others state in their links , that Moroccans, Algerians and Tunisians all have a berber component

parasar
10-01-2014, 02:21 PM
It was suppose to be ........R1-M173 @ 7% and 5% of R1a1 (SRY10831.2) for Bouhria berbers .........
http://eprints.uniss.it/2783/1/Francalacci_P_Articolo_2008_History.pdf
http://ethiohelix.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/berber-ydna.html
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0056775

I have anothe r2 links which I will need to refind to

I presume as all others state in their links , that Moroccans, Algerians and Tunisians all have a berber component

That is what I thought that it must be a sampling issue limited to a specific berber group.

4.48% R1a1 in Bouhria berbers has to be seen in context of 0% in all other berbers.
Table 1. Frequencies (% )of the Y chromosome haplogroups in five Berber populations https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/42082352/Berber.pdf

Jean M
10-21-2014, 12:19 AM
Tweets from ASHG 2014 re this paper:

[Luke Ward] Lazaridis: there was an influx from north Eurasian steppe into Europe after advent of farming. Consistent w linguistic evidence.

[Charleston Chiang] Lazaridis: Admixture shows multiway admixture among late Neolithic ancient samples. Yamnaya good source as 3rd ancestral reference.

Jean M
10-21-2014, 11:54 AM
Tweets from Razib Khan from ASHG 2014:

Lazaradis up.
Review Lazaradis et al 2014. Going over ancient data genome. 350 k SNPs.
Eastern hg away from western hg. Yamnaya toward one Mal'ta.
Late Neolithic different from mid Neolithic.
Eastern hg from Karelia and Sammara. ANE related to Eastern hg. Yamnaya had [also?] Near East and Caucasus.
ANE in Europe from eastern hg groups? (via Yamnaya).
Yamnaya better source for intrusive group into north Europe late Neolithic / Bronze Age.
Yamnaya modeled as 50/50 Armenian/ Karelian. Corded Ware 75% Yamnaya.
Yamnaya % peaks in north Europe. Lower in south Europe. Lowest in Sardinia.
Yamnaya = Proto-Indoeuropeans.
Corded Ware localized to center north Europe. Not clear if ANE west Europe due to later migrations.

Generalissimo
10-21-2014, 12:02 PM
Word is, Bell Beakers had some ANE, but not as high as Corded Ware.

Jean M
10-21-2014, 12:38 PM
A useful blog post expanding on the tweets: http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/pie-homeland-update-paleogenomics.html

parasar
10-21-2014, 02:50 PM
Tweets from Razib Khan from ASHG 2014:

Lazaradis up.
Review Lazaradis et al 2014. Going over ancient data genome. 350 k SNPs.
Eastern hg away from western hg. Yamnaya toward one Mal'ta.
Late Neolithic different from mid Neolithic.
Eastern hg from Karelia and Sammara. ANE related to Eastern hg. Yamnaya had [also?] Near East and Caucasus.
ANE in Europe from eastern hg groups? (via Yamnaya).
Yamnaya better source for intrusive group into north Europe late Neolithic / Bronze Age.
Yamnaya modeled as 50/50 Armenian/ Karelian. Corded Ware 75% Yamnaya.
Yamnaya % peaks in north Europe. Lower in south Europe. Lowest in Sardinia.
Yamnaya = Proto-Indoeuropeans.
Corded Ware localized to center north Europe. Not clear if ANE west Europe due to later migrations.

So it appears that that there were three inputs in Yamna - western hg foragers, farmers, and eastern hg.
The eastern hg were from the northern steppe - Mal'ta.

Anthony is of the opinion that the foragers (Bug Dneister from ice age remnant Mesolithic forager) represent the pre-PIE and the intrusive farmers from the west were not PIE speaking.
Renfrew is of the opinion that the farmers were pre-PIE.

None of them contemplate the third highly divergent element (ANE) from the northern steppes.

So is there any reason to think that it is this ANE element that is pre-PIE?
One would think that the presence of ANE in the Indian Subcontinent would indicate a PIE status for ANE. But ANE's almost even distribution across the Subcontinent makes that problematic unless ANE entered South Asia far earlier than it did in Yamna, Caucasus, or other parts of West Asia/Europe.

parasar
10-21-2014, 05:05 PM
Regarding the Karelian's east Eurasian ANE connection, perhaps C1 provides the best evidence:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0087612

The phylogeny of hg C1 is structured into five distinct monophyletic sub-clades, C1a, C1b, C1c, C1d and C1e, which exhibit a clear geographical distribution pattern ([4], [7], [9]–[10]; Figure 1). Three of the C1 sub-clades (C1b, C1c and C1d) are restricted to Native American populations, although spread widely across the American continent [11]–[12]. It was proposed that these three Native American C1 sub-clades were among the ancestral founder lineages, along with hg A2, B2 and D1, which reached the Americas during the initial human colonisation of the continent [4]–[5], [7], [9]. The source population of this migration was assumed to be in eastern Asia, where most of the diversity of hg C is observed today, and where C1a, a sister clade of the American C1 clades, is found at low frequencies in diverse indigenous populations [9]. The peopling of the Americas was made possible by the Beringian ice-free land bridge that connected north-east Siberia and Alaska before (~30,000 years Before Present, BP) and after (~13,000 yBP) the last Ice Age [9], [13]. The place of origin of ancestral hg C1 was approximated in the Amur River region just south of Beringia (eastern Asia) on the basis of the current frequency distribution of hg C1 in Asia [9]. The last hg C1 clade to have been described, C1e, was only found recently in a few individuals in Iceland and was shown to be distinct from any of the previously defined Asian and American clades on the basis of seven coding region and three control region mutations [10].
...

The potential long-term survival of C1 lineages in prehistoric Europe is highly relevant to the discussion about the prehistoric interactions between the ancestral populations of Europeans, Siberians and Native Americans. It is consistent with recently published genomic data from a 24,000 year-old Upper Paleolithic individual from Mal’ta, South Siberia [46]. Interestingly, this individual was shown to belong to the western Eurasian hg U, which was also the most frequent hg found in Yuzhnyy Oleni Ostrov Mesolithic individuals (64%) [20]. Genome-wide data from Upper Palaeolithic Mal’ta revealed affinities with both present-day western Eurasian and Native Americans, and further supports gene-flow between the ancestral populations of Europeans and Native Americans prior to the colonisation of the Americas [46]. The new C1f lineage thus bridges the geographic gap between the Icelandic, the Siberian and the Native American C1 lineages and argues for the presence of C1 lineages, albeit at low frequency, in prehistoric West Eurasia.


Rather than via the northern steppes, the connection may have been the Arctic.
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0087612.g001&representation=PNG_M


The change in vegetation began roughly 25,000 years ago and ended about 10,000 years ago - a time when many of the big animals slipped into extinction, the researchers said.

Scientists for years have been trying to figure out what caused this mass extinction, when two-thirds of all the large-bodied mammals in the Northern Hemisphere died out.

"Now we have, from my perspective at least, a very credible explanation," Eske Willerslev of the University of Copenhagen, an expert in ancient DNA who led an international team of researchers, said in a telephone interview.

The findings contradicted the notion that humans arriving in these regions during the Ice Age caused the mass extinction by hunting the big animals into oblivion - the so-called overkill or Blitzkrieg hypothesis.

"We think that the major driver (of the mass extinction) is not the humans," Willerslev said, although he did not rule out that human hunters may have delivered the coup de grace to some species already diminished by the dwindling food supplies.

The Arctic region once teemed with herds of big animals, in some ways resembling an African savanna. Large plant eaters included woolly mammoths, woolly rhinos, horses, bison, reindeer and camels, with predators including hyenas, saber-toothed cats, lions and huge short-faced bears.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2149-New-Theory-on-the-Extinction-of-Ice-Age-Mammals-in-North-America&p=30273&viewfull=1#post30273

R.Rocca
10-21-2014, 05:22 PM
I'm re-posting the results of today's study from Hungary as it can change this discussion quite a bit...


Individual KO1, E. Neol Körös (5,650–5,780 BC) = Y-Haplogroup I2a
Individual NE5, M. Neol. Late ALP (4,990–5,210 BC) = Y-Haplogroup C6
Individual NE6, M. Neol. LBK Culture (4,950–5,300 BC) = Y-Haplogroup C6
Individual NE7, L. Neol. Lengyel Culture (4,360–4,490 BC) = Y-Haplogroup I2a
Individual BR2, L. Bronze, Kyjatice Culture (1,110–1,270 BC) = Y-Haplogroup J2a1
Individual IR1, Iron Age, Pre-Scythian Mezőcsát Culture (830–980 BC) = Y-Haplogroup N

Jean M
10-21-2014, 07:03 PM
Anthony is of the opinion that the foragers (Bug Dneister from ice age remnant Mesolithic forager) represent the pre-PIE and the intrusive farmers from the west were not PIE speaking. Renfrew is of the opinion that the farmers were pre-PIE. None of them contemplate the third highly divergent element (ANE) from the northern steppes. So is there any reason to think that it is this ANE element that is pre-PIE?

David Anthony was well aware when he wrote Horse, Wheel and Language (2007) of an input from Asia in the form of pottery from Lake Baikal that arrived at Samara on the Volga c. 7000 BC. This was an obvious place to look for the first ANE in Europe. David Anthony is one of the authors of the study which extracted DNA from samples at Samara. He is also well aware of the similarities between PIE and Proto-Uralic, which some linguists think may indicate a common ancestor. An ancestor to Proto-Uralic in or near the Altai has been proposed. So an ancestor to PIE arriving on the Volga from the Altai would be perfectly logical. I don't say that there is absolute certainty that this is what happened, but it makes sense.

ADW_1981
10-21-2014, 07:37 PM
None of them contemplate the third highly divergent element (ANE) from the northern steppes.



Ma'lta is more like a South Asian, perhaps closer to what the R2 guy's profile looked like, and is considerably closer to modern Amerindians than anything European. I'm envisioning this as a South Asian branch that wandered off into Siberia and died out. It may be that they mixed with an Amerindian like population in Siberia, or it was ancestral to both of them. Either way, there is nothing European about modern Amerindians.

If this is what ANE is based on, then it's unlikely to be the full PIE story. There must be a WHG/EEF component to the PIE speakers of 5000 years ago, IMHO.

Jean M
10-21-2014, 07:44 PM
If this is what ANE is based on, then it's unlikely to be the full PIE story. There must be a WHG/EEF component to the PIE speakers of 5000 years ago, IMHO.

Yes indeed. Yamnaya was a mixed culture. It could not possibly be 100% ANE. I've said this a number of times, and so have several other forum users. If you look at Razib Khan's tweets in a post above, you will see that we now have all the proof anybody could wish for on this point. This study has modelled Yamnaya DNA as mixed.

Shaikorth
10-21-2014, 07:47 PM
Ma'lta is more like a South Asian, perhaps closer to what the R2 guy's profile looked like, and is considerably closer to modern Amerindians than anything European. I'm envisioning this as a South Asian branch that wandered off into Siberia and died out. It may be that they mixed with an Amerindian like population in Siberia, or it was ancestral to both of them. Either way, there is nothing European about modern Amerindians.

If this is what ANE is based on, then it's unlikely to be the full PIE story. There must be a WHG/EEF component to the PIE speakers of 5000 years ago, IMHO.

Farmer-associated mtDNA supposedly appears in Samara samples that are less than 6000 years old so that's a safe bet.

Leeroy Jenkins
10-21-2014, 07:57 PM
Farmer-associated mtDNA supposedly appears in Samara samples that are less than 6000 years old so that's a safe bet.

The farmer-related ancestry is not EEF-like is it? I assumed if the authors had to use ancient Karelian samples and modern Armenians to model Yamnaya peoples, then the farmer-related ancestry lacks the WHG of EEF, and that is why Armenians make a better proxy than Stuttgart.

Shaikorth
10-21-2014, 08:10 PM
The farmer-related ancestry is not EEF-like is it? I assumed if the authors had to use ancient Karelian samples and modern Armenians to model Yamnaya peoples, then the farmer-related ancestry lacks the WHG of EEF, and that is why Armenians make a better proxy than Stuttgart.

It's more of a quantitative issue, the Armenians are there as a proxy Basal Eurasian/ancient Middle Eastern ancestry but they do have some WHG, just not as much as Stuttgart. The Karelian sample possibly has much more. Things are thrown off by ANE or something else.

Generalissimo
10-21-2014, 08:16 PM
It's a bit silly to model an ancient population as a mixture of a modern population.

Armenians carry well over 10% of ANE, so they're unlikely to be the same as the people who lived in what is now Armenia during the early Yamnaya period.

R.Rocca
10-21-2014, 08:21 PM
Noteworthy on the PCA plot, the Baden Culture individual (CO1) is very Otzi/Neolithic Farmer/Sardinian-like and likely has very little to no ANE.

parasar
10-21-2014, 08:36 PM
David Anthony was well aware when he wrote Horse, Wheel and Language (2007) of an input from Asia in the form of pottery from Lake Baikal that arrived at Samara on the Volga c. 7000 BC. This was an obvious place to look for the first ANE in Europe. David Anthony is one of the authors of the study which extracted DNA from samples at Samara. He is also well aware of the similarities between PIE and Proto-Uralic, which some linguists think may indicate a common ancestor. An ancestor to Proto-Uralic in or near the Altai has been proposed. So an ancestor to PIE arriving on the Volga from the Altai would be perfectly logical. I don't say that there is absolute certainty that this is what happened, but it makes sense.

I doubt that at the time David Anthony wrote the book he envisioned any pre-PIE movement from the Bailkal to Yamnaya. Some beads and nephrite perhaps, but not pre-PIE.
https://archive.org/stream/horsewheelandlanguage/horsewheelandlanguage_djvu.txt

Colin Renfrew proposed that Indo-Hittite (Pre-Proto-Indo-European) was spoken by the first farmers in southern and western Anatolia ... about 7000 BCE.

[on the other hand]

If I am right about persistent frontiers and language, it was a linguis-tic frontier; if the other arguments in the preceding chapters are correct, the incoming pioneers spoke a non-Indo-European language, and the for-agers spoke a Pre-Proto-Indo-European language...The Bug-Dniester people may well have spoken a language belong- ing to the language family that produced Pre-Proto-Indo-European, while their Cris neighbors spoke a language distantly related to those of Neo-lithic Greece and Anatolia ...

The Bug-Dniester culture grew out of Mesolithic forager cultures that dwelt in the region since the end of the last Ice Age.


Even the early interaction between Proto-Uralic and pre-PIE he puts west of the Urals:

These parallels suggest that Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Uralic shared two kinds of linkages. 15 One kind, revealed in pronouns, noun
endings, and shared basic vocabulary, could be ancestral: the two proto-languages shared some quite ancient common ancestor, perhaps a broadly related set of intergrading dialects spoken by hunters roaming between the Carpathians and the Urals at the end of the last Ice Age.

Piquerobi
10-21-2014, 10:18 PM
What about their yDNA? That would crutial. Intrusive expansions and yDNA are often associated. If Yamnaya is believed to have been PIE, they should have tested the yDNA. I can't understand these researchers!

Leeroy Jenkins
10-21-2014, 10:29 PM
What about their yDNA? That would crutial. Intrusive expansions and yDNA are often associated. If Yamnaya is believed to have been PIE, they should have tested the yDNA. I can't understand these researchers!

Nothing was said about their Y-DNA at the conference from what I understand, but Y-DNA results will be included in the actual study itself.

Piquerobi
10-21-2014, 10:30 PM
^ Hopefully!

Hando
10-22-2014, 03:39 AM
Regarding the Karelian's east Eurasian ANE connection, perhaps C1 provides the best evidence:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0087612


Rather than via the northern steppes, the connection may have been the Arctic.
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0087612.g001&representation=PNG_M


http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2149-New-Theory-on-the-Extinction-of-Ice-Age-Mammals-in-North-America&p=30273&viewfull=1#post30273
It says "The last hg C1 clade to have been described, C1e, was only found recently in a few individuals in Iceland and was shown to be distinct from any of the previously defined Asian and American clades on the basis of seven coding region and three control region mutations."
How did this C1e get into Icelanders? If it was from the Norwegian migrations during Leif Ericson's time then why is it not found in Norwegians?

Hando
10-22-2014, 03:43 AM
Regarding the Karelian's east Eurasian ANE connection, perhaps C1 provides the best evidence:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0087612


Rather than via the northern steppes, the connection may have been the Arctic.
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0087612.g001&representation=PNG_M


http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2149-New-Theory-on-the-Extinction-of-Ice-Age-Mammals-in-North-America&p=30273&viewfull=1#post30273

I don't see the connection between ANE migrating to Europe from Siberia via the Arctic and the demise of Ice Age Mammals in the Arctic due to warming, unless you mean the warmer conditions of the Arctic starting 24,000 years ago allowed these ANE migrants to use the warmer Arctic as a route to Europe. Just want to confirm this is what you meant?

Hando
10-22-2014, 04:00 AM
If I am right about persistent frontiers and language, it was a linguis-tic frontier; if the other arguments in the preceding chapters are correct, the incoming pioneers spoke a non-Indo-European language, and the for-agers spoke a Pre-Proto-Indo-European language...The Bug-Dniester people may well have spoken a language belong- ing to the language family that produced Pre-Proto-Indo-European, while their Cris neighbors spoke a language distantly related to those of Neo-lithic Greece and Anatolia ...

The Bug-Dniester culture grew out of Mesolithic forager cultures that dwelt in the region since the end of the last Ice Age.

If the native foragers of Bug Dniester spoke a language that produced proto-pre Indo European then it would mean Hunter Gatherers such as WHG or UHG had more input/influence on PIE than EEF. So then why is there so much EEF in Yamnaya and CW? Shouldn't there be more hunter gatherer (ie Karelian) genes involved?
And if proto Indo Europeans and Proto Uralics came from shared common ancestors of hunters from between the Carpathians and the Urals, doesn't this contradict the theory that Bug Dniester foragers were the ones that contributed to PIE?

parasar
10-22-2014, 02:28 PM
I don't see the connection between ANE migrating to Europe from Siberia via the Arctic and the demise of Ice Age Mammals in the Arctic due to warming, unless you mean the warmer conditions of the Arctic starting 24,000 years ago allowed these ANE migrants to use the warmer Arctic as a route to Europe. Just want to confirm this is what you meant?

The big animal transition happens 10000 years ago - "ended about 10,000 years ago - a time when many of the big animals slipped into extinction." What I was implying is that potentially the Arctic region was quite habitable prior to that and sustained a large population of plant and animal life including a significant number of humans. This change in the Arctic region would have resulted in these populations moving south - deeper into the Americas, Inner Asia, and Europe.

We tend to see the globe in terms of longitudes, but if we look at it from the polar perspective the Arctic region is quite compact. Under my scenario we do not have to think of ANE as a late post Neolithic metal age entrant into Europe, but a component present in Mesolithic Arctic Europe and thus manifesting itself strongly in Karelians, northern Russians, Orcadians, etc.

Hando
10-22-2014, 08:38 PM
The big animal transition happens 10000 years ago - "ended about 10,000 years ago - a time when many of the big animals slipped into extinction." What I was implying is that potentially the Arctic region was quite habitable prior to that and sustained a large population of plant and animal life including a significant number of humans. This change in the Arctic region would have resulted in these populations moving south - deeper into the Americas, Inner Asia, and Europe.

We tend to see the globe in terms of longitudes, but if we look at it from the polar perspective the Arctic region is quite compact. Under my scenario we do not have to think of ANE as a late post Neolithic metal age entrant into Europe, but a component present in Mesolithic Arctic Europe and thus manifesting itself strongly in Karelians, northern Russians, Orcadians, etc.
That is quite interesting and logical actually. The fact that Europe, Inner Asia and America are closer to each other if they originated in the Arctic and spread from there would mean the distances traveled by humans to their various destinations would have been shorter from the Arctic rather than from Siberia.

Jean M
10-23-2014, 12:16 AM
Write-up from GenomeWeb:


ASHG Panelists Discuss New Insights into European Population Structure

During one session at the American Society of Human Genetics annual meeting, researchers discussed how folding in genetic data from ancient human samples as well as deeper analysis has given them a more refined picture of European populations. One group, for instance, traced an ancient ancestor of modern-day Europeans to a group called the Yamnaya while another examined finer population structure in modern-day Europeans and another investigated how immigrants to a region may affect population structure.

A recent Nature paper found that three ancestral populations likely contributed the genetic makeup of modern-day Europeans: western European hunter-gatherers, ancient north Eurasians, and early European farmers who themselves were of Near Eastern origin, but also related to western European hunter-gatherers.

As he recounted at ASHG, Harvard Medical School's Iosif Lazaridis, the lead author of that paper, has extended that study and homed in on the Yamnaya population as that likely third source.

Lazaridis and his colleagues targeted more than 350,000 SNPs in 65 ancient humans, including early Neolithic hunter-gatherers, early farmers, and late Neolithic Bronze Age populations from Europe, and compared them to SNPs from 2,345 present-day humans.

By examining admixture levels in these groups, they found that an early European farmer split off from the rest of the European farmers early on and mixed with eastern European hunter-gatherers to form the Yamnaya population, which lived on the Steppes, Lazaridis said. Meanwhile, a middle Neolithic population mixed with Yamnaya to form the late Neolithic Corded Ware population of central Europe.

"[The] major finding was that many admixture events occurred in Europe even after the advent of farming, and some of them were quite substantial," Lazaridis said.

http://cdnwww.genomeweb.com/sequencing/ashg-panelists-discuss-new-insights-european-population-structure

Hok
10-23-2014, 06:46 PM
I am aware of it. It is further proof of how desperately some people want to believe in continuity against all the evidence of place-names, personal names, tribal names etc. The name for the river Rhine is Celtic.

Sorry but it's hard to believe that whole Germany(Northern parts like Lower Saxony/Schleswig-Holstein) was Celtic speaking and there were no other dialects/languages at all.

Jean M
10-24-2014, 05:23 AM
Sorry but it's hard to believe that whole Germany(Northern parts like Lower Saxony/Schleswig-Holstein) was Celtic speaking and there were no other dialects/languages at all.

Well that's true enough. Germany is a big place and by the time we get Roman sources for place-names, it was Germanic-speaking, so it is just about impossible to say where the linguistic boundary was in the Bronze Age. The Celtic place-names map is here: http://cadair.aber.ac.uk/dspace/bitstream/handle/2160/282/FalileyevMap.pdf You will need to enlarge it to read the names.

vettor
10-24-2014, 06:39 PM
Well that's true enough. Germany is a big place and by the time we get Roman sources for place-names, it was Germanic-speaking, so it is just about impossible to say where the linguistic boundary was in the Bronze Age. The Celtic place-names map is here: http://cadair.aber.ac.uk/dspace/bitstream/handle/2160/282/FalileyevMap.pdf You will need to enlarge it to read the names.

People need to know that the only way to seperate languages on a map both past and present is with a map of isoglosses referencing a particulr language in question.

with this system, it is noted by linguistic scholars, that celtic only shares a very few isoglosses with southern germany ( below the danube river) , a clear indication that the celtic origin was not there.
https://www.univie.ac.at/indogermanistik/download/Stifter/oldcelt2008_2_lepontic.pdf

a modern isogloss would be this one which is this present from the roman times to now
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Spezia%E2%80%93Rimini_Line

TigerMW
10-24-2014, 06:53 PM
People need to know that the only way to seperate languages on a map both past and present is with a map of isoglosses referencing a particulr language in question.

with this system, it is noted by linguistic scholars, that celtic only shares a very few isoglosses with southern germany ( below the danube river) , a clear indication that the celtic origin was not there.
https://www.univie.ac.at/indogermanistik/download/Stifter/oldcelt2008_2_lepontic.pdf

a modern isogloss would be this one which is this present from the roman times to now
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Spezia%E2%80%93Rimini_Line

It looks like the hill country and plateaus along the northern side of the Alps had plenty of Celtic place names. They didn't call Bohemia, Bohemia for no reason.

Jean M
10-24-2014, 07:13 PM
People need to know that the only way to seperate languages on a map both past and present is with a map of isoglosses referencing a particular language in question. celtic only shares a very few isoglosses with southern germany

An isogloss is not the same as a linguistic border. It is a sound change. It cannot be plotted on a map unless you are talking about place-names or dialects. Celtic does not share any isoglosses whatever with southern Germany, because southern Germany is a geographical region and not a language. By the time a Germanic language was spoke in southern Germany, Proto-Celtic had long ceased to be. It had divided up into daughter languages. The incoming Germani encountered /fought people speaking Gaulish.

Jean M
10-24-2014, 07:16 PM
It looks like the hill country and plateaus along the northern side of the Alps had plenty of Celtic place names. They didn't call Bohemia, Bohemia for no reason.

Yep. The Germani chased the Boii out of Bohemia. They seem to have pushed in several directions, including Italy.

Hok
10-24-2014, 07:17 PM
Well that's true enough. Germany is a big place and by the time we get Roman sources for place-names, it was Germanic-speaking, so it is just about impossible to say where the linguistic boundary was in the Bronze Age. The Celtic place-names map is here: http://cadair.aber.ac.uk/dspace/bitstream/handle/2160/282/FalileyevMap.pdf You will need to enlarge it to read the names.

Thank you for the map and i do agree that probably a big part of Germany was Celtic speaking before the Germanic migrations from the North. I also wonder which groups lived in Eastern Germany in the Bronze Age. Do you have some info about that one?

vettor
10-24-2014, 07:26 PM
An isogloss is not the same as a linguistic border. It is a sound change. It cannot be plotted on a map unless you are talking about place-names or dialects. Celtic does not share any isoglosses whatever with southern Germany, because southern Germany is a geographical region and not a language. By the time a Germanic language was spoke in southern Germany, Proto-Celtic had long ceased to be. It had divided up into daughter languages. The incoming Germani encountered /fought people speaking Gaulish.

we agree,
except as per what an isogloss represents in view of linguistic scholars

Hando
10-24-2014, 07:28 PM
Write-up from GenomeWeb:



http://cdnwww.genomeweb.com/sequencing/ashg-panelists-discuss-new-insights-european-population-structure
1) If Yamnaya was the product of EEF that split from the rest of the EEF and mixed with Eastern hunter gatherers, I assume this to mean that Yamnaya was mostly EEF with some hunter gatherer. If I'm correct this means Indo Europeans were mostly EEF with little Hunter gatherer and negligible if any ANE. I thought Indo European had significant ANE. Now this seems incorrect.
2) Furthermore, when it states "middle Neolithic population mixed with Yamnaya to form the late Neolithic Corded Ware" what is this "middle neolithic"? EEF? If so, then once again Indo Europeans and Germanics who were descended from Corded Ware are mostly EEF with little hunter gatherer and little ANE. So where did the ANE related R1a of the Indo Europeans come from in such a significant amount? Surely not EEF.

Hando
10-24-2014, 07:35 PM
An isogloss is not the same as a linguistic border. It is a sound change. It cannot be plotted on a map unless you are talking about place-names or dialects. Celtic does not share any isoglosses whatever with southern Germany, because southern Germany is a geographical region and not a language. By the time a Germanic language was spoke in southern Germany, Proto-Celtic had long ceased to be. It had divided up into daughter languages. The incoming Germani encountered /fought people speaking Gaulish.

So I assume then that what is now southern Germany was indeed populated by Celtic speakers? I assume that Gaulish is Celtic.

dp
10-24-2014, 07:41 PM
Yes, Gaulish was a Celtic tongue.


www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1331158100


Table 1. Minimal glossary of Gaulish translated into European languages
Gaulish English Latin Classical Greek Old Irish Mod. Irish Mod. Scots Gaelic
Syntax: SV (a) SV (a) SV (a) SV (a) VS (b) VS (b) VS (b)
-OS (a) (nom.sg.masc.suffix) (b) -us(a) (a) Absent (b) Absent (b) Absent (b)
-I (a) (gen.sg.masc.suffix) -s (b) -i(a) (a) ICM, vowel change (c) ICM, vowel change (c) ICM, vowel change (c)
-V (a) (dat.sg.masc. suffix) (b) -o,-u(a) (a) ICM, vowel change (c) Absent (b) Absent (b)
-A (a) (nom.sg.fem.suffix) (b) -a(a) , (a) ICM (c) ICM (c) ICM (c)
-AS (a) (gen.sg.fem.suffix) -s (a) -ae(b) , (a) Vowel change (c) Vowel changeadd. (c) Vowel change (c)
parapsidiparaxidi (a) ps frequent (b) ps frequent (b) ps frequent (b) ps rare (a) ps rare (a) ps rare (a)
TEUO- (a) to gods (b) deis (a) ιι( ) (a) do de´ ib (a) do dhe´ ithe (a) do dhiadhan (a)
-XTONION (a) and to men (b) et hominibus (c)
ι πιι( )
(d)
ocus do daı´nib (a) agus do dhaoine (a) agus do dhaoinean (a)
IEVRV, IOVRVS. . . (a) has offered (b) obtulit (b)
ι
ι,πι (c) roı´r (a) ta´ se´ tar e´is a ı´obairt (a) thairgse (d)
-IKNOS (a) (patronymic suffix) son
of (b)
fil. gen. (b) gen. (b) mac gen. (b) (mac) gen. (b) mac gen. (b)
TARVOS (a) bull (b) taurus (a) (a) tarb (a) tarbh (a) tarbh (a)
TRI- (a) three- (a) tri- (a) ι- (a) trı´- (a) trı´- (a) tri- (a)
GARANVS (a) crane (a) grus (a) (a) corr (a) corr mho´na (a) absent (b)
Tuos (a) oven (b) furnus (c) ιπ (d) sorn (e) sorn (e) abhan (b)
LUXTODOS (a) loaded (a) oneratus (b) ι (c) la´n (a) la´n (a) lionta (a)
SUMMA UXSEDIA (a) grand total (b) summa summarum (c) π ι (d) Not determined an t-iomla´n (e) cunntas ( f )
ETI (a) thing as well as thing (b) item (c)
ι (d) ocus (e) agus (e) agus (e)
DUCI (a) person and person (b) et(c)
ι (d) ocus (e) agus (e) agus (e)
. . .DUCI . . . TONI. . . (a) person (and), p. and p. (b) p. et p. et p. (c) p.
ι p.
ι p. (d) p. ocus p. ocus p. (e) p., p. agus p. (e) p. agus p. agus p. (e)
AVVOT, etc. (a) has made (b) fecit (c) ιι ,
(d) do-rigni (e) dhein se´ , rinne se´ (e) rinn (e)
CINTUX (a) first (b) primus (c) π (c) ce´tnae (a) ce´ad (a) ceud (a)
ALLOS (a) second (b) secundus (b)
(c) ta´ naiseaile (a) dara (d) darna (d)
TR[ ] (a) third (a) tertius (a) ι (a) triss (a) trı´u´ (a) treas (a)
PETUAR[] (a) fourth (b) quartus (c) (d) cethramad (c) ceathru´ (c) ceithreamh (c)
PINPETOS (a) fifth (b) quintus (c) ππ (a) co´ iced (c) cu´ igiu´ (c) coigeamh (c)
SUEXOS (a) sixth (a) sextus (a)
(a) seissed (a) se´u´ (a) siathamh (a)
SEXTAMETOS (a) seventh (a) septimus (a)
(a) sechtmad (a) seachtu´ (a) seachdamh (a)
OXTUMETO[] (a) eighth (a) octauius (a)
(a) ochtmad (a) ochtu´ (a) ochdamh (a)
NAMET[] (a) ninth (a) nonius (a) (a) no´mad (a) naou´ (a) naoidheamh (a)
DECAMETOS (a) tenth (b) decimus (a)

(a) dechmad (a) deichiu´ (a) deicheamh (a)
M, MID (a) month (a) mensis (a) (a) mı´ (a) mı´ (a) mios (a)
LAT (a) day (b) dies (b) (c) laithe (a) la´ (a) latha (a)
MATIR (a) mother (a) mater (a) (a) ma´ thair (a) ma´ thair (a) ma` thair (a)
DUXTIR (a) daughter (a) filia (b) (a) ingen (c) inı´on (c) nighean (c)



Wikipedia:
Gaulish is an ancient Celtic language that was spoken in parts of Europe as late as the Roman period. In the narrow sense, Gaulish was the language spoken by the Celtic inhabitants of Gaul (modern France). In a wider sense, it also comprises varieties of Celtic that were spoken across much of central Europe ("Noric"), parts of the Balkans, and Asia Minor ("Galatian"), which are thought to have been closely related.[2][3] The more divergent Lepontic Celtic of Northern Italy has also sometimes been subsumed under Gaulish.[4][5]

I think the more intermixed (culturally via trade, war, history, etc) neighboring societies are the more likely that they will share/trade words between themselves.
dp :-)
PS: I wonder if word borrowing, like degree of relationship, can be detected at elevated levels clinely across Europe (UK [Ireland] to Italy --at least in the last 500 years to stay in keeping with the paper I'm thinking of.

Jean M
10-24-2014, 07:47 PM
we agree,
except as per what an isogloss represents in view of linguistic scholars

My apologies Vettor. I don't know what I was thinking. You are right. I am wrong.

vettor
10-24-2014, 07:47 PM
Yes, Gaulish was a Celtic tongue.


www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1331158100


Table 1. Minimal glossary of Gaulish translated into European languages
Gaulish English Latin Classical Greek Old Irish Mod. Irish Mod. Scots Gaelic
Syntax: SV (a) SV (a) SV (a) SV (a) VS (b) VS (b) VS (b)
-OS (a) (nom.sg.masc.suffix) (b) -us(a) (a) Absent (b) Absent (b) Absent (b)
-I (a) (gen.sg.masc.suffix) -s (b) -i(a) (a) ICM, vowel change (c) ICM, vowel change (c) ICM, vowel change (c)
-V (a) (dat.sg.masc. suffix) (b) -o,-u(a) (a) ICM, vowel change (c) Absent (b) Absent (b)
-A (a) (nom.sg.fem.suffix) (b) -a(a) , (a) ICM (c) ICM (c) ICM (c)
-AS (a) (gen.sg.fem.suffix) -s (a) -ae(b) , (a) Vowel change (c) Vowel changeadd. (c) Vowel change (c)
parapsidiparaxidi (a) ps frequent (b) ps frequent (b) ps frequent (b) ps rare (a) ps rare (a) ps rare (a)
TEUO- (a) to gods (b) deis (a) ιι( ) (a) do de´ ib (a) do dhe´ ithe (a) do dhiadhan (a)
-XTONION (a) and to men (b) et hominibus (c)
ι πιι( )
(d)
ocus do daı´nib (a) agus do dhaoine (a) agus do dhaoinean (a)
IEVRV, IOVRVS. . . (a) has offered (b) obtulit (b)
ι
ι,πι (c) roı´r (a) ta´ se´ tar e´is a ı´obairt (a) thairgse (d)
-IKNOS (a) (patronymic suffix) son
of (b)
fil. gen. (b) gen. (b) mac gen. (b) (mac) gen. (b) mac gen. (b)
TARVOS (a) bull (b) taurus (a) (a) tarb (a) tarbh (a) tarbh (a)
TRI- (a) three- (a) tri- (a) ι- (a) trı´- (a) trı´- (a) tri- (a)
GARANVS (a) crane (a) grus (a) (a) corr (a) corr mho´na (a) absent (b)
Tuos (a) oven (b) furnus (c) ιπ (d) sorn (e) sorn (e) abhan (b)
LUXTODOS (a) loaded (a) oneratus (b) ι (c) la´n (a) la´n (a) lionta (a)
SUMMA UXSEDIA (a) grand total (b) summa summarum (c) π ι (d) Not determined an t-iomla´n (e) cunntas ( f )
ETI (a) thing as well as thing (b) item (c)
ι (d) ocus (e) agus (e) agus (e)
DUCI (a) person and person (b) et(c)
ι (d) ocus (e) agus (e) agus (e)
. . .DUCI . . . TONI. . . (a) person (and), p. and p. (b) p. et p. et p. (c) p.
ι p.
ι p. (d) p. ocus p. ocus p. (e) p., p. agus p. (e) p. agus p. agus p. (e)
AVVOT, etc. (a) has made (b) fecit (c) ιι ,
(d) do-rigni (e) dhein se´ , rinne se´ (e) rinn (e)
CINTUX (a) first (b) primus (c) π (c) ce´tnae (a) ce´ad (a) ceud (a)
ALLOS (a) second (b) secundus (b)
(c) ta´ naiseaile (a) dara (d) darna (d)
TR[ ] (a) third (a) tertius (a) ι (a) triss (a) trı´u´ (a) treas (a)
PETUAR[] (a) fourth (b) quartus (c) (d) cethramad (c) ceathru´ (c) ceithreamh (c)
PINPETOS (a) fifth (b) quintus (c) ππ (a) co´ iced (c) cu´ igiu´ (c) coigeamh (c)
SUEXOS (a) sixth (a) sextus (a)
(a) seissed (a) se´u´ (a) siathamh (a)
SEXTAMETOS (a) seventh (a) septimus (a)
(a) sechtmad (a) seachtu´ (a) seachdamh (a)
OXTUMETO[] (a) eighth (a) octauius (a)
(a) ochtmad (a) ochtu´ (a) ochdamh (a)
NAMET[] (a) ninth (a) nonius (a) (a) no´mad (a) naou´ (a) naoidheamh (a)
DECAMETOS (a) tenth (b) decimus (a)

(a) dechmad (a) deichiu´ (a) deicheamh (a)
M, MID (a) month (a) mensis (a) (a) mı´ (a) mı´ (a) mios (a)
LAT (a) day (b) dies (b) (c) laithe (a) la´ (a) latha (a)
MATIR (a) mother (a) mater (a) (a) ma´ thair (a) ma´ thair (a) ma` thair (a)
DUXTIR (a) daughter (a) filia (b) (a) ingen (c) inı´on (c) nighean (c)




to a degree, their are gaulish and celtic words which are different

http://digilib.phil.muni.cz/bitstream/handle/11222.digilib/114125/N_GraecoLatina_13-2008-1_4.pdf

Gaulish is oldest written info is circa 500BC, celtic oldest written info is circa 330BC

TigerMW
10-24-2014, 09:12 PM
to a degree, their are gaulish and celtic words which are different

http://digilib.phil.muni.cz/bitstream/handle/11222.digilib/114125/N_GraecoLatina_13-2008-1_4.pdf

Gaulish is oldest written info is circa 500BC, celtic oldest written info is circa 330BC

I'm not sure what are definitions of Celtic are here. Proto-Celtic would have been spoken long before Gaulish and other Celtic languages, be they Gaelic, Brythonic or whatever.