So who were the first farmers in NW Europe?

[JeanL]

... Why is it that most G2a in Europe today gets TMRCA that is about 2 or 3 times lower than its known presence from aDNA, what should we expect for a haplogroup that got nearly annihilated in the Neolithic? 

Please explain the point about G2a (G-P15.)  I've read Dienekes make some kind of point on this too.  I may be looking at different TMRCA calculations for Hg G than you, but when I look at Marko Heinila's work, which is the only one I've seen with long haplotypes and tens of thousands of haplotypes, I don't see anything that looks out of place.

Heinila has G2a (G-P15) with an intraclade TMRCA of 11k ybp, but more importantly, the interclade TMRCA for G-P15 and G-M337 as 15k ybp. We can view the 15k ybp as a maximum age for either G-P15 or G-M337 with 11k ybp for G-P15 as approximate time of initial expansion.

For comparison purposes, Heinila has intraclade TMRCAs for R-M269 as 5.7k ybp, R-L23 as 5.7k ybp and R-L11 as 4.8k ybp.

Unfortunately there is not adequate* data for extant brother subclades for L23 and L11 so we can't calculate a valid interclade TMRCA. M269 (R1b1a2) does have a brother Heinila used, M73 (R1b1a1.) The interclade TMRCA for M269 and M73 is 15k ybp so that puts a kind of a maximum on M269's age.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17907527/TMRCAs_for_major_Y_Hgs_by_Heinila_2011.html

Anyway, I just don't see anything that really looks out of place.


* Actually I see he only had a sample size of 16 for R-M73 so I wouldn't bet the world on that either.

You seem to have missed the “In Europe” part, so the dates you provided are for the overall haplogroup in and outside of Europe, whereas I’m only talking about inside of Europe.

Moreover, take a look here:

http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=10647.msg131171#msg131171

MarkJost calculated the TMRCA of the G2a data from Rootsi et al.2012, this is what he said:

You mentioned the period of G2 but there is a huge amount of Caucasus HT's in the oldest P15  and P16 which would be Eneolithic/Bronze ages in Middle East: 4500 to 3300 BC? 1.5K back to founder suggests a very small, if any, growth but around 5K Ybp must have had substantial growth in the Caucasus after first 60 generations or so. After that a SNP mutation occurs on an average of every 11 generations or 275 years.
...

G-P15 Founder GA=   269   6,726
G-P16 GB coal=   208   5,208
G-P15 GA coal=   200   4,998
G-M285 GB coal=   171   4,275
G-P20 GB coal=   151   3,767
G-M406 GB coal=   143   3,575
G-M406 GB coal=   143   3,575
G-U1 GB coal=   126   3,150
R-L21 GB coal=   105   2,624
G-Page19 GB coal=   92   2,294
G-M527 GB coal=   89   2,235
G-L497 GB coal=   83   2,082
G-M485 GB coal=   82   2,038
G-L91 GB coal=   78   1,959
G-M377 GB coal=   70   1,758"

   


PS: G2a was found in Avellanar, Catalonia 7000 ybp. That is what I was referring to.

[JeanL]

I generally try to discern evidence from interpretation. Evidence is a set of facts.

Can you be a little more specific on the "current pattern" that you based your interpretation on?  What specific diversity, frequency or phylogenetic data are you looking at?

Explain why non-IndoEuropean speaking Basques have a peak in frequency of R1b-P312+ subclades, whereas IndoEuropean speaking Brits are vastly R1b-L21. Why nonIndoEuropean(Before Roman Conquest) speaking Sardinians have a descent amount of R1b-U152? Why Caucasian speaking Bagvalals have 67.9% R1b-L23(xL51). Why nonIndoeuropan(Prior to Roman Conquest) speaking Iberians such as Aragonenses and Catalonians show a far higher percentage of R1b-M269+ as their Celtic speaking counterparts(i.e. Cantabrians, Asturians, Galicians)? I simply do not see a Bronze age expansion of R1b-M269, where a good portion of Western Europe remains nonIndoEuropean speaking, yet absorbs a lot of "IndoEuropean" y-DNA. I know it is easier to dismiss the Basque today, but pre-Roman Iberian had quite some areas that were nonIndoEuropean speaking, yet those areas show some significant amount of R1b-M269+ today.

[alan trowel hands.]

The "genetic bottleneck" argument has always struck me as very weak and the last refuge of the Paleolithic R1b crowd remnant.

Haplotype variance a trifle low? That's easy to explain! Must have been a "genetic bottleneck"!

Not impossible. Surely such things happen or have happened. But the supposition is not very convincing.

....
Well what is the difference between a bottleneck at the onset of the Neolithic in the Atlantic fringes of France and the Franco Cantabrian region, and a bottleneck circa 3700 ybp in Iberia for R1b-P312 newcomers from Africa? I think the latter is a theory pushed by one of the genetic hobbyists that has argued for a Bronze Age arrival of R1b-P312 in Western Europe.  Why is it that most G2a in Europe today gets TMRCA that is about 2 or 3 times lower than its known presence from aDNA, what should we expect for a haplogroup that got nearly annihilated in the Neolithic?  

Please explain the point about G2a (G-P15.)  I've read Dienekes make some kind of point on this too.  I may be looking at different TMRCA calculations for Hg G than you, but when I look at Marko Heinila's work, which is the only one I've seen with long haplotypes and tens of thousands of haplotypes, I don't see anything that looks out of place.

Heinila has G2a (G-P15) with an intraclade TMRCA of 11k ybp, but more importantly, the interclade TMRCA for G-P15 and G-M337 as 15k ybp. We can view the 15k ybp as a maximum age for either G-P15 or G-M337 with 11k ybp for G-P15 as approximate time of initial expansion.

For comparison purposes, Heinila has intraclade TMRCAs for R-M269 as 5.7k ybp, R-L23 as 5.7k ybp and R-L11 as 4.8k ybp.

Unfortunately there is not adequate* data for extant brother subclades for L23 and L11 so we can't calculate a valid interclade TMRCA. M269 (R1b1a2) does have a brother Heinila used, M73 (R1b1a1.) The interclade TMRCA for M269 and M73 is 15k ybp so that puts a kind of a maximum on M269's age.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17907527/TMRCAs_for_major_Y_Hgs_by_Heinila_2011.html

Anyway, I just don't see anything that really looks out of place.


* Actually I see he only had a sample size of 16 for R-M73 so I wouldn't bet the world on that either.

It is amazing how unsuccessful in expansion R1b (and I suppose R1a too) were between the Upper Palaelithic and 4000BC if you take the variance calculations at face value (which for now I am doing as they seem to have proved themselves by stacking up with ancient DNA nicely).  I think again, the striking thing is the similarity of R1a and R1b and I am beginning to believe their story up to 4000BC (give or take) is mighty similar.  I now think both may have lived in a non-farming zone until that sort of period.  Very modest branching = non farming zone as far as I can see.  It seems to me that the only real difference between R1b and R1a is that some R1b entered the farming zone c. 4000BC.  However, I now am thinking they lived in a very similar area and economy prior to that date.  I am no longer convinced we know anything about R1b much above L23*.  There is a huge chasm of time between the Upper Palaeolithic and 4000BC when nothing tangeable survives except scattered remanants but my feeling now is that the idea that R1b is farmer and R1a hunter is almost certainly wrong pre-4000BC or even later.  So when we look for where R1b was holed up before L23/4000BC I think we can rule out all agricultural areas.  it surely was not located the farming zone.  So, I think we can eliminate Mesopotamia, Anatolia, the Balkans etc where farming was early. We need to look at late non-farming groups.  I am no expert in this very obscure subject.  So where were non-farming population hanging on in 4000BC.  Seems to me to favour some sort of steppes or nearby homeland for R1b.  

[Mikewww]

I generally try to discern evidence from interpretation. Evidence is a set of facts.

Can you be a little more specific on the "current pattern" that you based your interpretation on?  What specific diversity, frequency or phylogenetic data are you looking at?

Explain why non-IndoEuropean speaking Basques have a peak in frequency of R1b-P312+ subclades, whereas IndoEuropean speaking Brits are vastly R1b-L21.

Why nonIndoEuropean(Before Roman Conquest) speaking Sardinians have a descent amount of R1b-U152?

Why Caucasian speaking Bagvalals have 67.9% R1b-L23(xL51).

Why nonIndoeuropan(Prior to Roman Conquest) speaking Iberians such as Aragonenses and Catalonians show a far higher percentage of R1b-M269+ as their Celtic speaking counterparts(i.e. Cantabrians, Asturians, Galicians)?

I simply do not see a Bronze age expansion of R1b-M269, where a good portion of Western Europe remains nonIndoEuropean speaking, yet absorbs a lot of "IndoEuropean" y-DNA. I know it is easier to dismiss the Basque today, but pre-Roman Iberian had quite some areas that were nonIndoEuropean speaking, yet those areas show some significant amount of R1b-M269+ today.

Thank you for responding specifically.

If I may, I would summarize the "current pattern" that drives your interpretation as...

Several R1b significant populations are non-IE speaking. They would include:
1) Sardinians whom you feel descend from ancient non-IE speakers
2) Basques speaking Euskara
3) Bagvalals speaking Caucasian
4) Aragonenses and Catalonians whom you feel descend from ancient non-IE Iberians

Very good. That's gives a good list to evaluate.  Let me know if I misunderstand something about this "current pattern." I'm not strong on linguistics matters, but hopefully others will add comments while I try to brush up a bit.

[alan trowel hands.]

...and I am interested in getting a detailed map of the spread of agriculture in eastern Europe and SW/ central Asia.  I know some generalistic ones exist but I am hoping Jean M may know where the very latest maps are.  Broadly speaking I am wondering exactly which areas were intruded into by agriculture c. 4000-3000BC, the period when R1b seems to emerge from about 9000 years of non-branching of any significance. Those are the areas where I think R1b must have lurked.  I did see a map that seemed to suggest farming was late even on the south-east shore of the Black Sea just north of the core farming zone including the north-east of Anatolia Black Sea shores but I am skeptical of that map.

Two things strike me about R1b- it seems to have been late to farming and it seems to have had a maritime tradition behind it judging by its exploits after 3000BC.  I am thinking Black Sea shore hunter-fishers.  I do think that R1b was a little closer to the farming zone than R1b but not by much.  

[JeanL]

Thank you for responding specifically.

If I may, I would summarize the "current pattern" that drives your interpretation as...

Several R1b significant populations are non-IE speaking. They would include:
1) Sardinians whom you feel descend from ancient non-IE speakers
2) Basques speaking Euskara
3) Bagvalals speaking Caucasian
4) Aragonenses and Catalonians whom you feel descend from ancient non-IE Iberians

Very good. That's gives a good list to evaluate.  Let me know if I misunderstand something about this "current pattern." I'm not strong on linguistics matters, but hopefully others will add comments while I try to brush up a bit.

1)I think it is safe to assume that the R1b-M269 in Sardinians is pre-Roman, due to the fact that the external influences in Sardinians came from sources that weren’t rich on R1b-M269. So a good question is why Sardinians that were pre-IndoEuropean speaking have high R1b-M269. They are also high on I-M26, and have moderate frequencies of G2a.
I’m trying to find something that would harmonize the linguistic distribution found in R1b-L23+ bearers, of course, some language might have come from other haplogroups.  But it is clear to me, that some R1b-L23+ was IE speaking, and some wasn’t IE speaking.  

[Mikewww]

... Why is it that most G2a in Europe today gets TMRCA that is about 2 or 3 times lower than its known presence from aDNA, what should we expect for a haplogroup that got nearly annihilated in the Neolithic?  

Please explain the point about G2a (G-P15.)  I've read Dienekes make some kind of point on this too.  I may be looking at different TMRCA calculations for Hg G than you, but when I look at Marko Heinila's work, which is the only one I've seen with long haplotypes and tens of thousands of haplotypes, I don't see anything that looks out of place.

Heinila has G2a (G-P15) with an intraclade TMRCA of 11k ybp, but more importantly, the interclade TMRCA for G-P15 and G-M337 as 15k ybp. We can view the 15k ybp as a maximum age for either G-P15 or G-M337 with 11k ybp for G-P15 as approximate time of initial expansion.

For comparison purposes, Heinila has intraclade TMRCAs for R-M269 as 5.7k ybp, R-L23 as 5.7k ybp and R-L11 as 4.8k ybp.

Unfortunately there is not adequate* data for extant brother subclades for L23 and L11 so we can't calculate a valid interclade TMRCA. M269 (R1b1a2) does have a brother Heinila used, M73 (R1b1a1.) The interclade TMRCA for M269 and M73 is 15k ybp so that puts a kind of a maximum on M269's age.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17907527/TMRCAs_for_major_Y_Hgs_by_Heinila_2011.html

Anyway, I just don't see anything that really looks out of place.


* Actually I see he only had a sample size of 16 for R-M73 so I wouldn't bet the world on that either.

You seem to have missed the “In Europe” part, so the dates you provided are for the overall haplogroup in and outside of Europe, whereas I’m only talking about inside of Europe.

Moreover, take a look here:

http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=10647.msg131171#msg131171

MarkJost calculated the TMRCA of the G2a data from Rootsi et al.2012, this is what he said:

You mentioned the period of G2 but there is a huge amount of Caucasus HT's in the oldest P15  and P16 which would be Eneolithic/Bronze ages in Middle East: 4500 to 3300 BC? 1.5K back to founder suggests a very small, if any, growth but around 5K Ybp must have had substantial growth in the Caucasus after first 60 generations or so. After that a SNP mutation occurs on an average of every 11 generations or 275 years.
...

G-P15 Founder GA=   269   6,726
G-P16 GB coal=   208   5,208
G-P15 GA coal=   200   4,998
G-M285 GB coal=   171   4,275
G-P20 GB coal=   151   3,767
G-M406 GB coal=   143   3,575
G-M406 GB coal=   143   3,575
G-U1 GB coal=   126   3,150
R-L21 GB coal=   105   2,624
G-Page19 GB coal=   92   2,294
G-M527 GB coal=   89   2,235
G-L497 GB coal=   83   2,082
G-M485 GB coal=   82   2,038
G-L91 GB coal=   78   1,959
G-M377 GB coal=   70   1,758"

PS: G2a was found in Avellanar, Catalonia 7000 ybp. That is what I was referring to.

Okay, duly noted, we are talking about G2a "in Europe." I'm just trying to match up your statements so I can see them clearly.

Why is it that most G2a in Europe today gets TMRCA that is about 2 or 3 times lower than its known presence from aDNA

G2a was found in Avellanar, Catalonia7000 ybp

G-P15 Founder GA=   269    6,726

G-P15 GA coal=   200   4,998

Where does the "2 or 3 times lower" come into play?  I see Jost has 5.0k ybp (4,998) as a coalescence age but that is about 71% of the 7k ybp aDNA not 50% or 33%.  
Am I looking at the right comparison?

[JeanL]

Why is it that most G2a in Europe today gets TMRCA that is about 2 or 3 times lower than its known presence from aDNA

G2a was found in Avellanar, Catalonia7000 ybp

G-P15 Founder GA=   269    6,726

G-P15 GA coal=   200   4,998

Where does the "2 or 3 times lower" come into play?  I see Jost has 5.0k ybp (4,998) as a coalescence age but that is about 71% of the 7k ybp aDNA not 50% or 33%. 
Am I looking at the right comparison?

Jost data is of the whole dataset, not just Europe, the variance of G-P15+ is 0.4239 for Europe (n=189) using 16 STR from Rootsi.et.al.2012. I would have to calculate the TMRCA.

[Mikewww]

....If I may, I would summarize the "current pattern" that drives your interpretation as...

Several R1b significant populations are non-IE speaking. They would include:
1) Sardinians whom you feel descend from ancient non-IE speakers
....

1)I think it is safe to assume that the R1b-M269 in Sardinians is pre-Roman, due to the fact that the external influences in Sardinians came from sources that weren’t rich on R1b-M269. So a good question is why Sardinians that were pre-IndoEuropean speaking have high R1b-M269. They are also high on I-M26, and have moderate frequencies of G2a.

I’m trying to find something that would harmonize the linguistic distribution found in R1b-L23+ bearers, of course, some language might have come from other haplogroups.  But it is clear to me, that some R1b-L23+ was IE speaking, and some wasn’t IE speaking.  

You ask "So a good question is why Sardinians that were pre-IndoEuropean speaking have high R1b-M269".  Why do you ask that that?  Are you assuming pre-Roman R-M269 must be non-IE? I'm not that familiar with Sardinian history? Were they for sure non-IE speaking?

We don't really know what Bell Beakers and Urnfielders spoke but they have some cultural affinities to IE traditions.
"U152 - Bell Beakers and Urnfield Tradition in Italy" by Richard Rocca.

Bell Beaker sites and U152 are uncommon on the Adriatic coast. Both are more common in Corsica, Sardinia and Sicily than on the southern peninsula. It can be inferred from older R1b studies from Corsica, Sardinia and Sicily that U152 is also similarly distributed in a north and/or western pattern in those islands
....
Early Bell Beakers are thought to have reached Italy from coastal France. These earlier Bell Beakers are thought to have traveled from Tuscany to Sardinia, and from north-western Sardinia to south-western Corsica

http://www.u152.org/

[Mikewww]

Why is it that most G2a in Europe today gets TMRCA that is about 2 or 3 times lower than its known presence from aDNA

G2a was found in Avellanar, Catalonia7000 ybp

G-P15 Founder GA=   269    6,726

G-P15 GA coal=   200   4,998

Where does the "2 or 3 times lower" come into play?  I see Jost has 5.0k ybp (4,998) as a coalescence age but that is about 71% of the 7k ybp aDNA not 50% or 33%.  
Am I looking at the right comparison?

Jost data is of the whole dataset, not just Europe, the variance of G-P15+ is 0.4239 for Europe (n=189) using 16 STR from Rootsi.et.al.2012. I would have to calculate the TMRCA.

Are you looking at the same data that I am?
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg201286s1.html

I see only 43 G-P15 haplotypes for all of Europe in Rootsi's "Supplementary Table 1. Haplogroup G and its sub-clades frequency %"
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg201286s1.html

MJost was only using 15 STRs. I think that is too few to conclude much. There are only 9 G-P15 people in Rootsi Table from Iberia which is where the aDNA is from.

TMRCAs for a geography are a precarious undertaking, as RMS has noted in the discussion about diversity for R1b in North America.  We don't know that the people in a particular haplogrup in a particular location have a common ancestor from that location or, particularly given these small samples, they are representative of the location.

[Richard Rocca]

Pre-Roman non-IE speaking Sardinians are probably a good argument against a non-IE/R1b link. Modern Sardinians are overwhelmingly I-M26:

Pardo et al (2012):
I-M26 = 42.31%
M269 = 15.00%

Contu et al (2008):
I-M26 = 37.0%
M269 = 17.00%

Sardinian M269 is heavily AMH and the majority of it is U152. M269 is found heaviest in Bell Beaker areas, whereas I-M26 is found in non-Bell Beaker areas (Center-East).

Outside of what looks like the product of a small sample from Castile Spain (19% of 21 samples), the next highest I-M26 frequency is from Zuberoa Basques (17%). As a whole, French Basques are also high (9%). In the recent Martinez-Cruz paper, they went out of their way to mention the importance of I-M26 in Basques:

"Besides the high frequency of R1b1b2-M269 and its sub-haplogroups, the frequency of the haplogroup I2a1-M26 is noteworthy, and is consistent with what has been reported for other regions in Spain. I2a1-M26 is present at high frequencies in Sardinia (35-37%) but is very rare in other western European populations and even absent in the rest of Europe."

If I had to guess on some early non-IE speaking Sardinian-Iberian-Aquitani tribe continuum marker, it would be I-M26.

[JeanL]

Are you looking at the same data that I am?
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg201286s1.html

I see only 43 G-P15 haplotypes for all of Europe in Rootsi's "Supplementary Table 1. Haplogroup G and its sub-clades frequency %"
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg201286s1.html

MJost was only using 15 STRs. I think that is too few to conclude much. There are only 9 G-P15 people in Rootsi Table from Iberia which is where the aDNA is from.

Sure we are, because it isn’t G-P15, but G-P15+(So anything downstream of G-P15, including G-P15*).

TMRCAs for a geography are a precarious undertaking, as RMS has noted in the discussion about diversity for R1b in North America.  We don't know that the people in a particular haplogrup in a particular location have a common ancestor from that location or, particularly given these small samples, they are representative of the location.

Well those concerns would pretty much apply to any haplogroup, so I don’t see why we would need to bring them up?  If think that European data collected in European subjects for Academic studies randomly, it is as good as it gets. Do you think all R1b present in Anatolia was there 2000 ybp, or could some have gotten there during the historical era?

[Mikewww]

Are you looking at the same data that I am?
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg201286s1.html

I see only 43 G-P15 haplotypes for all of Europe in Rootsi's "Supplementary Table 1. Haplogroup G and its sub-clades frequency %"
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg201286s1.html

MJost was only using 15 STRs. I think that is too few to conclude much. There are only 9 G-P15 people in Rootsi Table from Iberia which is where the aDNA is from.

Sure we are, because it isn’t G-P15, but G-P15+(So anything downstream of G-P15, including G-P15*)....

Okay, where does the "2 or 3 times lower" come into play if it wasn't MJost's calculations you were comparing to aDNA.  I'm just trying to follow your reasoning.  You are one who made these statements.

[Maliclavelli]

If I had to guess on some early non-IE speaking Sardinian-Iberian-Aquitani tribe continuum marker, it would be I-M26.

About a possible link of Sardinian with Basque (Caucasian) I have written something also recently (thiligugu/čori-GAGA) and Alfredo Trombetti thought that Etruscan was intermediate between Caucasian and Indo-European. This to say that ancient Italy could get a Caucasian language (Sardinian/Corsican), an intermediate language Etruscan-Rhaetian-Camun and an Indo-European one (centum version Italic-Celt-Germanic, the most ancient IE: satem languages are more recent and presuppose the centum ones). We were in Mesolithic and there were little peoples and Italy, even though little, was almost great for them.

[Humanist]

TMRCAs for a geography are a precarious undertaking, as RMS has noted in the discussion about diversity for R1b in North America.  We don't know that the people in a particular haplogrup in a particular location have a common ancestor from that location or, particularly given these small samples, they are representative of the location.

Well those concerns would pretty much apply to any haplogroup, so I don’t see why we would need to bring them up?  If think that European data collected in European subjects for Academic studies randomly, it is as good as it gets. Do you think all R1b present in Anatolia was there 2000 ybp, or could some have gotten there during the historical era?

It is certainly possible some lines entered during the historical era, but if they did, they did not survive the farther east one travels.  I would look for such lines, if they still exist, along the coast of the Levant.

In the ME and Anatolia (excluding Persia), without fail, the highest frequencies of R-M269 are observed among the minority populations (from those sampled).  Most of these populations had lived as dhimmis* for the better part of the last two millennia.  Plus, most populations have very low levels of R1a1, very low or undetected I1/I2, and very low or undetected (if we use Dodecad K12b) "North European."


*

The Status of Non-Muslim Minorities Under Islamic Rule

Dhimmitude: the Islamic system of governing populations conquered by jihad wars, encompassing all of the demographic, ethnic, and religious aspects of the political system. The word "dhimmitude" as a historical concept, was coined by Bat Ye'or in 1983 to describe the legal and social conditions of Jews and Christians subjected to Islamic rule. The word "dhimmitude" comes from dhimmi, an Arabic word meaning "protected". Dhimmi was the name applied by the Arab-Muslim conquerors to indigenous non-Muslim populations who surrendered by a treaty (dhimma) to Muslim domination. Islamic conquests expanded over vast territories in Africa, Europe and Asia, for over a millennium (638-1683). The Muslim empire incorporated numerous varied peoples which had their own religion, culture, language and civilization. For centuries, these indigenous, pre-Islamic peoples constituted the great majority of the population of the Islamic lands. Although these populations differed, they were ruled by the same type of laws, based on the shari'a.

Bat Ye'or

[Maliclavelli]

Okay, where does the "2 or 3 times lower" come into play if it wasn't MJost's calculations you were comparing to aDNA.  I'm just trying to follow your reasoning.  You are one who made these statements.

I have written tons of letters about this.

[Mikewww]

TMRCAs for a geography are a precarious undertaking, as RMS has noted in the discussion about diversity for R1b in North America.  We don't know that the people in a particular haplogrup in a particular location have a common ancestor from that location or, particularly given these small samples, they are representative of the location.

Well those concerns would pretty much apply to any haplogroup, so I don’t see why we would need to bring them up?  If think that European data collected in European subjects for Academic studies randomly, it is as good as it gets. Do you think all R1b present in Anatolia was there 2000 ybp, or could some have gotten there during the historical era?

The concerns are real, that's why I bring them up. We shouldn't ignore them just because they apply across the board.  I'm still not sure where you calculated the young G-P15 age, but of what I've seen, the data is very limited.

I would contrast that to some data sets.  For instance, I think Marko Heinila had somewhere around 14,0000 haplotypes in some of his R-M269 TMRCA calculations.  Now we are talking significant amounts of daa, and not with just 15 STRs.  

Statistics are valuable, but they must be taken in context of each other, other evidence and the potential accuracy (or lack of it) due to limited data samples.

[JeanL]

Sardinian M269 is heavily AMH and the majority of it is U152. M269 is found heaviest in Bell Beaker areas, whereas I-M26 is found in non-Bell Beaker areas (Center-East).

You got any proof for that? Meaning do you have frequency distributions for places that are known to be Beaker in the past vs.non-Beaker areas.

Outside of what looks like the product of a small sample from Castile Spain (19% of 21 samples), the next highest I-M26 frequency is from Zuberoa Basques (17%). As a whole, French Basques are also high (9%).

[...]

If I had to guess on some early non-IE speaking Sardinian-Iberian-Aquitani tribe continuum marker, it would be I-M26.

Per Martinez-Cruz et  al(2012) I-M26 is found as follows:

Lapurdi/Nafarroa Beherea ZMX (n=44) Table S4

I-M26  3/44 or 6.82%

Nafarroa Beherea NLA (n=66) Table S4

I-M26  8/66 or 12.12%

Zuberoa SOU (n=53) Table S4

I-M26     9/53 or 16.98%

Roncal, Nafarroa  RON (n=53) Table S4

I-M26    2/53 or 3.77%

Central/Western Nafarroa  NCO (n=60) Table S4

I-M26 3/60 or 5%

North/Western Nafarroa  NNO (n=51) Table S4

I-M26     4/51 7.84%

Guipuscoa GUI (n=47) Table S4

I-M26     2/47 or 4.26%

Southwestern Guipuscoa GSO (n=57) Table S4

I-M26     2/57 or 3.51%

Alava, ALA (n=51) Table S4

I-M26    2/51 or 3.92%

Bizkaia BBA (n=57) Table S4

I-M26     1/57 or 1.75%

Western Bizkaia BOC(n=19) Table S4

I-M26     1/19 or 10.53%

There is also this:

http://www.plosone.org/article/slideshow.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0010419&imageURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0010419.t001

Which shows that R1b-M269 has the highest variance in Sardinia, followed by G-M201, followed by I-M26, followed by E-M78.

[JeanL]

Okay, where does the "2 or 3 times lower" come into play if it wasn't MJost's calculations you were comparing to aDNA.  I'm just trying to follow your reasoning.  You are one who made these statements.

It comes from Ötzi being G2a4 or G-L91, and the TMRCA of G-L91 being 1959 ybp per Mark Jost calculations, sample size of 47 haplotypes, when the Iceman lived 5300 years ago. 5300/1959= 2.70 times more.

[Richard Rocca]

Different Sardinian studies (there are a handful of them) have tested in different areas of the island and some differ slightly, but when you take all of them together you get a pattern that looks like the following:

I-M26 in the Center and East
M269 in the west and the south
G in the far north (Closest to S. Corsica where G is most prevalent)

Not surprisingly, the only two Sardinian samples in the FTDNA Italy project are both found in the western part of the island and they are both U152+.
 
Considering how rare I-M26 is outside of Sardinia, those Martinez-Cruz numbers (that average out to roughly 7%) are extremely high.

[David Mc]

First time post.

JeanL, Looking at the history of Sardinia, it had some impact from the Bell Beaker culture, and it was occupied by the Romans, the Italians, and the Spanish (specifically Aragon). Unless I am mistaken, M269 is present in all of these populations. Why assume that Sardinian M269 predates the influx of these varied populations?

[rms2]

Pre-Roman non-IE speaking Sardinians are probably a good argument against a non-IE/R1b link. Modern Sardinians are overwhelmingly I-M26:

Pardo et al (2012):
I-M26 = 42.31%
M269 = 15.00%

Contu et al (2008):
I-M26 = 37.0%
M269 = 17.00%

Sardinian M269 is heavily AMH and the majority of it is U152. M269 is found heaviest in Bell Beaker areas, whereas I-M26 is found in non-Bell Beaker areas (Center-East).

Outside of what looks like the product of a small sample from Castile Spain (19% of 21 samples), the next highest I-M26 frequency is from Zuberoa Basques (17%). As a whole, French Basques are also high (9%). In the recent Martinez-Cruz paper, they went out of their way to mention the importance of I-M26 in Basques:

"Besides the high frequency of R1b1b2-M269 and its sub-haplogroups, the frequency of the haplogroup I2a1-M26 is noteworthy, and is consistent with what has been reported for other regions in Spain. I2a1-M26 is present at high frequencies in Sardinia (35-37%) but is very rare in other western European populations and even absent in the rest of Europe."

If I had to guess on some early non-IE speaking Sardinian-Iberian-Aquitani tribe continuum marker, it would be I-M26.

I have been suggesting that since 2006.

I think it's possible I-M26 was once much more commonplace than it is now and has experienced a decline over the last several millennia.

[rms2]

The level of R-M269 among the Bagvalals is interesting. Wikipedia, not always the best source, but generally reliable for non-controversial stuff, says they are an Avar people. There were about 6,500 speakers of Bagvalal as of 2006, according to this article.

So, we're not talking about a large ethnic group.

It seems to me that by far G2a is the most common y haplogroup among speakers of Caucasian languages. My guess is that, in the Caucasus, Caucasian languages can be attributed to G2a, if they are to be attributed to a y haplogroup at all. Where R1a and R1b occur among Caucasian speakers, they represent non-Caucasian peoples who have been assimilated and who at some point learned to speak a Caucasian language.

[JeanL]

First time post.

JeanL, Looking at the history of Sardinia, it had some impact from the Bell Beaker culture, and it was occupied by the Romans, the Italians, and the Spanish (specifically Aragon). Unless I am mistaken, M269 is present in all of these populations. Why assume that Sardinian M269 predates the influx of these varied populations?

Well, I was always under the assumption that Sardinians being the closest modern folks to Oetzi in terms of their autosomal DNA that they could at least be assumed to show continuity since circa 5000 ybp. There is also the fact that Romans would have a lower proportion of R1b, so any contribution from the Romans would come along with contributions of different haplogroups. Northern Italians, and Aragonenses contributing R1b-M269 to Sardinia is definitely a possibility as both populations have higher fractions of R1b-M269, however a Northern Italian source is likely over an Iberian source due to the high proportion of R1b-U152 in Sardinia, plus the whole similarity issues with Oetzi, who is a Northern Italian.

[JeanL]

I have been suggesting that since 2006.

I think it's possible I-M26 was once much more commonplace than it is now and has experienced a decline over the last several millennia.

It is very likely that I-P37.2+ tagged along G2a during the Neolithic colonization of Europe.

As for I-M26, I would say that according to the Morelli.et.al.2010 study one can see from Table-1 that the diversity of R1b-M269 is higher in Sardinia than that of I-M26, whereas G-M207 is inbetween R1b-M269 and I-M26.


http://www.plosone.org/article/slideshow.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0010419&imageURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0010419.t001

Also according to the study by Lopez-Parra.et.al.2009, the diversity of R1b-M153 and R1b-SRY2627 with respect to I-M26 in the Pyrenees was studied, it turns out that they are in fact only slightly younger.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18803634

This is what they said about the mutation rate

Time-to-most-recent-common-ancestor (TMRCA) was estimated within Network from the ρ-statistic, using an average mutation rate per Y-STR locus at 6.9 × 10⁻⁴ per generation of 25 years (Zhivotovsky et al. 2004).

So I reversed the TMRCA reported by them in Figure-3 to get the mean variance per haplogroup.

R1b-M153(n=19) var=0.23322+-0.07452

R1b-SRY2627(n=30) var=0.20355+-0.04071

I-M26 (n=13) var=0.32844+-0.11109

This was only done for Pyrenan populations, so it is not valid for comparison of the overall TMRCA of R1b-SRY2627 vs. R1b-M153.

The point here being, that R1b-M153 is on average about 0.71 as old as I-M26 in the Pyrenees.