World Families Forums - Is L21 irrelevant? and the importance of the Welsh...

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 11, 2014, 10:12:52 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  Is L21 irrelevant? and the importance of the Welsh...
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Is L21 irrelevant? and the importance of the Welsh...  (Read 5545 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #50 on: August 13, 2012, 03:18:42 PM »

Quote
I'm not going to go back and look it all up, but I believe Capelli's British Isles study and Rootsi's  big y haplogroup I study showed the I1 stuff generally thought be either Anglo-Saxon and/or Viking as most frequent in pretty much the same places where U106 is most frequent and declining as one moves north and west into the places where L21 predominates.
Rootsi's maps for I1 show the expected clines for the haplogroup in Britain. Both I1a and I2a2 (called I1c in the map) show decreasing frequencies to the west. I2a2 could be seen as a primarily North German/Anglo Saxon marker and I1a as a primarily Scandinavian-Viking marker, but both hgs are common in those two areas.

Right. That is what I thought I recalled.

Those clades of y haplogroup I and R-U106 appear to be most frequent in the places where the Anglo-Saxons settled most heavily and which were later overlain by Viking settlement.
Logged

Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #51 on: August 13, 2012, 03:40:27 PM »

I looked at the 'Peoples of the british Isles' website a little while ago & noticed a map showing a region roughly corresponding to the Anglo-Welsh border, about where southern Gloucestershire meets Wales, shaded pale blue.

According to their project site, one of the subregions they tested was the Forest of Dean, so that would be it.  They haven't actually said what the colors stand for, yet.  Something autosomal, though.

Indeed i believe their map is based purely on autosomal clusters and doesn't take Y into acocunt at all. One possibility is that specific "pale blue" marks an admixed population eg. evenly admixed between Welsh and English clusters thus showing up as distinctive grouping compared to others perhaps? That's just a guess on my part though.
Logged
Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #52 on: August 13, 2012, 03:53:47 PM »

Regarding L21 in England I believe I got these figures from Busby (supplementary data), it's been awhile though, I'm just gonna copy and paste from other forum. It's evident that there is a West/East cline regarding both L21 and U106 in England. It's also interesting how in North-Wales there is an obvious major drop in R1b in general.

Quote
West Ireland -- 67 samples
L21 = 73.1%
U106 = 4.5%
U152 = 1.5%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 7.5%


South Ireland -- 89 samples
L21 = 74.2%
U106 = 3.4%
U152 = 1.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 7.9%


East Ireland -- 149 samples
L21 = 71.1%
U106 = 6.7%
U152 = 4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 7.4%


North Ireland -- 72 samples
L21 = 79.2%
U106 = 4.2%
U152 = 1.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 4.2%


West Scotland -- 21 samples
L21 = 66.7%
U106 = 9.5%
U152 = 1.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = --/--


North West Scotland -- 80 samples
L21 = 48.8%
U106 = 6.3%
U152 = --/--
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 11.3%


North East Scotland -- 67 samples
L21 = 52.2%
U106 = 6.3%
U152 = 19.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.0%


North Wales -- 120 samples
L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.5%


South Wales -- 9 samples
L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = --/--
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 11.1%


England Northwest -- 47 samples
L21 = 40.4%
U106 = 21.3%
U152 = 6.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 10.6%


England Southwest -- 48 samples
L21 = 37.5%
U106 = 25.0%
U152 = 8.3%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.3%


Central England -- 165 samples
L21 = 16.4%
U106 = 18.2%
U152 = 9.7%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 15.2%


East England -- 172 samples
L21 = 12.8%
U106 = 25.6%
U152 = 8.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.4%


England Southeast -- 52 samples
L21 = 15.4%
U106 = 26.9%
U152 = 15.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 21.2%

Obviously L21 probably forms a pluarity of R1b in what we now call England, though it's quite obvious that in Eastern part of country that U106 often outnumbers it. U152 also seems to have an eastern bias, perhaps connect to spread during Norman period (really need a study using alot more finer-grained SNP's)
Logged
avalon
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #53 on: August 13, 2012, 04:01:38 PM »

I looked at the 'Peoples of the british Isles' website a little while ago & noticed a map showing a region roughly corresponding to the Anglo-Welsh border, about where southern Gloucestershire meets Wales, shaded pale blue. I also noticed a similar colour used covering N W Cumbria.
I'm buggered if I can find out if these two regions share similar DNA as I can't navigate the site very well. I'm interested in those specific areas as there were approx 5 or 6 of us who were L21-, L238- (see my haplogroup info at foot of message), who seem to  share very distant  Y-DNA patterns. From memory, Williams, Jones, MacFarlane & Armstrong were the surnames concerned. I equate Williams & Jones with Wales; Armstrong & MacFarlane with Kingdom of Rheged/Kingdom of Strathclyde.
Am I way out of kilter with this?
Cheers,
Bob

To make it even more confusing there is another map at the Royal Society that uses different colours to the one you mention. http://sse.royalsociety.org/2012/exhibits/genetic-maps/. I'd say it's actually more Herefordshire than Gloucestershire and in this one the colour is dark blue. Cumbria is actually orange squares so they are separate genetic clusters.

My understanding is that these maps show autosomal dna in Britain. I would speculate that the blue could reflect some Norman genes as the Welsh English  border was a key battleground frontier in the Middle Ages. The Marcher Lords built plenty of castles in this area and settled in significant numbers right the way up to Chester.
Logged
Castlebob
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 216


« Reply #54 on: August 13, 2012, 05:12:20 PM »

Interesting, Avalon.
I notice a connection between S W Wales (Pembrokeshire)  & Cumbria, with some bleed into Northumberland.
Cheers,
Bob
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 05:25:06 PM by Castlebob » Logged

Y-DNA: R1b1b2a1b P312+ Z245- Z2247- Z2245- Z196-  U152-  U106-  P66-  M65-  M37-  M222-  M153-  L459-  L21-  L176.2-  DF27-  DF19- L624+ (S389+)
mtDNA: U5b2b3
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #55 on: August 13, 2012, 05:24:58 PM »

Quote
I'm not going to go back and look it all up, but I believe Capelli's British Isles study and Rootsi's  big y haplogroup I study showed the I1 stuff generally thought be either Anglo-Saxon and/or Viking as most frequent in pretty much the same places where U106 is most frequent and declining as one moves north and west into the places where L21 predominates.
Rootsi's maps for I1 show the expected clines for the haplogroup in Britain. Both I1a and I2a2 (called I1c in the map) show decreasing frequencies to the west. I2a2 could be seen as a primarily North German/Anglo Saxon marker and I1a as a primarily Scandinavian-Viking marker, but both hgs are common in those two areas.

Right. That is what I thought I recalled.

Those clades of y haplogroup I and R-U106 appear to be most frequent in the places where the Anglo-Saxons settled most heavily and which were later overlain by Viking settlement.

The thing that loses me is what happened to the Hiberno Vikings? There were areas along the coasts with lots of Ostmen.  Do we see higher levels of some of the I1, R1a1 and U106 haplogroups in regions of Ireland where the Vikings hit hardest?
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 05:55:52 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #56 on: August 13, 2012, 05:51:05 PM »

So am I understanding Jost's L21 calculations as intraclades suggesting DF13 at the moment only looks around the same age as L21.  Presumably though the number of L21XDF13 is still too low to feel confident about that.  Also, what is the story with the really old L21 dates with the 67 set?
Logged
SEJJ
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


« Reply #57 on: August 13, 2012, 05:54:58 PM »

Hi there, i've been following a lot of these R1b threads with interest, just thought some of these comments regarding the POBI project might be useful, some comments are taken directly from the royal society website as part of the 'questions' section, answered by someone involved in the project:

'One way to think about Cornwall, Devon and the rest of England is that Cornwall is more representative of the peopling of the British Isles from the Atlantic facing region of Europe, whilst the extensive red English cluster has a large signature from the Belgium/Denmark/North Germany area.  Devon can then be thought of as a zone of mixture between the two.  The tight boundaries are very interesting and may well be a result of political spheres of influence.'

'the Welsh and Cornish are quite similar to each other, although the Cornish are more similar to the large south eastern group than the Welsh.'

'The Cornish have similarity to the Welsh in that the Cornish and Welsh both have a high similarity to North West France.  However, the Cornish are more genetically similar to mainland England than the Welsh.'

Here is a thread on 'A Genetic Genaeology Community' that also has some more useful information:

http://eng.molgen.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=451

Took a quote out - Quotes of quotes really but it's interesting:

'He said that they shared information with the AncestryDNA team suggesting that they too are finding a much larger Scandinavian component in the British Isles than expected. Some of their findings can be seen in the recent article here. According to Ken, these discoveries support the notion that the British Isles was a true melting pot long before the United States earned that moniker and further suggests that there was lots of migration between the British Isles and Norway, Sweden and Denmark.'

So basically they are finding lots of regional clusters in some areas, particularly in the north and west, while much of central and southern England is a lot more mixed/cosmopolitan.

Here is a link to their June 2012 Newsletter, with some details about their methods:

http://www.peopleofthebritishisles.org/nl5.pdf

Apologies for taking it off-topic a bit - I don't know much about the mechanics of the R1b-L21 tree as you are talking about it now, so i won't talk about it - But i'll carry on following this thread.
Logged

Y-DNA: I1*
MT-DNA: U5a1b4
       
vineviz
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


« Reply #58 on: August 13, 2012, 06:34:37 PM »

A key is that there may be a November 2011 cut-off date for what SNPs are included. That may leave out SNPs like DF49.   I wonder about DF63?

How were DF49 and DF63 discovered?  If they were mined from public data sets, they could very well have been included even if they hadn't yet been named.
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #59 on: August 13, 2012, 06:47:45 PM »

Quote
I'm not going to go back and look it all up, but I believe Capelli's British Isles study and Rootsi's  big y haplogroup I study showed the I1 stuff generally thought be either Anglo-Saxon and/or Viking as most frequent in pretty much the same places where U106 is most frequent and declining as one moves north and west into the places where L21 predominates.
Rootsi's maps for I1 show the expected clines for the haplogroup in Britain. Both I1a and I2a2 (called I1c in the map) show decreasing frequencies to the west. I2a2 could be seen as a primarily North German/Anglo Saxon marker and I1a as a primarily Scandinavian-Viking marker, but both hgs are common in those two areas.

Right. That is what I thought I recalled.

Those clades of y haplogroup I and R-U106 appear to be most frequent in the places where the Anglo-Saxons settled most heavily and which were later overlain by Viking settlement.

The thing that loses me is what happened to the Hiberno Vikings? There were areas along the coasts with lots of Ostmen.  Do we see higher levels of some of the I1, R1a1 and U106 haplogroups in regions of Ireland where the Vikings hit hardest?

I am with you on this.  Its totally improbable how little impact there seems to be.  The Viking groups must be in there.   One thing to remember is the Irish Vikings lived in urban areas or raiding bases/longforts.  I suspect they mainly melted into the urban populations of the Irish eastern and southern coastal towns.  They were probably Normanised when the normans took over and then Anglicised further as the Medieval period wore on.  I think we need to see these southern and eastern towns as places that lay outside the normal Irish clan system for the last 1000 years and as ports saw a constant flow of population from Britain and Europe.  Like Scotland, the Irish east and south coast towns probably had a very distinct enclave nature that has only been blurred in modern times.  So, I doubt there will be be clusters of the type you get from Niall type figures in a clan system.  These were people who lived a very different life indeed.  You get a very good feel for this in Dublin in the Dublinia museum in Dublin and the Jorvik centre in York.  A different world really but its a part of Irish heritage that tends to be overlooked while the clan aspect gets all the attention.  I think you get a feel that that world continued from Viking into Medieval times.  I am not sure if a study has been done of surnames noted in the various records of Medieval town dwellers.  The names are probably distinctive, even if actual viking names were morphed into Anglo-Norman trade names etc I am sure the blood of the Vikings was among them among the craftsmen, traders etc.
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #60 on: August 13, 2012, 07:06:24 PM »

I think the distinction between Atlantic and more easterly origins is probably a better one to make than simply saying we are seeing Ancient Britons vs Germanics.  Yes that is clearly a significant part of the story but there are many indicators of a similar Atlantic vs east-English channel/Low Countries link as a division in pre-Germanic times.  The most well known aspects are the Belgic identity of southern and SE England and of course the much stronger incorporation of lowland Britain in the Roman empire for 400 years.  It is absurd not to think a significant impact was made on the lowland Britons by these pre-Germanic phases whose impact was only slight in the north and western fringes.  So, I suspect there was a distinction in pre-Germanic times between the Romanised and Celtic fringe.  I also suspect the Belgic elements meant that this pattern was strong in pre-Roman times.  The classical authors and archaeology show that there was strong differentiation among the Britons culturally and phenotypically when they arrived.  Of course this distinction is even older than this.  There was an extremely close connection between the east of Britain and the Low Countries in beaker times and in the whole Hilversum complex too in the Bronze Age and then of course the Belgic connection.  So, a general similarity of southern and eastern Britain with the Low Countries and NE France that was not shared with Atlantic Britain to the same degree was probably well established in prehistory. So, I would be extremely cautious in terms of linking the lowland British-Low Countries etc component in any autosomal maps as Germanic.  It was probably a cumulative thing that the Germanic waves were only the latter stages of (a palimpsest).  

NB- Tthat doesnt mean that I believe U106 was part of this pre-Germanic continental link between SE Britain and the Low Countries etc.  That would only follow if U106 was in areas like NE France, Belgium and western Holland in the earlier periods of contact with southern and eastern Britain.  If it was not on those areas of the continent at those times of earlier contact then it is unlikely to have come with those contacts.  It up to geneticists to decide through variance etc whether U106 was far enough west in those periods to be part of the pre-Germanic flow into southern and eastern Britain.  I dont know the answer to that but what little I have heard seems to imply to me that U106 did not reach the Rhine until late in prehistory.    

EDIT- Southern and eastern Britain's links were with the intermediate zone that lay between the Atlantic zone to the west (lets say west of the Seine) and the Germanic areas beyond the Rhine was of course later called Belgic Gaul between the Seine and the Rhine.  However, I think this intermediate zone had an existence long before that in the Bronze Age.    I think the only way to sort out the relative importance of the two types of non-Attantic impact on southern and eastern Britain is to subtract the groups that might have come from areas like NE France, Belgium and Holland west of the Rhine and concentrate on what must have come from east of the Rhine. If the groups could have come from west of the RHine then it is not safe to assume they are Germanic. 
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 07:20:48 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #61 on: August 13, 2012, 07:18:19 PM »



As far as the Welsh, I'm detecting a trend that I want to share. Its speculative, but I have an affinity to them anyway, with a name like Walsh. LOL.

...but I do have some analysis.  BTW, its not really the Welsh, its the Old Britons that are important.

Mike,
Will you be posting the info re Old Britons on this thread?

Okay. I'll proceed. I've been waiting to hear back on Thomas Krahn's findings. Remember, we had a prior false start on L459 when we found an L21+ L459- guy, Bonham, but later found his L21 result from FTDNA was in error and he is being re-classified as U152. The significance of a discussion on L459xL21 depends on the validity of Jones' results.

Here is the latest update I have.
Quote from: David R
As a matter of fact I just heard back from Thomas:

Quote from: Thomas Krahan
I was just surprised by myself when I read this on the list. However I re-checked the raw data and all seems to be clean.  I placed a re-run order for L21 because the result was from 2009, just  to be 100% sure, but all tests seem to have been running on the same  sample.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/RL21Project/message/9969

I guess there is an interesting pattern, though, so I'll show you what I found.

Umm..  I just thought of something. I should copy f63671 Jones into the L21 spreadsheet and see if any L21+ clusters match with him. If there is one, that's a clue that the lab made an error on Jones' L21- call.

Well, I couldn't detect that clue that he is related to some L21+ group. His closest GD's in the L21+ file are GDs of 13 and 14 at 67. Some were M222 guys (which Jones clearly isn't) and the some were DF21.  So I'll go ahead and proceed with the folks similar to him in the P312* data set. 

I guess I should go look at the Jones surname project too.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 07:21:58 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #62 on: August 13, 2012, 07:52:28 PM »

... there is an interesting pattern, though, so I'll show you what I found.

I am glad to see the interest Welsh, but I had no intention of claiming that Wales is or that England's Old Brythonic areas are the home of L21. I think it is possible though.

Given we have f63671 Jones is L459+ L21- (barring FTDNA error), Mark J had put together some recommendations for other P312* people who might test for L459. I started digging into GDs and STR off-modals for the Jones and noticed something.

Jones doesn't have any close GD's in the P312* file, similar to the L21+ file, his closest GDs at 67 are 13. However, among his closer GDs, off-modal patterns might be identifiable.

I created a variety in the P312xL21 spreadsheet I am calling "1430" because most of the folks are 390<=23 392>=14 449>=30. A lot of them are 464=15,15,16,18 although Jones actually 15,15,16,17.  The 464c=16 seems to be common. Many also have 447<=24 and/or 444=<11.

I tried to cross-check GDs between each of the individuals while looking for matches on the majority of the off-modal STRs.

When I got done, I had narrowed down to this list.

f63671   Jones    R-L459*   Wales
f180710   Pugh    R-P312   Wales
f11475   Williams   R-P312   Wales
f28000   Meek    R-P312   Ireland, Ulster, Co. Antrim, Ahoghill
f32335   Powell   R-P312   Wales, South, Monmouthshire, Trevethin
f106228   Thomas   R-P312   Wales, South, Monmouthshire, Bedwellty
f205772   Mathew   R-P312   Wales, South, Glamorganshire, Llangyfelach
f60348   Williams   R-P312   zzzUnkOrigin
f213295   Gibson   R-P312   zzzUnkOrigin
f34748   Jenkins   R-P312   zzzUnkOrigin
f142231   Cloyes   R-P312   England, East, Essex, Colchester
f141335   Davis    R-P312   zzzUnkOrigin
f49174   Lewis    R-P312   Wales
f8704   Davis       R-P312   UK


I didn't look at the geographies or names until I was done, but as you can see, it is heavily Welsh.

Let me be clear, this was just a speculative exercise.  If Krahn's L21 retest for Jones comes back as still L21-, I'll see if these guys will consider L459 and Z245 testing.

However, if that happens, anyone who is P312+ U152- DF27- could be L459+, regardless if they are L21-.  We don't know how many clusters might be hidden L459+. Z245 just compounds this problem because it could be right below or right above L459.

Gosh, I hope Geno 2.0 attracts tens of thousands. That may be the only way this will get thoroughly tested.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 07:59:53 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #63 on: August 13, 2012, 08:16:08 PM »

Quote
I'm not going to go back and look it all up, but I believe Capelli's British Isles study and Rootsi's  big y haplogroup I study showed the I1 stuff generally thought be either Anglo-Saxon and/or Viking as most frequent in pretty much the same places where U106 is most frequent and declining as one moves north and west into the places where L21 predominates.
Rootsi's maps for I1 show the expected clines for the haplogroup in Britain. Both I1a and I2a2 (called I1c in the map) show decreasing frequencies to the west. I2a2 could be seen as a primarily North German/Anglo Saxon marker and I1a as a primarily Scandinavian-Viking marker, but both hgs are common in those two areas.

Right. That is what I thought I recalled.

Those clades of y haplogroup I and R-U106 appear to be most frequent in the places where the Anglo-Saxons settled most heavily and which were later overlain by Viking settlement.

The thing that loses me is what happened to the Hiberno Vikings? There were areas along the coasts with lots of Ostmen.  Do we see higher levels of some of the I1, R1a1 and U106 haplogroups in regions of Ireland where the Vikings hit hardest?

I am with you on this.  Its totally improbable how little impact there seems to be.  The Viking groups must be in there.   One thing to remember is the Irish Vikings lived in urban areas or raiding bases/longforts.  I suspect they mainly melted into the urban populations of the Irish eastern and southern coastal towns.  They were probably Normanised when the normans took over and then Anglicised further as the Medieval period wore on.  I think we need to see these southern and eastern towns as places that lay outside the normal Irish clan system for the last 1000 years and as ports saw a constant flow of population from Britain and Europe.  Like Scotland, the Irish east and south coast towns probably had a very distinct enclave nature that has only been blurred in modern times.  So, I doubt there will be be clusters of the type you get from Niall type figures in a clan system.  These were people who lived a very different life indeed.  You get a very good feel for this in Dublin in the Dublinia museum in Dublin and the Jorvik centre in York.  A different world really but its a part of Irish heritage that tends to be overlooked while the clan aspect gets all the attention.  I think you get a feel that that world continued from Viking into Medieval times.  I am not sure if a study has been done of surnames noted in the various records of Medieval town dwellers.  The names are probably distinctive, even if actual viking names were morphed into Anglo-Norman trade names etc I am sure the blood of the Vikings was among them among the craftsmen, traders etc.

I've read Gerald Cambresis' stuff and the Ostmen (men from the east - Scandinavian settlers) were a major force in coastal regions.

My puzzlement is areas like the western coast of Scotland or north and western Irish coastal regions. These regions directly face Iceland. How did they miss the significant I1 and U106 input?

At first I thought this was a clue that U106 was not in Scandinavia early so the Vikings were not thick with U106, but since I1 did not make a big dent I have to think that thought doesn't hold water.

The alternative is that the Vikings just didn't have that big of an impact on the western side of the Isles, period.

However, R1a actually looks like what I thought Scandinavian input would look like


More of a northerly bias.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 08:17:06 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #64 on: August 13, 2012, 11:48:11 PM »

Busby has Scotland West at 9.5% U106 and Scotland Northwest at 6.3% U106. That's enough to reflect a fair amount of Viking Era settlement, I think. I don't know how much I1 is there, but coupled with the 5% or so R1a in the region, that seems to about cover it.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #65 on: August 13, 2012, 11:56:15 PM »

Busby has Scotland West at 9.5% U106 and Scotland Northwest at 6.3% U106. That's enough to reflect a fair amount of Viking Era settlement, I think. I don't know how much I1 is there, but coupled with the 5% or so R1a in the region, that seems to about cover it.

From Maciamo Hay's Eupedia I-M253 map I posted earlier, if it is accurate, it looks I1 runs 5-10% in western Scotland. So, it looks like anywhere from 15-20% of the y-dna there could be the product of Viking Era settlement, if one counts all the U106, M253, and M17 as representing Viking input. Of course, some of that could be from later English influence.

Logged

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #66 on: August 14, 2012, 01:15:19 AM »

So am I understanding Jost's L21 calculations as intraclades suggesting DF13 at the moment only looks around the same age as L21.  Presumably though the number of L21XDF13 is still too low to feel confident about that.  Also, what is the story with the really old L21 dates with the 67 set?

If you thinking about why mentioned that the age of a clade seems to be somewhat older as the number of markers decrease, review these results.

Results of Same Set  of HTs at Diff lengths of L21 and Z253.
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
37Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,153.7   N=683   3,158.4   8.4   8.4
Z253 All    2,450.0   N=34   2,524.3   6.5   6.7
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
67Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,801.5   N=683   3,807.1   15.0   15.0
Z253 All    2,462.4   N=34   2,537.0   9.7   10.0
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
111 Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,466.8   N=683   3,471.9   28.1   28.1
Z253 All    2,334.2   N=34   2,404.9   18.9   19.5
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
glentane
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #67 on: August 14, 2012, 06:06:13 AM »

My puzzlement is areas like the western coast of Scotland or north and western Irish coastal regions. These regions directly face Iceland. How did they miss the significant I1 and U106 input?
...
The alternative is that the Vikings just didn't have that big of an impact on the western side of the Isles, period.
The chaotic mix of intergroup hostility contradicted by elite "interaction" (including bloodfeud and kidnap, as well as trade, alliances and marriage), where the characteristic (intra-European) recognition of class as being a more defining bond than ethnicity (the upper levels of each society recognising and easily mixing with their peers and rivals, and having a common interest in "maintaining order" among their respective peasantries) is I suspect of fairly long standing (Amesbury Archer, anyone?).

The general atmosphere of Norse/Irish relations at this period can be gauged (in a no doubt heavily idealised and shiny/happy form) in Laxdaela Sagas tale of Olaf Hoskuldsson.
"When Olaf expressed a desire to find his mother's people in Ireland, Gunnhild (Norwegian King Harald's mother) financed his voyage".

As Alan mentioned, outside the longphorts, anyone who couldn't handle themselves was regarded as fair game.
Apologies for long quote, it demonstrates the expected tone of "international diplomacy" among the relevant parties.
Quote
There was much talk during the night as to where they could be come to; and when daylight was up they recognised that it was Ireland. Orn said, "I don't think we have come to a good place, for this is far away from the harbours or market-towns, whose strangers enjoy peace"
...
Olaf said no harm would happen, "But I have seen that today there is a gathering of men up inland"
...
Now, as day drew on, crowds drifted down to the shore. At last two men rowed a boat out to the ship. They asked what men they were who had charge of that ship, and Olaf answered, speaking in Irish, to their inquiries. When the Irish knew they were Norwegians they pleaded their law, and bade them give up their goods; and if they did so, they would do them no harm till the king had sat in judgment on their case. Olaf said the law only held good when merchants had no interpreter with them. "But I can say with truth these are peaceful men, and we will not give ourselves up untried."

The Irish then raised a great war-cry, and waded out into the sea .. Olaf bade the crew fetch out their weapons, and range in line of battle from stem to stern on the ship; and so thick they stood, that shield overlapped shield all round the ship, and a spear point stood out at the lower end of every shield. ... When the Irish saw this array fear shot through their hearts, and they thought it would not be so easy a matter as they had thought to master the booty .. so they sent speedily word to the king, which was easy, as he was at that time a short way off, feasting. Straightway he rides with a company of men to where the ship was.

The genetic implications of the complex interrelations among the local pan-north-european nobility at the time (i.e. the ones with the best shot at having sackloads of kids to maturity, and staying put) are shown by Olaf being the (secret) grandson of the king about to feel his collar for trespass, having been born to the king's enslaved daughter, purchased by an Icelander from the Rus.

Elsewhere we have a dodgy psycho character (which must have taken some doing, to alarm vikings :D), Killer-Hrapp the Hebridean ("Hrapp was the son of Sumarlid, and was called Fight(Viga)-Hrapp. He was Scotch on his father's side, and his mother's kin came from Sodor") Laxdaela Saga

I'd guess any small groups of norse (or anyone else) who fell on the tender mercies of the local gaelic/pictish peasantry would have received even shorter shrift than crewmen allegedly got from Cornish "wreckers".
Do the Western Isles have an obvious in-your-face scandinavian component? The complaints by (contemporary or recent) mainlanders  about the quality of the Gaelic used there (ironically, its last viable holdout) suggests almost a creolised language situation, so I'd expect it.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2012, 06:11:21 AM by glentane » Logged
avalon
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #68 on: August 14, 2012, 06:35:17 AM »

Regarding L21 in England I believe I got these figures from Busby (supplementary data), it's been awhile though, I'm just gonna copy and paste from other forum. It's evident that there is a West/East cline regarding both L21 and U106 in England. It's also interesting how in North-Wales there is an obvious major drop in R1b in general.

Quote
West Ireland -- 67 samples
L21 = 73.1%
U106 = 4.5%
U152 = 1.5%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 7.5%


South Ireland -- 89 samples
L21 = 74.2%
U106 = 3.4%
U152 = 1.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 7.9%


East Ireland -- 149 samples
L21 = 71.1%
U106 = 6.7%
U152 = 4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 7.4%


North Ireland -- 72 samples
L21 = 79.2%
U106 = 4.2%
U152 = 1.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 4.2%


West Scotland -- 21 samples
L21 = 66.7%
U106 = 9.5%
U152 = 1.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = --/--


North West Scotland -- 80 samples
L21 = 48.8%
U106 = 6.3%
U152 = --/--
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 11.3%


North East Scotland -- 67 samples
L21 = 52.2%
U106 = 6.3%
U152 = 19.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.0%


North Wales -- 120 samples
L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.5%


South Wales -- 9 samples
L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = --/--
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 11.1%


England Northwest -- 47 samples
L21 = 40.4%
U106 = 21.3%
U152 = 6.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 10.6%


England Southwest -- 48 samples
L21 = 37.5%
U106 = 25.0%
U152 = 8.3%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.3%


Central England -- 165 samples
L21 = 16.4%
U106 = 18.2%
U152 = 9.7%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 15.2%


East England -- 172 samples
L21 = 12.8%
U106 = 25.6%
U152 = 8.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.4%


England Southeast -- 52 samples
L21 = 15.4%
U106 = 26.9%
U152 = 15.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 21.2%

Obviously L21 probably forms a pluarity of R1b in what we now call England, though it's quite obvious that in Eastern part of country that U106 often outnumbers it. U152 also seems to have an eastern bias, perhaps connect to spread during Norman period (really need a study using alot more finer-grained SNP's)

I think the lower R1b in North Wales could be explained by poor sampling in the y-dna studies. I am not sure where Busby got his 120 samples from but as I recall many of the y-dna studies in recent years have sampled some towns in Wales that were not typically Welsh, particularly along the more Anglicised North Wales coast.

Llanidloes, actually in mid Wales, was sampled by Capelli 2003 but it has a known immigration of miners from England in Industrial times.

Also, Anglesey has been sampled a few times but it is worth pointing out that due its prominent location and rich agricultural land it has been attractive to immigrants for centuries and is probably more mixed than other parts of North Wales.



Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #69 on: August 14, 2012, 10:42:54 AM »

Regarding Jones, the putative L21- Z245+ L459+, what is his Ysearch ID, if he has one?

Logged

Mkk
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 95


« Reply #70 on: August 14, 2012, 02:17:30 PM »

So am I understanding Jost's L21 calculations as intraclades suggesting DF13 at the moment only looks around the same age as L21.  Presumably though the number of L21XDF13 is still too low to feel confident about that.  Also, what is the story with the really old L21 dates with the 67 set?

If you thinking about why mentioned that the age of a clade seems to be somewhat older as the number of markers decrease, review these results.

Results of Same Set  of HTs at Diff lengths of L21 and Z253.
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
37Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,153.7   N=683   3,158.4   8.4   8.4
Z253 All    2,450.0   N=34   2,524.3   6.5   6.7
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
67Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,801.5   N=683   3,807.1   15.0   15.0
Z253 All    2,462.4   N=34   2,537.0   9.7   10.0
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
111 Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,466.8   N=683   3,471.9   28.1   28.1
Z253 All    2,334.2   N=34   2,404.9   18.9   19.5

Should the 111 marker results be considered more accurate?
Logged
df.reynolds
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #71 on: August 14, 2012, 05:09:26 PM »

Regarding Jones, the putative L21- Z245+ L459+, what is his Ysearch ID, if he has one?

5FRF8
Logged
razyn
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 405


« Reply #72 on: August 14, 2012, 05:11:47 PM »

I looked at the 'Peoples of the british Isles' website a little while ago & noticed a map showing a region roughly corresponding to the Anglo-Welsh border, about where southern Gloucestershire meets Wales, shaded pale blue.

Brian Swann attended the week-long science fair at the Royal Society last month (at which the PoBI project had a booth), and took a closeup snapshot of the part of their large, much more detailed map that you have asked about.  This link works for me, but I don't know if it works for everybody -- you may need to be logged in to Facebook, or even to the ISOGG group there.  Anyway, give it a try -- it will show the Forest of Dean samples, and a broader area (but maybe not broad enough to answer every question that might spring to mind).  They didn't want anyone sampling the whole map, a bit at a time, and posting all of their details.  They intend to publish the full explanation, with the captions you are going to miss.  I think that's supposed to be in Nature, or one of those things that nobody can afford.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3746429657618&set=o.11416337921&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf
Logged

R1b Z196*
vineviz
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


« Reply #73 on: August 14, 2012, 05:14:49 PM »

Should the 111 marker results be considered more accurate?
Not necessarily.  Accurate estimation of mutation rates is still critical.

But the differences in those estimates are statistically significant in any event.
Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #74 on: August 14, 2012, 05:44:30 PM »

So am I understanding Jost's L21 calculations as intraclades suggesting DF13 at the moment only looks around the same age as L21.  Presumably though the number of L21XDF13 is still too low to feel confident about that.  Also, what is the story with the really old L21 dates with the 67 set?

If you thinking about why mentioned that the age of a clade seems to be somewhat older as the number of markers decrease, review these results.

Results of Same Set  of HTs at Diff lengths of L21 and Z253.
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
37Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,153.7   N=683   3,158.4   8.4   8.4
Z253 All    2,450.0   N=34   2,524.3   6.5   6.7
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
67Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,801.5   N=683   3,807.1   15.0   15.0
Z253 All    2,462.4   N=34   2,537.0   9.7   10.0
               
    CoalescenceAge   YrsPerGen*   Founder's Age     Coalescence   Founder's
111 Markers   YBP   30   + - YBP   VARP   VARs
L21 All   3,466.8   N=683   3,471.9   28.1   28.1
Z253 All    2,334.2   N=34   2,404.9   18.9   19.5

Should the 111 marker results be considered more accurate?

FtDNA FAQ states:
Y-DNA111: The Y-DNA111 test includes a balanced panel of sixty-seven Y-DNA STR markers, those from the Y-DNA67 plus forty-four more. The additional markers refine the predicted time period in which two individuals are related. They completely eliminate unrelated matches. A close match at 111 markers indicates a common ancestor in recent generations, and an exact match indicates a close or immediate relationship.

Accurate as to calculating the number of generations using KenN's Gen111T method? It is based on variance (sample or whole population) of the datasets variables, and the summation of the STRs utilized. And/or the mutation rates applied.

I modifed Ken's formula and used the internal Excel Stat function VarP for the Coalescence Age which matched Kens results, and the Founders Age which Var has a more precision level which produced a slightly different result which, in Excel the function results in Excel 2003 and in later versions of Excel are more stable numerically using a two-pass process .

Interclade is another story.

I do believe we can no longer use 67 or less markers for age calculations unless for reference since the advent of 111 markers.

MJost
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.122 seconds with 19 queries.