World Families Forums - Latest Brabant (Belgium) DNA Project Results - Lots of R1b

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 02, 2014, 07:49:51 AM
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)
| | |-+  Latest Brabant (Belgium) DNA Project Results - Lots of R1b
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Latest Brabant (Belgium) DNA Project Results - Lots of R1b  (Read 4125 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« on: March 23, 2010, 08:12:37 PM »

Here is the latest report on the Brabant DNA Project from this thread at Eupedia by "Maciamo":

Quote
It's been four months since the last update. The Brabant DNA Project is now expandin to all Belgium. The latest results include 741 participants, almost all from Flanders. The province and East and West Flanders account for the biggest part of the new results. The percentage of R1b is a bit higher while all other haplogroups lower except I1 and R1a which are stable. This means that East and West Flanders have a considerably higher frequency of R1b than the provinces of Antwerp, Brabant and Brussels.

R1b : 61.94%
R1b-M343 : n=1 (0.15%)
-R1b-M269 : n=9 (1.37%)
--R1b-P310 : n=4 (0.61%)
--- R1b-U106 (S21) : n=193 (29.47%)
--- R1b-P312 (S116, incl. L21) : n=131 (20%)
---- R1b-U152 (S28) : n=61 (9.31%)
---- R1b-SRY2627 : n=6 (0.92%)


R1a : 3.91%
R1a* : n=1
-R1a1 : n=21

I1 : 12.68%
I1* : n=77
- I1c (P109) : n=6

I2 : 7.82%
-I2* : n=11 (1.68%)
-- I2a* : n=9 (1.37%)
-- I2b* : n=21 (3.21%)
--- I2b1 (M284) : n=2 (0.31%)
--- I2b3 (P78) : n=2 (0.31%)
--- I2b4 (P95) : n=2 (0.31%)

J1 : 1.21%

J2 : 4.18%
- J2a* : n=9
--J2a2 : n=4
---J2a2a : n=4
--J2a8 : n=3
- J2b* : n=0
-- J2b2 : n=6

G2a : 2.83%

E1 : 4.45%
-E1b1b (M215) : n=0
---E1b1b1a1 (V12) : n=1
---E1b1b1a2 (V13) : n=18
---E1b1b1a3 (V22) : n=4
--E1b1b1c (M123) : n=1
---E1b1b1c1 (M34) : n=6
--E1b1b1b (M81) : n=1

L : 0.54%
-L1 (M27) : n=3
-L2 (M317) : n=1

T : 0.81%

Q : 0.54%

I put the R1b results in bold. Interesting that in East and West Flanders S116/P312 (which probably includes some L21, since they aren't testing for it) isn't too far behind U106. If one adds in the U152 and SRY2627 stuff, then P312+ clades run about as frequent as U106 does.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2010, 08:15:55 PM by rms2 » Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2010, 08:27:43 PM »

Hey, nice stats, Rich! Looks like R1b is about 50% of the population!
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2010, 07:03:00 PM »

Again what stands out for me is that U106 is the modal in this part of Belgium but the S116*/L21* group is said to be the biggest in the extreme NE of France in a recent study.  That shows there is a considerable difference in the clade balance in 2 areas that were both part of Belgic Gaul.  The question is is the elevated U106 due to the Germani invasions??
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #3 on: March 25, 2010, 05:25:35 PM »

There is more data from the project posted on the DNA forum. I find it interesting that different people interpret it in different ways.
Here is some analysis from (I believe) one of the particiupants in the project:

"When looking at the DNA results from these different regions, east-west gradients become apparent, as shown in the graph. In the west U106 (in red) is very dominant, and its prevalence decreases towards the east: 56% of all R1b in both West- and East-Flanders (WVL / OVL) is U106, compared to 44% in Brabant, and 36% in Limburg. P312* (in blue) shows an opposite gradient: 43% in Limburg, 35% in Brabant, 31% in East-Flanders and 26% in West-Flanders. The U152 subhaplogroup (in green) behaves similarly to P312*: 21% in Limburg, 17% in Brabant, 13% in East-Flanders and 11% in West-Flanders. I’ve considered the Dutch province of Noord-Brabant (NB) separately, as it shows remarkable differences with the rest of Brabant, likely resulting from admixture from more northern regions (as has already been pointed out in this forum). In Noord-Brabant U106 is found at 52%, P312* at 31% and U152 at only 8%.

These tendencies thus seem to indicate an association of U106 with the Saxo-Frisian colonisation of Flanders, with a gradient that peaks at the coast. P312* may have been most common among the Franks, as it peaks in the east. However, the high incidence of U106 in Brabant (although 12% lower than in Flanders) may imply that this marker was also carried by quite some of the Frankish settlers from the east, making U106 a general indicator for the various Germanic tribes that arrived in our region during the 4th - 7th century. U152 is more common in the east than in the west, but in contrast to P312* it is quite rare in NB. This could mean that it was mostly associated with the Celtic tribes that originally lived in the region south and west of the Rhine, i.e. the Belgae. Surely even 1600 years ago the genetic differences weren’t black and white, in that all Celts in the region would have been U152 and all German descendants U106 or P312*, but probably there were significant differences in the prevalence of these 3 haplogroups among the different tribes, as they had their roots in very different geographic locations. The fact that the Belgae were already heterogeneous at the time Caesar paid them a visit (with some tribes claiming Germanic origins rather than Celtic) complicates matters further, but time and further research will hopefully teach us more about the genetics of these different tribes. It’s at least nice to see that the notion of U106 being a Frisian or north-Germanic marker is somehow supported by the preliminary observations in this project."

I still think treating all U106/S21 as an homogenous unit, and then comparing it against P312/S116 (which includes L21) after U152/S28 is separated out from it, is likely to result in misleading interpretations.
It sounds though as if they intend to continue testing for L21 and L48 as well as a few other SNPs discovered since the project was formed.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #4 on: March 25, 2010, 07:22:01 PM »

. . .
It sounds though as if they intend to continue testing for L21 and L48 as well as a few other SNPs discovered since the project was formed.

That sounds hopeful. I would like to see how much L21 there is in Belgium and how it is distributed.

We always seem to get left out of these studies. L21 was discovered just a tad too late, I guess. It is extremely aggravating.

It is funny (funny strange, not funny ha ha) how U106 is treated as a monolithic block while the P312 clades are always broken into their constituent parts (as you mentioned). I imagine that is just a function of the fact that U106 was discovered and testing begun for it back in 2005, and for a number of years it was one of the few games in town, while most of the rest of us were consigned to "aboriginal" asterisk purgatory.
Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #5 on: March 25, 2010, 07:52:09 PM »

we also know from the recent study of France that their R1b1b2* group (which would have comprised S116* and L21*) is the most common clade in what was the western part of the Belgic Gaul, now NE France. 
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2010, 08:08:09 PM »

I think itis important to remember that historic Brabant is almost entirely in the Germanic speaking Flemish area.  The linguistic division in Belgium is north-south not east-west.  Compare the map of Brabant and the French-Flemish linguistic division that runs though Belgium.

http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/Brabant_map.gif

http://s2.ned.univie.ac.at/Publicaties/taalgeschiedenis/en/belgie.gif
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #7 on: March 25, 2010, 08:54:03 PM »

we also know from the recent study of France that their R1b1b2* group (which would have comprised S116* and L21*) is the most common clade in what was the western part of the Belgic Gaul, now NE France.  
Yes, but in the Brabant study, the percentage of S116* and L21* (combined, as they aren't separated out) actually increases rather significantly as one moves from west to the east.
The study includes West and East Flanders, Brabant, Limburg and North Brabant, all of which, I believe, are primarily Flemish speaking.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 08:58:11 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #8 on: March 25, 2010, 09:00:44 PM »


Yes, but in the Brabant study S116* and L21* (which aren't separated out) actually increase rather significantly as one moves from west to the east.

That seems strange. Are we sure our dna-forums informant has that right? It seems odd, given that French study that showed R1b1b2* (untested for P312 and L21) as the most frequent variety of R1b1b2 in NE France. Does U106 increase at the expense of P312/L21 as one moves west in Belgium, only to drop off again as one crosses the border into NE France, where P312/L21 increases at U106's expense?

But we do have a number of L21+ guys in the Netherlands, one of them, Vanover, in East Flanders, almost in Belgium.

Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2010, 11:23:06 PM »

we also know from the recent study of France that their R1b1b2* group (which would have comprised S116* and L21*) is the most common clade in what was the western part of the Belgic Gaul, now NE France.  
Yes, but in the Brabant study, the percentage of S116* and L21* (combined, as they aren't separated out) actually increases rather significantly as one moves from west to the east.
The study includes West and East Flanders, Brabant, Limburg and North Brabant, all of which, I believe, are primarily Flemish speaking.



Wow, that is interesting. Hey Rich, the Bronk in the L21 Project is from North-Rhine Westphalia, just east of the Netherlands. So it seems L21 between Belgium and the Netherlands is not just a myth anymore!
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 11:23:54 PM by NealtheRed » Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2010, 11:57:51 AM »

I think itis important to remember that historic Brabant is almost entirely in the Germanic speaking Flemish area.  The linguistic division in Belgium is north-south not east-west.  Compare the map of Brabant and the French-Flemish linguistic division that runs though Belgium.
http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/Brabant_map.gif
http://s2.ned.univie.ac.at/Publicaties/taalgeschiedenis/en/belgie.gif
I'm uneducated on the Flemish people.  I see that the Flemish language is derived from Old Frankish.   Were the original Flemish people Francs?  Were they Belgae?

I have often wondered what the impact of these people were on the Isles. The Norman invasion supposedly included many Flemish folks.  The researcher who identified the R-L21* 11-13 Combo signature has stated that 11-13 people are oftentimes linked to areas of the Isles where Flemish people inflow was heaviest.  I hadn't thought much of it, until I noticed two of the four 67 length confirmed R-L21* haplotypes from Benelux are 11-13.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #11 on: March 26, 2010, 01:42:16 PM »

Interesting.

I know we spoke about it before, as there are names in the Leinster cluster like Fleming, Pendergrass, Bries, and Van Cleave that could be Flemish. Who knows?
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #12 on: March 26, 2010, 03:59:44 PM »


Yes, but in the Brabant study S116* and L21* (which aren't separated out) actually increase rather significantly as one moves from west to the east.

That seems strange. Are we sure our dna-forums informant has that right? It seems odd, given that French study that showed R1b1b2* (untested for P312 and L21) as the most frequent variety of R1b1b2 in NE France. Does U106 increase at the expense of P312/L21 as one moves west in Belgium, only to drop off again as one crosses the border into NE France, where P312/L21 increases at U106's expense?

But we do have a number of L21+ guys in the Netherlands, one of them, Vanover, in East Flanders, almost in Belgium.


He seems to know what he is talking about, and even has a bar graph showing the percentage of R1b for U106, P312(XU152) and U152 for each of the five regions. U106 decreases as one moves east, while P312 and U152 actually increase rather dramatically. In Limburg, the most eastly region, P312 (again this includes L21 in whatever portion) is the highest, nearly 45%, U106 is a little over 35%, and U152 is a little over 20%. North Brabant doesn't precisely follow this east west gradient trend. U106 is over 50%, P312 is a little over 30%, but there is less than 10% U152, which is more similar to West Flanders.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #13 on: March 26, 2010, 07:17:16 PM »

Well, that is interesting. I hope they go back and test all their samples for P312 and L21 and publish the results.
Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2010, 07:59:25 AM »

again, I would point out that the coast slopes north to south as one moves east to west in Belgium which basically means that the further east you go, the more inland and closer to central Germany/away from the north coast you get.  So, I am not convinced there is anything odd going on.  I think it has long been realised that U106 has a North Sea coastal concentration.  It may well have expanded with the coastal Germanic tribes extension westwards in late/post-Roman times.  We also have to remember that large areas of Flemish Belgium were only reclaimed from mashes and the sea and settled in the Medieval period.  That means some areas near the coast had little or no pre-Roman populations and could be entirely settled by adjacent Germanic speaking people.  I do not know the details but knowledge of this would be vital to interpretation.

It also strikes me too that unlike the folk movements along the coast, the Franks (like the Visagoths) seem to have operated more as a dominant minority military elite that was all-conquering but did not greatly budge the local populations or their pre-Germanic languages in most areas (France, southern Belgium etc).  So, there may be a contrast between the areas west of the Rhine with large existing Gallo-Roman populations which the Franks overlorded and coastal/marginal/reclaimed area where it was close to virgin territory that could be subject to folk movement.  Obviously there were shades of grey too.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 08:35:51 AM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Pages: [1] 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 0.12 seconds with 18 queries.