World Families Forums

General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse. => R1b General => Topic started by: Mike Walsh on May 30, 2012, 09:59:42 AM



Title: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 30, 2012, 09:59:42 AM
"Ancient History of the Arbins, Bearers of Haplogroup R1b, from Central Asia to Europe, 16,000 to 1500 Years before Present"
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19567

Abstract:
Quote from: Anatole Klyosov
This article aims at reconstructing the history of R1b ancient migrations between 16,000 and 1500 years before present (ybp). Four thousand four hundred eight (4408) haplotypes of haplogroup R1b (with subclades) were considered in terms of base (ancestral) haplotypes of R1b populations and the calculated time to their common ancestors. The regions considered are from South Siberia/Central Asia in the east (where R1b haplogroup arose ~16,000 ybp) via the North Kazakhstan, South Ural to the Russian Plain and further west to Europe (the northern route entering Europe around 4500 ybp); from the Russian Plain south to the Caucasus (6000 ybp), Asia Minor (6000 ybp) and the Middle East (6000 - 5500 ybp) to the Balkans in Europe (the southern route, entering Europe around 4500 ybp); along North Africa and the Mediterranean Sea (5500 - 5000 ybp) via Egypt to the Atlantic, north to Iberia (the North African route with arrival to the Pyrenees 4800 ybp). The Arbins (bearers of R1b haplogroup) along their migration route to the Middle East and South Mesopotamia apparently have established the Sumer culture (and the state), moving westward to Europe (5000 - 4500 ybp) carrying mainly the R-M269 subclade and its downstream L23 subclade. This last subclade was nearly absent along the North African route, and/or did not survive the migration to Iberia or evidenced later. At the arrival to Iberia (4800 ybp) the M269 subclade split off M51 and soon thereafter the L11 downstream subclades. These populations became known as the Bell Beakers and moved north, along with the newly arisen subclades of P312 and L21 (which split off within a few centuries after P312). Those subclades and their downstream clades have effectively, without major interruptions, populated Europe (the smooth haplotype trees demonstrate the near non-stop proliferation of R1b haplotypes in Europe). They are evidenced from the Atlantic eastward to the Balkans, Carpathian Mountains, present day Poland to the western border of the Russian Plain and up to the Baltic Sea. The Isles had a different history of R1b migrations. The bearers of L11, P312 and L21 moved to the Isles by land and sea concurrently with those Arbins who were populating Europe between 4000 and 2500 ybp and formed the respective “local” subclades of P314, M222, L226, which largely populated the Isles. As a result, a significant part of the Isles is populated almost exclusively by the Arbins, whose frequency reaches 85% - 95% among the current population. In general, the frequency of Arbins in Western and Central Europe, reaches—albeit not uniformly—some 60% of the population. This study essentially presents an example of application of DNA genealogy in studying the history of mankind.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on May 30, 2012, 10:16:21 AM
^ What's exactly new about this paper, isn't this the exact same thing he published back in 2010. I mean this one:

http://www.turkicworld.org/turkic/60_Genetics/Klyosov2010DNK-GenealogyEn.html (http://www.turkicworld.org/turkic/60_Genetics/Klyosov2010DNK-GenealogyEn.html)

Quote from: Klyosov.et.al.2012
This last subclade was nearly absent along the North African route, and/or did not survive the migration to Iberia or evidenced later.At the arrival to Iberia (4800 ybp) the M269 subclade split off M51 and soon thereafter the L11 downstream subclades. These populations became known as the Bell Beakers and moved north, along with the newly arisen subclades of P312 and L21 (which split off within a few centuries after P312). Those subclades and their downstream clades have effectively, without major interruptions, populated Europe (the smooth haplotype trees demonstrate the near non-stop proliferation of R1b haplotypes in Europe).

Wait, doesn't he mean R1b-S21 or R1b-U106? Also, yeah good luck to him trying to prove that R1b-S21 arose in Iberia. Moreso, now that we know that two Bell Beakers very negative for R1b-S21.


To rms2:

Quote from: Klyosov.et.al.2012
Both are very similar and have very close timespans to their common ancestors, as it is shown in the next section. In 4850 ybp L11 promptly split off two “brother” subclades, P312 and U106 (Klyosov, 2011b) which after a long “population bottleneck” on the edge of extinction, eventually survived and expanded around 4000 - 3700 ybp, and actively populated Europe, first as Bell Beakers, between 4000 and 3000 ybp, and then up to the era of Ancient Rome, Gauls and Celts, mentioning only those names which present certain “milestones” in history. In fact, there were dozens if not hun-reds of ancient R1b tribes in Europe.

[...]

The question is—where those L51 and L11 subclades could have arisen? If they are 6000-5000 years “old”, they could have split in Asia Minor, the Middle East or on the Russian Plain, and enter Europe from there. The “intraclade” haplotypes, that is only L51 or only L11 subclade, might reflect population bottlenecks, hence, look “younger” than they in fact should be (in terms of mutations and the respective TMRCA). However, their “interclade” comparison could reveal their lost (due to bottlenecks) timespans to more ancient common ancestors. To analyze those subclades, a combined L51-L11 haplotype tree is shown in Figure 11.


They all do it, the only difference is the time frame, however bottlenecks appear to be the most popular explanation for Ad Hoc approaches. He also needs to claim bottlenecks for I1, E-V13 and all those other fellows, because that's the only possible explanation for E-V13 being found in 7000 ybp Spain, yet getting a TMRCA of less than 3000 ybp according to Klyosov, however, for some reason the TMRCA methodology seems to explain the migration route of R1b very well, but doesn't indicate anything for I1, or E-V13 bearers.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: ironroad41 on May 30, 2012, 10:18:36 AM
This sure conflicts with the Tarvi/e paper that Jean L. found.  He postulates little migration from the Caucasus?  On balance, it seems that everyone can believe whatever they want to.  


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Heber on May 30, 2012, 11:15:25 AM
This is a very interesting study and the first time I have seen the entire migration from R to M222 documented in this way. It is different and more readable than his previous article which focussed too much on the Turkic vs PIE debate which distracted from the overall message.

This supports the maritime model I proposed (and adapted) following the publication of the Myres study in 2010.

https://www.box.com/shared/b3ff9f377700af24ddce

"The Isles had a different history of their R1b haplotypes and lineages. The bearers of L11, P312 and L21 moved to the Isles by land and sea concurrently with those Arbins who were populating Europe between 4000 and 2500 ybp, and formed the respective “local” subclades, such as P314, M222, L226, which largely populated the Isles. As a result, a significant part of the Isles is populated almost exclusively by the Arbins whose fre-quency reaches 92% - 96% among the population. In general, the frequency of the Arbins in Western and central Europe reaches—albeit not uniformly—some 60% of the population."

"The language of the Arbins may have been originally one language easily flowing through millennia and across Eurasia. However, this is a subject of another study."

Two interesting recent articles on Dienekes blog reinforces this message of a maritine route. One shows the first migration of Agriculture out of Anatolia to Cyprus by sea 10,600 years ago. The second "The Stanford Geospatial Network Model of the Roman World" clearly shows that the fastest most effective means of communication in the ancient world was the Maritime route.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/05/01/1201693109.abstract

http://orbis.stanford.edu/

Agriculture arrived in Cyprus 10,600 years ago
PNAS doi: 10.1073/pnas.1201693109

First wave of cultivators spread to Cyprus at least 10,600 y ago

Jean-Denis Vigne et al.

"Early Neolithic sedentary villagers started cultivating wild cereals in the Near East 11,500 y ago [Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA)]. Recent discoveries indicated that Cyprus was frequented by Late PPNA people, but the earliest evidence until now for both the use of cereals and Neolithic villages on the island dates to 10,400 y ago. Here we present the recent archaeological excavation at Klimonas, which demonstrates that established villagers were living on Cyprus between 11,100 and 10,600 y ago. Villagers had stone artifacts and buildings (including a remarkable 10-m diameter communal building) that were similar to those found on Late PPNA sites on the mainland. Cereals were introduced from the Levant, and meat was obtained by hunting the only ungulate living on the island, a small indigenous Cypriot wild boar. Cats and small domestic dogs were brought from the mainland. This colonization suggests well-developed maritime capabilities by the PPNA period, but also that migration from the mainland may have occurred shortly after the beginning of agriculture."


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: razyn on May 30, 2012, 11:18:12 AM
This sure conflicts with the Tarvi/e paper that Jean L. found.  He postulates little migration from the Caucasus? 

Mari Järve is a woman -- I assume you are referring to her 2012 dissertation from Tartu University in Estonia.   Until very recently she has been part of the "et al" in papers with someone else at the lead, such as (Natalie M.) Myres et al (2011).  


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on May 30, 2012, 11:32:07 AM
"Ancient History of the Arbins, Bearers of Haplogroup R1b, from Central Asia to Europe, 16,000 to 1500 Years before Present"
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19567

Abstract:
Quote from: Anatole Klyosov
This article aims at reconstructing the history of R1b ancient migrations between 16,000 and 1500 years before present (ybp). Four thousand four hundred eight (4408) haplotypes of haplogroup R1b (with subclades) were considered in terms of base (ancestral) haplotypes of R1b populations and the calculated time to their common ancestors. The regions considered are from South Siberia/Central Asia in the east (where R1b haplogroup arose ~16,000 ybp) via the North Kazakhstan, South Ural to the Russian Plain and further west to Europe (the northern route entering Europe around 4500 ybp); from the Russian Plain south to the Caucasus (6000 ybp), Asia Minor (6000 ybp) and the Middle East (6000 - 5500 ybp) to the Balkans in Europe (the southern route, entering Europe around 4500 ybp); along North Africa and the Mediterranean Sea (5500 - 5000 ybp) via Egypt to the Atlantic, north to Iberia (the North African route with arrival to the Pyrenees 4800 ybp). The Arbins (bearers of R1b haplogroup) along their migration route to the Middle East and South Mesopotamia apparently have established the Sumer culture (and the state), moving westward to Europe (5000 - 4500 ybp) carrying mainly the R-M269 subclade and its downstream L23 subclade. This last subclade was nearly absent along the North African route, and/or did not survive the migration to Iberia or evidenced later. At the arrival to Iberia (4800 ybp) the M269 subclade split off M51 and soon thereafter the L11 downstream subclades. These populations became known as the Bell Beakers and moved north, along with the newly arisen subclades of P312 and L21 (which split off within a few centuries after P312). Those subclades and their downstream clades have effectively, without major interruptions, populated Europe (the smooth haplotype trees demonstrate the near non-stop proliferation of R1b haplotypes in Europe). They are evidenced from the Atlantic eastward to the Balkans, Carpathian Mountains, present day Poland to the western border of the Russian Plain and up to the Baltic Sea. The Isles had a different history of R1b migrations. The bearers of L11, P312 and L21 moved to the Isles by land and sea concurrently with those Arbins who were populating Europe between 4000 and 2500 ybp and formed the respective “local” subclades of P314, M222, L226, which largely populated the Isles. As a result, a significant part of the Isles is populated almost exclusively by the Arbins, whose frequency reaches 85% - 95% among the current population. In general, the frequency of Arbins in Western and Central Europe, reaches—albeit not uniformly—some 60% of the population. This study essentially presents an example of application of DNA genealogy in studying the history of mankind.

LOL @ the association of R1b with Sumer. The sky is green I swear to you I do not lie.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 30, 2012, 11:34:24 AM
Quote from: Anatole Klyosov
...  The Arbins (bearers of R1b haplogroup) along their migration route to the Middle East and South Mesopotamia apparently have established the Sumer culture (and the state), moving westward to Europe (5000 - 4500 ybp) carrying mainly the R-M269 subclade and its downstream L23 subclade. This last subclade was nearly absent along the North African route, and/or did not survive the migration to Iberia or evidenced later. At the arrival to Iberia (4800 ybp) the M269 subclade split off M51 and soon thereafter the L11 downstream subclades. .... 

LOL @ the association of R1b with Sumer. The sky is green I swear to you I do not lie.

Please elaborate.  I don't know enough about Sumerian cultures to give an opinion. Why is this a laugher?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on May 30, 2012, 11:36:13 AM
Sumerian culture was responsible for a great expanse of agriculture and cities in the fertile crescent. Along with this, one would expect a booming population and/or explosion. R1b is far too minimal in southern Iraq, and even the adjacent regions to be part of this.

You can't just pull haplogroups out of a hat. When there is scant evidence of aDNA in borderline pre-historic eras, at least be logical with your reasoning.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on May 30, 2012, 02:17:12 PM
It looks to me like another desperate attempt to disassociate R1b from Europe and IE and leave it all for Klyosov's galloping R1a elites.

To me the evidence is clear: R1a and R1b are two sides of the same PIE coin. The fact that they've both shown up in similar and adjacent cultures in ancient DNA (Corded Ware & Bell Beaker respectively) is more proof than any cherry picking he can do.

Interestingly he wrote the following:

"The same may be said for Yamnaya, Catacomb and neighboring archaeological cultures of Central and South Russia, which apparently were shared by both R1b and R1a bearers, albeit in different time periods. R1b before 5000 ybp, R1a after 4500 ybp have confused archaeologists who have observed “different roots” of those cultures, spread-ing in different directions and in different times."

...and the following:

"At some point in time, the Arbins (The name he made up for the R1b tribe, lest we confuse them with the R1a Aryans) began migration to the west, across Central Asia, North Kazakhstan, South Urals, to the Russian Plain where they have established a number of archaeological cultures between 12,000 and 4500 ybp (include- ing apparently Seroglazovo, Khvalyn, Samaran, Middle Volga, Drevneyamnay, Catacomb, and also “Proto-Kurgan” and/or “Kurgan” cultures which are largely considered as controversial and not accepted by many historians; it should be emphasized that all those above suggestions regarding the archaeological cultures can be viewed at present only as very tentative ones)."


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 30, 2012, 02:40:35 PM
It looks to me like another desperate attempt to disassociate R1b from Europe and IE and leave it all for Klyosov's galloping R1a elites.

To me the evidence is clear: R1a and R1b are two sides of the same PIE coin. The fact that they've both shown up in similar and adjacent cultures in ancient DNA (Corded Ware & Bell Beaker respectively) is more proof than any cherry picking he can do.

Interestingly he wrote the following:

"The same may be said for Yamnaya, Catacomb and neighboring archaeological cultures of Central and South Russia, which apparently were shared by both R1b and R1a bearers, albeit in different time periods. R1b before 5000 ybp, R1a after 4500 ybp have confused archaeologists who have observed “different roots” of those cultures, spread-ing in different directions and in different times."

...and the following:

"At some point in time, the Arbins (The name he made up for the R1b tribe, lest we confuse them with the R1a Aryans) began migration to the west, across Central Asia, North Kazakhstan, South Urals, to the Russian Plain where they have established a number of archaeological cultures between 12,000 and 4500 ybp (include- ing apparently Seroglazovo, Khvalyn, Samaran, Middle Volga, Drevneyamnay, Catacomb, and also “Proto-Kurgan” and/or “Kurgan” cultures which are largely considered as controversial and not accepted by many historians; it should be emphasized that all those above suggestions regarding the archaeological cultures can be viewed at present only as very tentative ones)."

That's a bit weird that he has R1b in the PIE homeland prior to 3000 BC and then R1a after 2500 BC.

From what I can see, the major PIE homeland theories are the earlier side of that, the times that Klyosov would say R1b was there.

Quote from: Wikipedia
These possibilities boil down to four competing basic models (with variations) that have academic credibility (Mallory (1997:106)), i.e.:

    Pontic-Caspian: Chalcolithic (5th to 4th millennia BCE)
    Anatolia: Early Neolithic (7th to 5th millennia BCE)
    Baltic hypothesis: Mesolithic to Neolithic (Ertebølle to Corded Ware horizon, 6th to 3rd millennia BCE)
    Balkans: Neolithic (5th millennium BCE)

Maybe Klyosov has a different PIE homeland than the Pontic-Steppes.  Where does he think it is?

Of course, since R1a and R1b share the same R1 MRCA, and the same territories (at different times) in Klyosov's views, I would think it makes sense that R1a and R1b may not have been so isolated from each other.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on May 30, 2012, 03:09:50 PM
I don't get the R1b from Central Asia premise. There is close to no R1b there. Bashkir M269 is recent. M269 in the rest of Central Asia is most likely related to Sassanid Persians. And M73 could a recent expansion from somewhere else imo.

It is clear R1a and R1b interacted with each other (Tripoyle and Yamn). I am just confused on why no Tripoyle R1b-M269 (or I2 for that matter) shows up in Andronovo. Is it due to a lack of samples/bottlenecks? Would more samples eventually show R1b-M269 in addition to M73, I2, G2a, , Z93+, Z280+ and Z283+ ?

Some people have argued for Corded Ware being the PIE homeland. Maybe that is what he thinks?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on May 30, 2012, 03:28:41 PM
Maybe Klyosov has a different PIE homeland than the Pontic-Steppes.  Where does he think it is?

Unfortunately he quotes his other papers more than he does others, so I can't see how he came up with much of anything.

What doesn't make sense to me is that he is saying that R1b left the Yamnaya area about 3,000 BC and made some long convoluted stops in the Middle East, then Northern Africa and finally arriving in Iberia in 2,800 BC.

Since he uses math to back up his logic, how about a straight line being the shortest distance between two points? If R1b1a2 did indeed leave the Yamnaya Cultural region around 3,000 BC, then wouldn't the safe money be that it would have traveled up the Danube to produce the two German Bell Beaker samples by 2,600 BC?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on May 30, 2012, 03:33:12 PM
Quote
Another half of the Assyrian hap-lotypes in the Project, mostly from Iran, have a slightly mutated “classical” European R1b1a2 base haplotype (with DYS464 = 15 15 17 17), and a common ancestor of 850 ± 360 ybp calcu-lated from the first 12 markers, and 1100 ± 280 ybp from the first 37 markers. This R1b evidence is clearly a relatively recent event in Assyrian population, brought from Europe.

This cannot be correct.  The lines he is referring to are R-L584.  They most certainly did not arrive 1100 ± 280 ybp. This is the same line that appears to be, albeit slightly mutated, the modal haplotype among the Alawites.  And the one shared with the Cohanim Jewish men.

GD to Al-Jeloo, based on 67 markers.  All of the men, save for one, are members of the "Nestorian" church.  The other one, Hermes, may be from the "Nestorian" church.  We still have not tested the Syriac Orthodox and Chaldean Catholics to any significant extent, unfortunately.  

205749    Al-Jeloo   L584

213562   David 13 L584
90492   Barkho 21   L584
147979   Hermes   21
213878   Mezdo   21   L277 23andMe
190249   Sada   23   L277 Possible
184027   Gorgis   26  L584

There are other R-M269 men in the project.  However, they are not tested through 67 markers.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on May 30, 2012, 04:18:09 PM
It looks to me like another desperate attempt to disassociate R1b from Europe and IE and leave it all for Klyosov's galloping R1a elites.

Well said. I suspect he will be challenging George R.R. Martin as the king of modern fantasy pretty soon though.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on May 30, 2012, 04:44:02 PM
What is North and NW Iranian Iranian R1b closest to? Is it native to them or a recent introduction?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on May 30, 2012, 04:45:38 PM
Quote
Another half of the Assyrian hap-lotypes in the Project, mostly from Iran, have a slightly mutated “classical” European R1b1a2 base haplotype (with DYS464 = 15 15 17 17), and a common ancestor of 850 ± 360 ybp calcu-lated from the first 12 markers, and 1100 ± 280 ybp from the first 37 markers. This R1b evidence is clearly a relatively recent event in Assyrian population, brought from Europe.

This cannot be correct.  The lines he is referring to are R-L584.  They most certainly did not arrive 1100 ± 280 ybp. This is the same line that appears to be, albeit slightly mutated, the modal haplotype among the Alawites.  And the one shared with the Cohanim Jewish men.

GD to Al-Jeloo, based on 67 markers.  All of the men, save for one, are members of the "Nestorian" church.  The other one, Hermes, may be from the "Nestorian" church.  We still have not tested the Syriac Orthodox and Chaldean Catholics to any significant extent, unfortunately.  

205749    Al-Jeloo   L584

213562   David 13 L584
90492   Barkho 21   L584
147979   Hermes   21
213878   Mezdo   21   L277 23andMe
190249   Sada   23   L277 Possible
184027   Gorgis   26  L584

There are other R-M269 men in the project.  However, they are not tested through 67 markers.

I doubt any Caucasian, Iranian, Assyrian, Armenian, Iraqi R1b 9and most Anatolian) is of European origin. European R1b might be found among the Levantine or Anatolian coast though imo.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 30, 2012, 04:47:09 PM
I don't get the R1b from Central Asia premise. There is close to no R1b there. Bashkir M269 is recent. M269 in the rest of Central Asia is most likely related to Sassanid Persians. And M73 could a recent expansion from somewhere else imo.

Do you agree with the Central Asia heartland theory by Spencer Wells?  He has many elements of HG P subgroups coming from there. This would include R1, R2 and R* and Q.
http://www.pnas.org/content/98/18/10244.long
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_P_(Y-DNA)

Do you think R1a has a possible Central Asian origin?  R1a is a brother to R1b underneath the R1 family.

There are elements of R1b, i.e. R1b-V88, that appear to have expanded from the Near East into Africa. There other elements, R1b-M73, that are found in SW Asia as far away as Pakistan and the Urals.

There has been no R1b ancient DNA found in Europe prior to a Bell Beaker find and an Urnfield find, both of the Bronze Age.

It is clear R1a and R1b interacted with each other (Tripoyle and Yamn). I am just confused on why no Tripoyle R1b-M269 (or I2 for that matter) shows up in Andronovo. Is it due to a lack of samples/bottlenecks? Would more samples eventually show R1b-M269 in addition to M73, I2, G2a, , Z93+, Z280+ and Z283+ ?

I am not sure that both R1a and R1b interacted within or in the contact areas between Tripolye and the Yamna horizon, but I don't know. Why do you say that is clear?

If the Yamna horizon is an horizon cultures spread across a broad area, why do you think the what pops out on the east side of that horizon and great plain has to have the same mix as what pops out on the west side far away?  There are probably a number bottlenecks, cultural integrations and splits within the bands of Yamna peoples.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on May 30, 2012, 05:18:13 PM
I don't get the R1b from Central Asia premise. There is close to no R1b there. Bashkir M269 is recent. M269 in the rest of Central Asia is most likely related to Sassanid Persians. And M73 could a recent expansion from somewhere else imo.

Do you agree with the Central Asia heartland theory by Spencer Wells?  He has many elements of HG P subgroups coming from there? This would include R1, R2 and R* and Q.
http://www.pnas.org/content/98/18/10244.long
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_P_(Y-DNA)

Do you think R1a has a possible Central Asian origin?  R1a is a brother to R1b underneath the R1 family.

There are elements of R1b, i.e. R1b-V88, that appear to have expanded from the Near East into Africa. There other elements, R1b-M73, that are found in SW Asia as far away as Pakistan and the Urals.

There has been no R1b ancient DNA found in Europe prior to a Bell Beaker find and an Urnfield find, both of the Bronze Age.

It is clear R1a and R1b interacted with each other (Tripoyle and Yamn). I am just confused on why no Tripoyle R1b-M269 (or I2 for that matter) shows up in Andronovo. Is it due to a lack of samples/bottlenecks? Would more samples eventually show R1b-M269 in addition to M73, I2, G2a, , Z93+, Z280+ and Z283+ ?

I am not sure that both R1a and R1b interacted within or in the contact areas between Tripolye and the Yamna horizon, but I don't know. Why do you say that is clear?

If the Yamna horizon is an horizon cultures spread across a broad area, why do you think the what pops out on the east side of that horizon and great plain has to have the same mix as what pops out on the west side far away?  There are probably a number bottlenecks, cultural integrations and splits with in the bands of Yamna peoples.


That would make sense to some degree. We saw a lot of rare Q subclades in Iran and India which are not associated with Turkic admixture. Does that open up the possibility of Q being West Eurasian? An origin of R2 (both l295+ and l295_ found here) also makes sense as does R1a.  M73 seems to have been brought to the area by proto Turks. The M73 you find in Pakistan is found among the Hazaras who are the descendants of Turko-Mongols. You find some among the Tajiks as well who have significant Turkic admixture.

I say it is clear because many here associate R1b with lactose persistence which spread to the steepe and is found at appreciable frequencies in IE speaking parts of Asia. And then Jean M mentioned that rare mtdna T clade being found in both Andronovo and Tripoyle. I also find it hard to believe the IE speakers expanding east were fully R1a-Z93+. They had a minority of other clades which died out. Central Asia has been subject to numerous Turkic invasions which have changed the picture and that has also led to migrations westward.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Arch Y. on May 31, 2012, 01:28:01 AM
^ What's exactly new about this paper, isn't this the exact same thing he published back in 2010. I mean this one:

http://www.turkicworld.org/turkic/60_Genetics/Klyosov2010DNK-GenealogyEn.html (http://www.turkicworld.org/turkic/60_Genetics/Klyosov2010DNK-GenealogyEn.html)

Quote from: Klyosov.et.al.2012
This last subclade was nearly absent along the North African route, and/or did not survive the migration to Iberia or evidenced later.At the arrival to Iberia (4800 ybp) the M269 subclade split off M51 and soon thereafter the L11 downstream subclades. These populations became known as the Bell Beakers and moved north, along with the newly arisen subclades of P312 and L21 (which split off within a few centuries after P312). Those subclades and their downstream clades have effectively, without major interruptions, populated Europe (the smooth haplotype trees demonstrate the near non-stop proliferation of R1b haplotypes in Europe).

Wait, doesn't he mean R1b-S21 or R1b-U106? Also, yeah good luck to him trying to prove that R1b-S21 arose in Iberia. Moreso, now that we know that two Bell Beakers very negative for R1b-S21.


To rms2:

Quote from: Klyosov.et.al.2012
Both are very similar and have very close timespans to their common ancestors, as it is shown in the next section. In 4850 ybp L11 promptly split off two “brother” subclades, P312 and U106 (Klyosov, 2011b) which after a long “population bottleneck” on the edge of extinction, eventually survived and expanded around 4000 - 3700 ybp, and actively populated Europe, first as Bell Beakers, between 4000 and 3000 ybp, and then up to the era of Ancient Rome, Gauls and Celts, mentioning only those names which present certain “milestones” in history. In fact, there were dozens if not hun-reds of ancient R1b tribes in Europe.

[...]

The question is—where those L51 and L11 subclades could have arisen? If they are 6000-5000 years “old”, they could have split in Asia Minor, the Middle East or on the Russian Plain, and enter Europe from there. The “intraclade” haplotypes, that is only L51 or only L11 subclade, might reflect population bottlenecks, hence, look “younger” than they in fact should be (in terms of mutations and the respective TMRCA). However, their “interclade” comparison could reveal their lost (due to bottlenecks) timespans to more ancient common ancestors. To analyze those subclades, a combined L51-L11 haplotype tree is shown in Figure 11.


They all do it, the only difference is the time frame, however bottlenecks appear to be the most popular explanation for Ad Hoc approaches. He also needs to claim bottlenecks for I1, E-V13 and all those other fellows, because that's the only possible explanation for E-V13 being found in 7000 ybp Spain, yet getting a TMRCA of less than 3000 ybp according to Klyosov, however, for some reason the TMRCA methodology seems to explain the migration route of R1b very well, but doesn't indicate anything for I1, or E-V13 bearers.

I can't find the source for Klyosov stating that the oldest Bell Beaker artefacts are found in the Pyrenees.  The only confirmed source I have about the oldest Bell Beaker artefacts are from Cunliffe stating Eastern Iberia for the BB archers. I don't think we have any BB remains tested positive for R1b folks in Iberia, so where is he getting his data?

Arch



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 31, 2012, 11:41:14 AM
... It is clear R1a and R1b interacted with each other (Tripoyle and Yamn).... 

I am not sure that both R1a and R1b interacted within or in the contact areas between Tripolye and the Yamna horizon, but I don't know. Why do you say that is clear

.... I say it is clear because many here associate R1b with lactose persistence which spread to the steepe and is found at appreciable frequencies in IE speaking parts of Asia. And then Jean M mentioned that rare mtdna T clade being found in both Andronovo and Tripoyle. I also find it hard to believe the IE speakers expanding east were fully R1a-Z93+. They had a minority of other clades which died out. Central Asia has been subject to numerous Turkic invasions which have changed the picture and that has also led to migrations westward.

Okay, I see what you are saying. I wouldn't necessarily say it is clear that R1a and R1b interacted in the Tripolye Yamna contact/integration. This is a good chance they did.  I wish we had some aDNA from those sites.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on May 31, 2012, 01:54:39 PM
I don't get the R1b from Central Asia premise. There is close to no R1b there. Bashkir M269 is recent. M269 in the rest of Central Asia is most likely related to Sassanid Persians. And M73 could a recent expansion from somewhere else imo.

Do you agree with the Central Asia heartland theory by Spencer Wells?  He has many elements of HG P subgroups coming from there. This would include R1, R2 and R* and Q.
http://www.pnas.org/content/98/18/10244.long
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_P_(Y-DNA)

Do you think R1a has a possible Central Asian origin?  R1a is a brother to R1b underneath the R1 family.

There are elements of R1b, i.e. R1b-V88, that appear to have expanded from the Near East into Africa. There other elements, R1b-M73, that are found in SW Asia as far away as Pakistan and the Urals.

There has been no R1b ancient DNA found in Europe prior to a Bell Beaker find and an Urnfield find, both of the Bronze Age.

It is clear R1a and R1b interacted with each other (Tripoyle and Yamn). I am just confused on why no Tripoyle R1b-M269 (or I2 for that matter) shows up in Andronovo. Is it due to a lack of samples/bottlenecks? Would more samples eventually show R1b-M269 in addition to M73, I2, G2a, , Z93+, Z280+ and Z283+ ?

I am not sure that both R1a and R1b interacted within or in the contact areas between Tripolye and the Yamna horizon, but I don't know. Why do you say that is clear?

If the Yamna horizon is an horizon cultures spread across a broad area, why do you think the what pops out on the east side of that horizon and great plain has to have the same mix as what pops out on the west side far away?  There are probably a number bottlenecks, cultural integrations and splits within the bands of Yamna peoples.


Mike

Would you agree that R1b shows the hallmarks (lack of deep bushy branches) of a haplotype that was in a low population hunter-gather location until late in the Neolithic.  I am now thinking that V88 was simply a guy who somehow wandered into the farming zone or perhaps sailed.  I think the rarity of line founding on a scale that wont daughter out etc until late in the Neolithic kind of demonstrates that they were at a sufficient remove from farming to make gravitation towards it, incorporation within it  or emulation of it a rare event.  I now am very curious about the late hunter cultures all round the Black and Caspian Seas (all sides). 

Is am wondering if L23* first intruded into the fringes of the farming zone around the Caucuses and Anatolia and perhaps the Black Sea shores of Romania from some non-farming area on the Black Sea who were in the vanguard of the R1 peoples movements into the old farming world.  Perhaps the group who entered Anatolia early by doing so broke off PIE early hence Anatolian.  I imagine other L23* headed west into Romania.  This sort of diffusion west and south would fit well a location near the northern shores of Black Sea c.  4000BC or so.  I wonder if this could be linked to the disappearance of the Bug -Dniester and other hunters in the face of Cucuteni-Trypole famers invading their areas.  This must have had some effect on the hunter-fishers.  Here is the chronology of the Cucuteni-Typole movements.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodization_of_the_Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture

I just wonder if some L23* (and Anatolian language?) was displaced with the hunters from the western end of some sort of proto-proto-IE zone of hunters when (non-R1b) Cucuteni-Trypole pushed in.  Not exactly a clear smoking gun but around the right place about the right time.  Displacement could have involved boats too so no trail needs to exist over land.  So I guess what I am speculating is that while R1a may have arisen further east along the steppes perhaps R1b was located among the Bug-Dneiper or related groups immediately to the west on the north shore of the Black Sea.  Displacement of such a group would have happened progressively as Cucuteni-Trypole intruded.   


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on May 31, 2012, 02:07:21 PM
... It is clear R1a and R1b interacted with each other (Tripoyle and Yamn).... 

I am not sure that both R1a and R1b interacted within or in the contact areas between Tripolye and the Yamna horizon, but I don't know. Why do you say that is clear

.... I say it is clear because many here associate R1b with lactose persistence which spread to the steepe and is found at appreciable frequencies in IE speaking parts of Asia. And then Jean M mentioned that rare mtdna T clade being found in both Andronovo and Tripoyle. I also find it hard to believe the IE speakers expanding east were fully R1a-Z93+. They had a minority of other clades which died out. Central Asia has been subject to numerous Turkic invasions which have changed the picture and that has also led to migrations westward.

Okay, I see what you are saying. I wouldn't necessarily say it is clear that R1a and R1b interacted in the Tripolye Yamna contact/integration. This is a good chance they did.  I wish we had some aDNA from those sites.

I am now thinking the lack of deep branching in R1b would not be compatible with a farming group like C-T who themselves are descended from older SE European farming groups.  R1b looks like it was only incorporated late into a farming society with its demographic opportunities.  I think the problem is that people keep talking about Typole Yamna contact.  What about the pre-Yamna hunters who lived a little further west i.e. the Bug-Dneister and similar cultures.  Could R1b not have been located there?  Yamna is thought to be descended from  hunters (I think its Sredny Stog) a little to the east.  Because of the low demographic growth of most hunter groups this presents a good opportunity for mixed R1 populations to end up divided into single lineage groups.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 02, 2012, 07:08:34 AM
In terms of Anantole's paper I would say 'dont throw out the baby with the bath water'.  Its a very interesting paper about the deepest origins of R1b and its early fanning out.  Its a pity he tends to undermine his cred a little when he dabbles outside the DNA and mathematical element but a lot of what he says is very interesting. I would say his general model of the multi-directional fanning out of R1b from south Russia could be on the money.  I would interpret it culturally somewhat differently though.  I would suspect that his southwards movement of L23 could be associated with the Anatolian languages and the Assyrian element could well be due to the Hittite empire who I suspect had an L23 aristocracy.  I would certainly not associate L23 with the founding of Sumer but it clearly infiltrated the area.  Personally I would think L23 Biforked south and west judging by the split between Hittite and the other Indo-Europeans.  Some L23 must have stayed behind in the 'core' where full PIE developed and headed west more directly into Europe.  All in all if you ignore some of his dabblings in interpretation I still find his basic model very interesting albeit some of the details of its spread into central and western Europe need some work IMO. 

One comment- I think Jean L said good luck to anyone deriving U106 from Iberia.  I think the reality is U106 did not exist at the time of the first century or so of the spread of L11.  It was an L11* lineage that did the travelling IMO and the U106 SNP happened in a locality (the Baltic) after the initial migration phase and apparently remained fairly bottled up for a very long time after.  Bottom line is U106 and P312 both share a very recent L11 ancestor and the later cultural linguistic distinctions we put on them are things that happened long after they did their initial migration phase (in the case of U106 still in the L11* form).  Yes U106 eventually did become associated with the formation of Germanic but that was a matter of geography and probably happened about 600BC, 2000 years after the L11* ancestors of U106 had migrated to Poland.  Finally I would still strongly think that the Rhone and adjacent were the landfall of L51/L11 group in Europe via some route either through central Europe of around Italy. 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 02, 2012, 07:22:30 AM
...also as for the Sumer link could that not be related to the strong connections with the north in the metal trade (Maekop etc).  I think Anatole has provided an epic in depth analysis of the DNA although he is dabbling outside his area of expertise in interpretation and that is a pity as I think he should be congradulated in 'having a go' at providing an overall genetic history of R1b.  I think as soon as one excepts the variance dating for R1b in its various stages then it is quite clear R1b was an intruder into the farming zone in a number of phases from 4000BC.  This almost forces us to look to the steppes and adjacent.  I think perhaps he tries too hard to distinguise R1b and R1a and contrast them when they have so much in common although there clearly was some modest geographical/chronological differences that created the contrasting patterning.  Personally I think they were both in the zone where PIE evolved. 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: razyn on June 02, 2012, 11:02:12 AM
I think as soon as one excepts the variance dating for R1b in its various stages then it is quite clear R1b was an intruder into the farming zone in a number of phases from 4000BC.

The other thing that would make a little more sense of the TMRCA data we have (if people accepted it -- which many do not, and will not if it conflicts with their strongly held beliefs) would be ignoring paragroups such as L23*, M51*, L11*, maybe even P312*, except in the case of aDNA that exhibited those early and still un-branched SNPs.  Whether someone survives today whose Y-DNA hasn't branched since the LGM (or something in that time range), I don't know; but in the absence of very hard evidence, I tend to doubt it.  And given that doubt, I give little weight to some closely reasoned constructs about refugia (several millennia after the LGM), PIE (before there was PIE), and the like.  To me, the variance-based dating is currently more credible.

Whereas, to partisans of some regional or cultural sorts (Italian, Basque, Assyrian and Iranian spring to mind -- but there are several others, who just aren't making so much noise in this specific discussion), the best way to make the data fit their theories is to concentrate on time frames earlier than any good evidence we might have that contradicts them.  Arguing about that -- or with them -- just doesn't seem to me to be a very productive use of the time of others who are not obsessed with those same theories (although we may well be obsessed in some other ways).

But with regard specifically to Alan's comment, the interclade MRCA dating is better than intraclade, and these paragroups don't today constitute a sufficiently precise clade with which one might draw meaningful interclade comparisons.  Presumably most of them are ephemera, and will go away after their downstream SNPs are discovered and tested.  Ethnic partisans won't go away, that would be too much to hope for.  But their efforts might be better directed at such projects as testing Romanian Y-DNA.  Some ethnic groups have been doing that sort of thing quite well -- including the ones I mentioned, and quite a few others -- with the caveat that many of the scholarly efforts to date have tested at very low resolution. 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on June 02, 2012, 03:24:12 PM
... It is clear R1a and R1b interacted with each other (Tripoyle and Yamn).... 

I am not sure that both R1a and R1b interacted within or in the contact areas between Tripolye and the Yamna horizon, but I don't know. Why do you say that is clear

.... I say it is clear because many here associate R1b with lactose persistence which spread to the steepe and is found at appreciable frequencies in IE speaking parts of Asia. And then Jean M mentioned that rare mtdna T clade being found in both Andronovo and Tripoyle. I also find it hard to believe the IE speakers expanding east were fully R1a-Z93+. They had a minority of other clades which died out. Central Asia has been subject to numerous Turkic invasions which have changed the picture and that has also led to migrations westward.

Okay, I see what you are saying. I wouldn't necessarily say it is clear that R1a and R1b interacted in the Tripolye Yamna contact/integration. This is a good chance they did.  I wish we had some aDNA from those sites.

Maybe R1a and R1b didn't but R1a and R1b tribes did. Lactose persistence had to have originated in one of those tribes and it doesn't make sense for R1a populations far away from Europe to have the same alleles for lactose persistence. of course the possibility of it being transmitted through mtdna is always there.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on June 02, 2012, 03:26:46 PM
In terms of Anantole's paper I would say 'dont throw out the baby with the bath water'.  Its a very interesting paper about the deepest origins of R1b and its early fanning out.  Its a pity he tends to undermine his cred a little when he dabbles outside the DNA and mathematical element but a lot of what he says is very interesting. I would say his general model of the multi-directional fanning out of R1b from south Russia could be on the money.  I would interpret it culturally somewhat differently though.  I would suspect that his southwards movement of L23 could be associated with the Anatolian languages and the Assyrian element could well be due to the Hittite empire who I suspect had an L23 aristocracy.  I would certainly not associate L23 with the founding of Sumer but it clearly infiltrated the area.  Personally I would think L23 Biforked south and west judging by the split between Hittite and the other Indo-Europeans.  Some L23 must have stayed behind in the 'core' where full PIE developed and headed west more directly into Europe.  All in all if you ignore some of his dabblings in interpretation I still find his basic model very interesting albeit some of the details of its spread into central and western Europe need some work IMO. 

One comment- I think Jean L said good luck to anyone deriving U106 from Iberia.  I think the reality is U106 did not exist at the time of the first century or so of the spread of L11.  It was an L11* lineage that did the travelling IMO and the U106 SNP happened in a locality (the Baltic) after the initial migration phase and apparently remained fairly bottled up for a very long time after.  Bottom line is U106 and P312 both share a very recent L11 ancestor and the later cultural linguistic distinctions we put on them are things that happened long after they did their initial migration phase (in the case of U106 still in the L11* form).  Yes U106 eventually did become associated with the formation of Germanic but that was a matter of geography and probably happened about 600BC, 2000 years after the L11* ancestors of U106 had migrated to Poland.  Finally I would still strongly think that the Rhone and adjacent were the landfall of L51/L11 group in Europe via some route either through central Europe of around Italy. 

And the Iranian(and Azerbaijani/Syrian/Iraqi Arab etc) R1b exists how?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 02, 2012, 04:25:07 PM

Whereas, to partisans of some regional or cultural sorts (Italian, Basque, Assyrian and Iranian spring to mind -- but there are several others, who just aren't making so much noise in this specific discussion), the best way to make the data fit their theories is to concentrate on time frames earlier than any good evidence we might have that contradicts them.

How am I partisan?  I present the data, ask questions from folks, and do not even argue in favor of a N Mesopotamian origin of L23.  

Edit: Not only that, I present evidence that may support the arguments of others (e.g. Caucasian origin of L23, Balkan or Indo-European origin of L23, Central Asian origin of L23, etc.).  


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 02, 2012, 04:35:21 PM
The one thing I do hold is that, although not necessarily the homeland, my part of the world (West Asia) played a significant part in the history of R-M269.  That is the extent of what I am "pushing." 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 02, 2012, 04:45:32 PM
For instance.  From another forum:

Quote
Posted 2012-05-02, 18:44

Excluding Turkic and other relatively recent Asian population movements, the four most recent and significant strata (not exclusive of reintroduction of a component and/or uniparental line), in my opinion, in the Near East, beginning with the most recent (all peoples of the region have not been impacted by each, or at least not to the same degree):

Mid 1st millennium CE
Arabo-Islamic expansions. Elevated Y-DNA J1-P58, elevated mtDNA L, "African" components, and elevated "Southwest Asian" in some parts.

~ 1st millennium BCE
Indo-Iranian expansions. Elevated R1a1, "North European" component.

2nd millennium/1st millennium BCE
Aramaean expansions. I am unsure about this. At one time, I thought that some haplogroup Y-DNA T lines could be linked to them. It is possible they may have increased "Southwest Asian" in some groups in the area. To what extent, I do not know.

~ 2nd millennium BCE
The expansion of an eastern(?) people(s) of unknown origin. Elevated "Gedrosia," and in some populations elevated R-M269. This does not mean other uniparental lines were not also involved.

These are simply a few thoughts. Not to be taken seriously.

If the above outline is in the ballpark, at least some populations of northern Mesopotamia, a few millennia ago (4 kya+?), would have carried a predominance (60%+?) of "Caucasus," with the rest being split (not necessarily equally) between "Southwest Asian" and "Atlantic_Med." With perhaps some "NW African" and/or "East African."


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on June 02, 2012, 04:49:10 PM

Whereas, to partisans of some regional or cultural sorts (Italian, Basque, Assyrian and Iranian spring to mind -- but there are several others, who just aren't making so much noise in this specific discussion), the best way to make the data fit their theories is to concentrate on time frames earlier than any good evidence we might have that contradicts them.

How am I partisan?  I present the data, ask questions from folks, and do not even argue in favor of a N Mesopotamian origin of L23.  

Edit: Not only that, I present evidence that may support the arguments of others (e.g. Caucasian origin of L23, Balkan or Indo-European origin of L23, Central Asian origin of L23, etc.).  

I don't get how you are being a partisan. Individuals who think Iranian R1b is the result of a Balkan migration and later Armenian/Assyrian admixture in Iranian despite there being no proof of either are the partisan. Despite the fact that R1b likely originated in the area and its presence in West Asia has very little to do with Europe.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 02, 2012, 05:06:21 PM
Here is another.  This one, suggestive of a possible Indo-European element:

Quote
Posted 2012-05-22, 15:51

An older paper:

Quote
The few LBA burials uncovered thus far at Sabi Abyad indicate an interesting variability in the treatment of the dead. Apart from the mass interment, which is no doubt of an exceptional nature, three types of formal burial behaviour are recognised. A true cemetery may have existed in the close vicinity of the site, but at least some of the dead, both children and adults, were buried within or at the margins of the settlement. What reasons underlie the choice of burial treatment is not yet clear. Simple pit graves and pot inhumations have a long history and are found throughout the second millennium (and before) in Mesopotamia and Syria. Cremation burials, however, hardly appear in earlier times in these regions. Whereas cremations are commonly found in second millennium Anatolia, in Syria cremations, although already present at the end of the second millennium, seem to constitute a mainly first millennium (Iron Age) feature of burial treatment. In view of the cemeteries at e.g. Hama or Carchemish, cremations are commonly associated with Hittite presence or influence (see Moorey 1980:6), but in the east, e.g. at Assur or Babylon, we find these graves in Neo- Assyrian times (Haller 1954:52ff; Reuther 1926:189).

EXCAVATIONS AT TELL SABI ABYAD, NORTHERN SYRIA: A REGIONAL CENTRE ON THE ASSYRIAN FRONTIER

Peter M.M.G. Akkermans and Inge Rossmeisl (1990)


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Maliclavelli on June 02, 2012, 10:41:57 PM
Whereas, to partisans of some regional or cultural sorts (Italian, Basque, Assyrian and Iranian spring to mind
I thank you for having put me first. You will see that this will be the winning post.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on June 02, 2012, 10:54:52 PM
I don't get how you are being a partisan. Individuals who think Iranian R1b is the result of a Balkan migration and later Armenian/Assyrian admixture in Iranian despite there being no proof of either are the partisan. Despite the fact that R1b likely originated in the area and its presence in West Asia has very little to do with Europe.

This is pretty trivial, and inconsequential to dispute. Whether the R1b man was born in West Asia or Europe is irrelevent and impossible to determine. The vast majority of his descendants live in Europe, so the original man probably did not live too deep into Asia. (ie: probably not Central Asia, or India for example - despite a single R1b1* Indian male in our samples) I also think this could be an extremely long time ago which is why so few males live on today. (12000+ years)

The strongest point of origin (R1b1*) in my view is Anatolia which borders Europe. So techincally I suppose it's "not European", but at the same time it is pretty close. I am not sure on the status of the L389 mutation, but it consists of a pretty broad swath of territory- consisting at least 1 Ashkenazi cluster and some Armenians and other West Asians.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 08:08:42 AM
Yeah I suppose it comes with the turf in a hobby where a lot of people are seeking/want to refine some sort of ethno-historic identity.  I get sick of the transparent obsession some people have about making their own haplogroup or that which is strong in their population as early and indigenous as possible.  In other words you are more of a 'true' member of your ethnic or national group because you are earlier or it proves some political point.    There is also far too much talk of 'pure' populations of single yDNA lineages.  There is also a bit too much admiration for violent conquest. There is also too much childish heavy metal type fantasies for  conan the barbarian types (some people never grow up).   Then there is the seeking of glory in claims that one's own haplogroup did this or that.  There is a lot of obsessing about Indo-European and a desperation to be part of that.  There is often a suggestion of superiority or a desire to associate with northern Europeans and nordics in general. Ringing any alarm bells?  I Those ideas seem live and well in this hobby.     


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: rms2 on June 03, 2012, 08:33:35 AM
Yeah I suppose it comes with the turf in a hobby where a lot of people are seeking/want to refine some sort of ethno-historic identity.  I get sick of the transparent obsession some people have about making their own haplogroup or that which is strong in their population as early and indigenous as possible.  In other words you are more of a 'true' member of your ethnic or national group because you are earlier or it proves some political point.    There is also far too much talk of 'pure' populations of single yDNA lineages.  There is also a bit too much admiration for violent conquest. There is also too much childish heavy metal type fantasies for  conan the barbarian types (some people never grow up).   Then there is the seeking of glory in claims that one's own haplogroup did this or that.  There is a lot of obsessing about Indo-European and a desperation to be part of that.  There is often a suggestion of superiority or a desire to associate with northern Europeans and nordics in general. Ringing any alarm bells?  I Those ideas seem live and well in this hobby.      

All that is true and, as you said, pretty obvious. I'm not sure it can be helped, however. We all want our ancestors, especially those in our own direct y-dna line, to be heroic and larger than life.

I am susceptible to that urge myself, but I like to think I have a kind of nose for the truth, even when it is not what I would have preferred, that gives me a certain immunity from the worst fantasy-hobbyist excesses.

The complexity of this past time is daunting. It requires expertise in genetics, history, archaeology, anthropology, mathematics, linguistics, geography, and more. Who is the master of all those fields? Not I!

That complexity makes all of these competing hypotheses possible, and it makes even some of those that are probably patently ridiculous sound - for a time - credible.

There have been quite a few times, especially recently, that I have contemplated abandoning an interest in and the pursuit of "deep ancestry" and restricting myself to personal genealogy. Personal family genealogy is the interest that got me into dna testing in the first place, although when I ordered my first 37-marker y-dna test I did harbor a silly, childish desire to be a "Viking". :-)


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 08:42:03 AM
In terms of Anantole's paper I would say 'dont throw out the baby with the bath water'.  Its a very interesting paper about the deepest origins of R1b and its early fanning out.  Its a pity he tends to undermine his cred a little when he dabbles outside the DNA and mathematical element but a lot of what he says is very interesting. I would say his general model of the multi-directional fanning out of R1b from south Russia could be on the money.  I would interpret it culturally somewhat differently though.  I would suspect that his southwards movement of L23 could be associated with the Anatolian languages and the Assyrian element could well be due to the Hittite empire who I suspect had an L23 aristocracy.  I would certainly not associate L23 with the founding of Sumer but it clearly infiltrated the area.  Personally I would think L23 Biforked south and west judging by the split between Hittite and the other Indo-Europeans.  Some L23 must have stayed behind in the 'core' where full PIE developed and headed west more directly into Europe.  All in all if you ignore some of his dabblings in interpretation I still find his basic model very interesting albeit some of the details of its spread into central and western Europe need some work IMO. 

One comment- I think Jean L said good luck to anyone deriving U106 from Iberia.  I think the reality is U106 did not exist at the time of the first century or so of the spread of L11.  It was an L11* lineage that did the travelling IMO and the U106 SNP happened in a locality (the Baltic) after the initial migration phase and apparently remained fairly bottled up for a very long time after.  Bottom line is U106 and P312 both share a very recent L11 ancestor and the later cultural linguistic distinctions we put on them are things that happened long after they did their initial migration phase (in the case of U106 still in the L11* form).  Yes U106 eventually did become associated with the formation of Germanic but that was a matter of geography and probably happened about 600BC, 2000 years after the L11* ancestors of U106 had migrated to Poland.  Finally I would still strongly think that the Rhone and adjacent were the landfall of L51/L11 group in Europe via some route either through central Europe of around Italy. 

And the Iranian(and Azerbaijani/Syrian/Iraqi Arab etc) R1b exists how?

There are a huge amount of scenarios for explaining R1b almost anywhere.  The Hittite empire I think may have been founded by an L23 group (with a smaller M269* element) from somewhere else.  The Hittite empire was massive and covered a large area including much of Anatolia, the northern part of Syria where most L23 is), part of Lebanon, the north of Iraq, The NE of Iran etc.  Of course those were sophisticated societies and I think there would have been movement of ordinary people between those areas and the neighbouring countries too.  The Hittite empire is just one of a large group of movements in that general area. I think there is enough evidence to suggest R1b was also present in some Iranian and clearly was among the Armenians. Whether R1b was due to Hittites or was simply in the earlier Iranian mix prior to it decreasing by founder effects and fission,  I dont know.  I really hope some money some day is thrown at a major study of R1b from L23 upstream in eastern Europe, Anatolia and SW and central Asia.    


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 08:59:48 AM
Yeah I suppose it comes with the turf in a hobby where a lot of people are seeking/want to refine some sort of ethno-historic identity.  I get sick of the transparent obsession some people have about making their own haplogroup or that which is strong in their population as early and indigenous as possible.  In other words you are more of a 'true' member of your ethnic or national group because you are earlier or it proves some political point.    There is also far too much talk of 'pure' populations of single yDNA lineages.  There is also a bit too much admiration for violent conquest. There is also too much childish heavy metal type fantasies for  conan the barbarian types (some people never grow up).   Then there is the seeking of glory in claims that one's own haplogroup did this or that.  There is a lot of obsessing about Indo-European and a desperation to be part of that.  There is often a suggestion of superiority or a desire to associate with northern Europeans and nordics in general. Ringing any alarm bells?  I Those ideas seem live and well in this hobby.      

All that is true and, as you said, pretty obvious. I'm not sure it can be helped, however. We all want our ancestors, especially those in our own direct y-dna line, to be heroic and larger than life.

I am susceptible to that urge myself, but I like to think I have a kind of nose for the truth, even when it is not what I would have preferred, that gives me a certain immunity from the worst fantasy-hobbyist excesses.

The complexity of this past time is daunting. It requires expertise in genetics, history, archaeology, anthropology, mathematics, linguistics, geography, and more. Who is the master of all those fields? Not I!

That complexity makes all of these competing hypotheses possible, and it makes even some of those that are probably patently ridiculous sound - for a time - credible.

There have been quite a few times, especially recently, that I have contemplated abandoning an interest in and the pursuit of "deep ancestry" and restricting myself to personal genealogy. Personal family genealogy is the interest that got me into dna testing in the first place, although when I ordered my first 37-marker y-dna test I did harbor a silly, childish desire to be a "Viking". :-)

:0) my post was a bit overly serious and all of us deep down would like a particularly interesting deep ancestry.  its just the mix of traits I posted are a bit alarming.  I have to be honest though I quiet liked the idea of being a western refugia hunter gather.  I always thought I would much prefer their lifestyle (called 'the first affluent society') to farming.  Still, everyones ancestors were hunters somewhere at some time.  I am now curious as to where R1b's Ice Age eastern refuge was. Jean M has made some suggestions.  I would like to find out a bit more but with the origin point of R1b and R1 a little vague (anywhere from Siberia to Anatolia) it would be complex.  I think we need some sort of study specifically targetted on early R1b.  I suppose at the LGM it was still really R1, maybe with early R1a and R1b.  Now I have accepted the variance dating I am no longer convinced R1b was in the farming zone so I would tend to think of its likely refuge as being further north than Anatolia or Mesopotamia.  If it had been that far south it would have been in the epicentre of early farming.  R1b above M269 (and below it too for some time) does not have the branching expanding structure you would expect for a haoplogroup who experienced the farming demographic explosion.  I think what has been lost sight of due to the contrasting European distributions of much later clades is the similarity of R1a and R1b prior to say 4000BC.  They both seem to have been really in the backwoods and demographically not doing well.  The simplest explanation is they were both late hunter-gatherers in or adjacent to the steppes.   


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: rms2 on June 03, 2012, 09:14:59 AM
:0) my post was a bit overly serious and all of us deep down would like a particularly interesting deep ancestry.  its just the mix of traits I posted are a bit alarming.  I have to be honest though I quiet liked the idea of being a western refugia hunter gather.  I always thought I would much prefer their lifestyle (called 'the first affluent society') to farming.  Still, everyones ancestors were hunters somewhere at some time.  I am now curious as to where R1b's Ice Age refuge was. 

That's true. The "Cro-Magnon R1b" thing that was much advertised when I ordered my first dna test would please me just fine, too. I just never thought it made much sense and still don't.

As you know because I have mentioned it before, I grew up thinking I was an Anglo-Saxon or a Viking (by descent, I mean - and I am pretty sure I have those folks among my ancestors, too) and that the Britons were pathetic losers who got herded into Wales, Cornwall, southern Scotland, and Brittany. Then I found out my y-dna ancestors probably were Britons! How the world turns! Now I wouldn't trade that for anything.

So, whatever we ultimately discover, I'll find something to like about it.



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 09:31:56 AM
:0) my post was a bit overly serious and all of us deep down would like a particularly interesting deep ancestry.  its just the mix of traits I posted are a bit alarming.  I have to be honest though I quiet liked the idea of being a western refugia hunter gather.  I always thought I would much prefer their lifestyle (called 'the first affluent society') to farming.  Still, everyones ancestors were hunters somewhere at some time.  I am now curious as to where R1b's Ice Age refuge was. 

That's true. The "Cro-Magnon R1b" thing that was much advertised when I ordered my first dna test would please me just fine, too. I just never thought it made much sense and still don't.

As you know because I have mentioned it before, I grew up thinking I was an Anglo-Saxon or a Viking (by descent, I mean - and I am pretty sure I have those folks among my ancestors, too) and that the Britons were pathetic losers who got herded into Wales, Cornwall, southern Scotland, and Brittany. Then I found out my y-dna ancestors probably were Britons! How the world turns! Now I wouldn't trade that for anything.

So, whatever we ultimately discover, I'll find something to like about it.



I doubt the Anglo-Saxons would have conquered the Britons if they hadnt been disarmed by the Romans for 400 years and expecting professional protection.  If the Anglo-Saxons had tried to cross to Britain in pre-Roman times I think they would have quickly been sent packing and would probably have just been pirates (without the hook hand, wooden leg, eye patch and parrot)


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on June 03, 2012, 09:50:12 AM
I don't get how you are being a partisan. Individuals who think Iranian R1b is the result of a Balkan migration and later Armenian/Assyrian admixture in Iranian despite there being no proof of either are the partisan. Despite the fact that R1b likely originated in the area and its presence in West Asia has very little to do with Europe.

From Herrera (2011). Neolithic patrilineal signals indicate that the Armenian plateau was repopulated by agriculturalists:

"...Armenian as an old Indo-European language with similarities to the ancestral Proto-Indo-European languages has led to the supposition that agriculturalists migrating from Armenia into Europe were responsible for the establishment of Indo-European languages in the continent.13,14 However, despite the close linguistic relationship between Armenians and the Indo-European speaking populations of
Europe,12 we see little genetic support for this claim. The derived M412 allele, which is found in nearly all haplogroup R1b1b1*-L23 chromosomes in Europe,27 is absent in the sampled Armenians, which also exhibit a scarcity of haplotype sharing with Europeans, suggesting a limited role for Armenians in the introduction of R1b into Europe."


"Several authors have proposed that the Indo-European language presently spoken by Armenians arose during the Bronze Age, when Indo-European speaking tribes from the Balkans and Greece invaded Anatolia and Transcaucasia, leading to the subsequent spread of their culture and language.16,17 In this study, we have detected a number of lineages that are prominent in the Balkans (I2*, I2b*, J2b1 and J2b2) at low levels throughout Ararat Valley, Gardman and Lake Van, the latter of which also contains haplogroups commonly associated with Bronze Age Greece (ie, J2a8-M319 (4.9%), and E1b1b1-M78 and its sublineages (3.9%)). While this may suggest genetic input from early Greek or Phrygian tribes, it is also possible that these low levels of Balkan lineages arrived in Armenia at a later time, such as during one of the many incursions into the area during the reign of the Macedonian, Roman and Byzantine empires. It should be noted that these results only reflect the paternal history of Armenia and studies on a maternal or gender-neutral system may reveal distinct conclusions."


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 09:52:10 AM
Anyway, R1 and early R1b and R1a clearly were hunter gatherers somewhere.  Its just looking like it was almost certainly in the east not the west.  I have always been amazed that the eastern refuge seems to have been in Ukraine, a far colder refuge than the western one.  I think that had a lot more to do with the game migration patterns than better weather.  I have no idea if R1 was there.  


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 03, 2012, 11:39:50 AM
Yeah I suppose it comes with the turf in a hobby where a lot of people are seeking/want to refine some sort of ethno-historic identity.

My grandfather called himself a "Suraya," his grandfather before him, and so on.  We had lived in northern Mesopotamia for at least as long as there was a Church of the East.   We speak an Aramaic dialect tied to that specific area (the Tigris and points immediately east), with a history in Mesopotamia dating back to the BCE.  We are genetically (and in other ways) similar to populations with ancient histories in the area, etc. If trying to further connect to my past is a crime, well, then, I am guilty.  Since I am not hurting anyone, and always try and remain civil in my discussions with others, I really do not see what the problem is.  At least in my case.  Plus, again, I am not even saying R-L23 originated in northern Mesopotamia.  If we could choose where it originated, I would vote for Europe, because I know how much it means to so many people of European ancestry. 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Maliclavelli on June 03, 2012, 11:58:52 AM
If we could choose where it originated, I would vote for Europe, because I know how much it means to so many people of European ancestry. 
Humanist, you are very kind, you who brings a Latin nickname, but I don't want your charity. I am scientifically convinced that at least from R1b1* this haplogroup is European (I am convinced that it is above all Italian), but we are the descendants of Greek thinking, and only proofs (in this case aDNA) decide who is right and who is wrong. Certainly to treat with you is better than with someone else.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 03, 2012, 12:10:10 PM
Humanist, you are very kind, you who brings a Latin nickname, but I don't want your charity. I am scientifically convinced that at least from R1b1* this haplogroup is European (I am convinced that it is above all Italian), but we are the descendants of Greek thinking, and only proofs (in this case aDNA) decide who is right and who is wrong. Certainly to treat with you is better than with someone else.

That is fine.  I believe that Italy likely played a very important part in the spread of R-M269 in the European continent.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on June 03, 2012, 02:25:46 PM
Anyway, R1 and early R1b and R1a clearly were hunter gatherers somewhere.  Its just looking like it was almost certainly in the east not the west.  I have always been amazed that the eastern refuge seems to have been in Ukraine, a far colder refuge than the western one.  I think that had a lot more to do with the game migration patterns than better weather.  I have no idea if R1 was there.  

One other thing to keep in perspective YDNA A->T were ALL hunter gatherers at some point in time. :) Many would even argue that agriculture sprung up from people who lived in the right place at the right time. It's not exactly an innovation, some would argue it was accidental.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on June 03, 2012, 03:11:37 PM
I don't get how you are being a partisan. Individuals who think Iranian R1b is the result of a Balkan migration and later Armenian/Assyrian admixture in Iranian despite there being no proof of either are the partisan. Despite the fact that R1b likely originated in the area and its presence in West Asia has very little to do with Europe.

This is pretty trivial, and inconsequential to dispute. Whether the R1b man was born in West Asia or Europe is irrelevent and impossible to determine. The vast majority of his descendants live in Europe, so the original man probably did not live too deep into Asia. (ie: probably not Central Asia, or India for example - despite a single R1b1* Indian male in our samples) I also think this could be an extremely long time ago which is why so few males live on today. (12000+ years)

The strongest point of origin (R1b1*) in my view is Anatolia which borders Europe. So techincally I suppose it's "not European", but at the same time it is pretty close. I am not sure on the status of the L389 mutation, but it consists of a pretty broad swath of territory- consisting at least 1 Ashkenazi cluster and some Armenians and other West Asians.


So frequency is what matters? I never once suggested an Indian or Central asian origin.

And Anatolia is a broad term. R1b diversity seems to suggest it origin n the area encompassing Eastern Anatolia, Northern Iraq, Armenia and NW Iran. Hardly what I would call European.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on June 03, 2012, 03:14:08 PM
Yeah I suppose it comes with the turf in a hobby where a lot of people are seeking/want to refine some sort of ethno-historic identity.  I get sick of the transparent obsession some people have about making their own haplogroup or that which is strong in their population as early and indigenous as possible.  In other words you are more of a 'true' member of your ethnic or national group because you are earlier or it proves some political point.    There is also far too much talk of 'pure' populations of single yDNA lineages.  There is also a bit too much admiration for violent conquest. There is also too much childish heavy metal type fantasies for  conan the barbarian types (some people never grow up).   Then there is the seeking of glory in claims that one's own haplogroup did this or that.  There is a lot of obsessing about Indo-European and a desperation to be part of that.  There is often a suggestion of superiority or a desire to associate with northern Europeans and nordics in general. Ringing any alarm bells?  I Those ideas seem live and well in this hobby.      

All that is true and, as you said, pretty obvious. I'm not sure it can be helped, however. We all want our ancestors, especially those in our own direct y-dna line, to be heroic and larger than life.

I am susceptible to that urge myself, but I like to think I have a kind of nose for the truth, even when it is not what I would have preferred, that gives me a certain immunity from the worst fantasy-hobbyist excesses.

The complexity of this past time is daunting. It requires expertise in genetics, history, archaeology, anthropology, mathematics, linguistics, geography, and more. Who is the master of all those fields? Not I!

That complexity makes all of these competing hypotheses possible, and it makes even some of those that are probably patently ridiculous sound - for a time - credible.

There have been quite a few times, especially recently, that I have contemplated abandoning an interest in and the pursuit of "deep ancestry" and restricting myself to personal genealogy. Personal family genealogy is the interest that got me into dna testing in the first place, although when I ordered my first 37-marker y-dna test I did harbor a silly, childish desire to be a "Viking". :-)

:0) my post was a bit overly serious and all of us deep down would like a particularly interesting deep ancestry.  its just the mix of traits I posted are a bit alarming.  I have to be honest though I quiet liked the idea of being a western refugia hunter gather.  I always thought I would much prefer their lifestyle (called 'the first affluent society') to farming.  Still, everyones ancestors were hunters somewhere at some time.  I am now curious as to where R1b's Ice Age eastern refuge was. Jean M has made some suggestions.  I would like to find out a bit more but with the origin point of R1b and R1 a little vague (anywhere from Siberia to Anatolia) it would be complex.  I think we need some sort of study specifically targetted on early R1b.  I suppose at the LGM it was still really R1, maybe with early R1a and R1b.  Now I have accepted the variance dating I am no longer convinced R1b was in the farming zone so I would tend to think of its likely refuge as being further north than Anatolia or Mesopotamia.  If it had been that far south it would have been in the epicentre of early farming.  R1b above M269 (and below it too for some time) does not have the branching expanding structure you would expect for a haoplogroup who experienced the farming demographic explosion.  I think what has been lost sight of due to the contrasting European distributions of much later clades is the similarity of R1a and R1b prior to say 4000BC.  They both seem to have been really in the backwoods and demographically not doing well.  The simplest explanation is they were both late hunter-gatherers in or adjacent to the steppes.   

That is a stretch and based on speculation and wishful thinking. I would like to see evidence of the Hittie empire being responsible for all this R1b.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: intrestedinhistory on June 03, 2012, 03:18:29 PM
I don't get how you are being a partisan. Individuals who think Iranian R1b is the result of a Balkan migration and later Armenian/Assyrian admixture in Iranian despite there being no proof of either are the partisan. Despite the fact that R1b likely originated in the area and its presence in West Asia has very little to do with Europe.

From Herrera (2011). Neolithic patrilineal signals indicate that the Armenian plateau was repopulated by agriculturalists:

"...Armenian as an old Indo-European language with similarities to the ancestral Proto-Indo-European languages has led to the supposition that agriculturalists migrating from Armenia into Europe were responsible for the establishment of Indo-European languages in the continent.13,14 However, despite the close linguistic relationship between Armenians and the Indo-European speaking populations of
Europe,12 we see little genetic support for this claim. The derived M412 allele, which is found in nearly all haplogroup R1b1b1*-L23 chromosomes in Europe,27 is absent in the sampled Armenians, which also exhibit a scarcity of haplotype sharing with Europeans, suggesting a limited role for Armenians in the introduction of R1b into Europe."


"Several authors have proposed that the Indo-European language presently spoken by Armenians arose during the Bronze Age, when Indo-European speaking tribes from the Balkans and Greece invaded Anatolia and Transcaucasia, leading to the subsequent spread of their culture and language.16,17 In this study, we have detected a number of lineages that are prominent in the Balkans (I2*, I2b*, J2b1 and J2b2) at low levels throughout Ararat Valley, Gardman and Lake Van, the latter of which also contains haplogroups commonly associated with Bronze Age Greece (ie, J2a8-M319 (4.9%), and E1b1b1-M78 and its sublineages (3.9%)). While this may suggest genetic input from early Greek or Phrygian tribes, it is also possible that these low levels of Balkan lineages arrived in Armenia at a later time, such as during one of the many incursions into the area during the reign of the Macedonian, Roman and Byzantine empires. It should be noted that these results only reflect the paternal history of Armenia and studies on a maternal or gender-neutral system may reveal distinct conclusions."

No one is disputing Armenian's origins in the Balkan.

And thanks for posting that. The major differene between Armenians and Assyrians is that Armenians tend to be E-V13 and I2 whereas I is absent in Assyrians and E-V13 is rare. Thanks for posting something that supports the point that the majority of West Asian R1b didn't come from  the Balkans. If it did other populations would havve I and E-V13. The Iranian I is not even all I2. It is a recent introduction. Same applies for the Levantine I.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on June 03, 2012, 03:36:31 PM
I don't get how you are being a partisan. Individuals who think Iranian R1b is the result of a Balkan migration and later Armenian/Assyrian admixture in Iranian despite there being no proof of either are the partisan. Despite the fact that R1b likely originated in the area and its presence in West Asia has very little to do with Europe.

This is pretty trivial, and inconsequential to dispute. Whether the R1b man was born in West Asia or Europe is irrelevent and impossible to determine. The vast majority of his descendants live in Europe, so the original man probably did not live too deep into Asia. (ie: probably not Central Asia, or India for example - despite a single R1b1* Indian male in our samples) I also think this could be an extremely long time ago which is why so few males live on today. (12000+ years)

The strongest point of origin (R1b1*) in my view is Anatolia which borders Europe. So techincally I suppose it's "not European", but at the same time it is pretty close. I am not sure on the status of the L389 mutation, but it consists of a pretty broad swath of territory- consisting at least 1 Ashkenazi cluster and some Armenians and other West Asians.


So frequency is what matters? I never once suggested an Indian or Central asian origin.

And Anatolia is a broad term. R1b diversity seems to suggest it origin n the area encompassing Eastern Anatolia, Northern Iraq, Armenia and NW Iran. Hardly what I would call European.

Reminds me of the diversity studies that claim R1a1a is from India. Hardly what I would call the steppe.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 04:08:58 PM
Yeah I suppose it comes with the turf in a hobby where a lot of people are seeking/want to refine some sort of ethno-historic identity.

My grandfather called himself a "Suraya," his grandfather before him, and so on.  We had lived in northern Mesopotamia for at least as long as there was a Church of the East.   We speak an Aramaic dialect tied to that specific area (the Tigris and points immediately east), with a history in Mesopotamia dating back to the BCE.  We are genetically (and in other ways) similar to populations with ancient histories in the area, etc. If trying to further connect to my past is a crime, well, then, I am guilty.  Since I am not hurting anyone, and always try and remain civil in my discussions with others, I really do not see what the problem is.  At least in my case.  Plus, again, I am not even saying R-L23 originated in northern Mesopotamia.  If we could choose where it originated, I would vote for Europe, because I know how much it means to so many people of European ancestry. 

I think the important thing is we need to stop looking at peoples as lineages from one common ancestor as in many national legends.  I also think its important not to label a lineage as literrally being equal to an ethnicity. A particular lines will pass through many linguistic and cultural identities except perhaps in very isolated areas.  Places like the middle east have far more complex ethno-linguistic histories than somewhere like Ireland for example.  I actually appreciate the knowledge of the middle east and input. I tend to think L23 came from a little to the north but even if my guess is right (and I really have not much confidence in any theory) it could have been in northern Mesopotomia for 5000 years.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 03, 2012, 04:18:30 PM

And Anatolia is a broad term. R1b diversity seems to suggest it origin n the area encompassing Eastern Anatolia, Northern Iraq, Armenia and NW Iran. Hardly what I would call European.

Uhmm, the data collected from Myres.et.al.2010 regarding R1b-L23+ shows Poland having a higher diversity than Anatolia in terms of R1b-L23+, Pakistan does have the highest diversity, but its small sample size does call into question the validity of the result. Also, all the R1b-L23+ found in Pakistan is R1b-L23(xL51).

http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/m582/jeanlohizun/Myresetal2010R1b-L23Variance.jpg (http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/m582/jeanlohizun/Myresetal2010R1b-L23Variance.jpg)

Moreover Busby.et.al.2011 shows in figure2.a that the peak in variance of all R1b-M269+ actually happens in Central Europe.

Moreover here is some data regarding paragroup R1b-M269(xL23)

In the ht35 Project there are 28 haplotypes that are R1b-M269(xL23).

 http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/default.aspx?section=yresults (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/default.aspx?section=yresults)

Out of the 28 haplotypes, 18 have 67 STRs available.

There are 12 with known European origin:

Italy-5
Ukraine-3
Belarus-2
Poland-1
France-1


There are 5 with known SW Asian origin:

Turkey-3
Syria-1
Armenia-1


For what it is worth:

R1b-M269(xL23) using 67 STRs

Europe (n=12, var=0.2512)

SW Asia (n=5, var=0.1642)

Now there are 23 haplotypes typed for 37 STRs. Out of those 1-Italian has some uncertainty in the STR values, so I didn't included.

Now there are 15 with known European origin:

Italy-6
Ukraine-4
Belarus-2
Poland-1
France-1
UK-1


There are 7 with known SW Asian origin:

Turkey-4
Syria-1
Armenia-1
Kazakhstan-1


For what it is worth:

R1b-M269(xL23) using 37 STRs

Europe (n=15, var=0.3189)

SW Asia (n=7, var=0.2857)

This is in agreement with the data from Myres et al(2010) where

R1b-M269(xL23) using 10 STRs

Europe (n=17, var=0.2706)

SW Asia (n=13, var=0.2385)

One can argue that the sample sizes are rather small, but it is all we got now both from the hobbyist community and Academic studies. In both cases using 10, 37, or 67 STRs the paragroup R1b-M269(xL23) has consistently more variance in Europe than outside of it.





Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 04:37:05 PM
Yeah I suppose it comes with the turf in a hobby where a lot of people are seeking/want to refine some sort of ethno-historic identity.  I get sick of the transparent obsession some people have about making their own haplogroup or that which is strong in their population as early and indigenous as possible.  In other words you are more of a 'true' member of your ethnic or national group because you are earlier or it proves some political point.    There is also far too much talk of 'pure' populations of single yDNA lineages.  There is also a bit too much admiration for violent conquest. There is also too much childish heavy metal type fantasies for  conan the barbarian types (some people never grow up).   Then there is the seeking of glory in claims that one's own haplogroup did this or that.  There is a lot of obsessing about Indo-European and a desperation to be part of that.  There is often a suggestion of superiority or a desire to associate with northern Europeans and nordics in general. Ringing any alarm bells?  I Those ideas seem live and well in this hobby.      

All that is true and, as you said, pretty obvious. I'm not sure it can be helped, however. We all want our ancestors, especially those in our own direct y-dna line, to be heroic and larger than life.

I am susceptible to that urge myself, but I like to think I have a kind of nose for the truth, even when it is not what I would have preferred, that gives me a certain immunity from the worst fantasy-hobbyist excesses.

The complexity of this past time is daunting. It requires expertise in genetics, history, archaeology, anthropology, mathematics, linguistics, geography, and more. Who is the master of all those fields? Not I!

That complexity makes all of these competing hypotheses possible, and it makes even some of those that are probably patently ridiculous sound - for a time - credible.

There have been quite a few times, especially recently, that I have contemplated abandoning an interest in and the pursuit of "deep ancestry" and restricting myself to personal genealogy. Personal family genealogy is the interest that got me into dna testing in the first place, although when I ordered my first 37-marker y-dna test I did harbor a silly, childish desire to be a "Viking". :-)

:0) my post was a bit overly serious and all of us deep down would like a particularly interesting deep ancestry.  its just the mix of traits I posted are a bit alarming.  I have to be honest though I quiet liked the idea of being a western refugia hunter gather.  I always thought I would much prefer their lifestyle (called 'the first affluent society') to farming.  Still, everyones ancestors were hunters somewhere at some time.  I am now curious as to where R1b's Ice Age eastern refuge was. Jean M has made some suggestions.  I would like to find out a bit more but with the origin point of R1b and R1 a little vague (anywhere from Siberia to Anatolia) it would be complex.  I think we need some sort of study specifically targetted on early R1b.  I suppose at the LGM it was still really R1, maybe with early R1a and R1b.  Now I have accepted the variance dating I am no longer convinced R1b was in the farming zone so I would tend to think of its likely refuge as being further north than Anatolia or Mesopotamia.  If it had been that far south it would have been in the epicentre of early farming.  R1b above M269 (and below it too for some time) does not have the branching expanding structure you would expect for a haoplogroup who experienced the farming demographic explosion.  I think what has been lost sight of due to the contrasting European distributions of much later clades is the similarity of R1a and R1b prior to say 4000BC.  They both seem to have been really in the backwoods and demographically not doing well.  The simplest explanation is they were both late hunter-gatherers in or adjacent to the steppes.   

That is a stretch and based on speculation and wishful thinking. I would like to see evidence of the Hittie empire being responsible for all this R1b.

Its just a  guess but it does have some aspects in its favour.  An intrusion from the north into the area to the south of L23* would match the early splitting off of Anatolian from PIE.  Most people are placing the PIE homeland in and around the steppes.  IMO L23* is probably the top candidate for the arrival of Anatolian.  There just are not too many other candidates.  L23* also seems to have remained in the general IE area for a long period given that it has some fairly strong associations with some Iranian and Armenian groups.  However this is all speculative.

The most persuasive aspect for R1b coming from the north is that it the R1b tree.  It does not have the deep branches bushy aspect until very late which is indicative to me that R1b did not enter the farming area/take up farming until very late, much the same as is suggested for R1a.  I just do not believe R1b has a structure and dating suggestive of its presence in the areas where farming goes back 10000 years.  R1b only seems to have only started taking off from L23 onwards.  I do think its first move was into Anatolia and adjacent but I am not convinced ALL L23 moved there before moving further west.  I think it is likely that another chunk of L23 moved directly west from its origin.  I am not sure about the origin point.  We need to look for an area outside the early agriculture zone in a group who remained non-farming until the copper age. If R1b had been right in the earliest farming core of northern Mesopotamia I would have thought that it would have a very very different structure and variance dates.  I think that is the single most persausive evidence that R1b was not in in the Mesopotamia, Anatolia, the Levant etc at an early point in the Neolithic. However, I do believe that the first thrust of L23 from its origin point was probably in the direction of Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia and obviously V88 made a similar journey.  So, I dont think those areas were the origin point but I do think the path south was taken somewhat sooner than the path west.  


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 03, 2012, 04:58:39 PM
Does anyone think the basic outlline of R1b in the introduction of his paper (if you ignore his futher expansion on this) is OK

South Siberia/Central Asia in the east (where R1b haplogroup arose ~16,000 ybp) via the North Kazakhstan, South Ural to the Russian Plain and further west to Europe (the northern route entering Europe around 4500 ybp); from the Russian Plain south to the Caucasus (6000 ybp), Asia Minor (6000 ybp) and the Middle East (6000 - 5500 ybp) to the Balkans in Europe (the southern route, entering Europe around 4500 ybp);

Is his placing of early R1b to the north sound?  He seems pretty convinced on that and I would tend to agree that the structure and variance of R1b pre-4000BC does agree with something along the lines of the extract above.  Can anyone comment on this?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 03, 2012, 05:06:14 PM
I think the important thing is we need to stop looking at peoples as lineages from one common ancestor as in many national legends.  I also think its important not to label a lineage as literrally being equal to an ethnicity.

Hi Alan.  I define Assyrian* as follows: Hittite, Israelite, Hurrian, Judaean, Babylonian, Aramaean, Chaldean...

The area was a melting pot.   Nearly 1500 years of Muslim domination has homogenized the gene pool, to the extent that it is difficult (though certainly possible) to distinguish between Mesopotamian-Aramaic-speaking peoples, including Assyrians, Mandaeans, and many Mizrahim Jews. That is why, when Jean provided support for your statement regarding reliance on R-M269 diversity in Assyrians, I did not ask any further questions.  Because I am in agreement that we must be cautious in relying on such data, given what the historical record states regarding population movements to and fro this part of the world, not too long ago (~2500 years), all things considered.

* In the Dur-Sharrukin cylinder inscription, the task of linguistic unification is given to the Assyrian monarch Sargon II, who ruled from 722 to 705 B.C.:

Quote
"Peoples of the four regions of the world, of foreign tongue and divergent speech, dwellers of mountain and lowland, all that were ruled by the light of the gods, lord of all, I carried off at Assur, my lord's command, by the might of my scepter. I made them of one mouth [Assyrian-Aramaic]..."

William M. Schniedewind
Kershaw Chair of Ancient Eastern Mediterranean Studies
Professor of Biblical Studies & Northwest Semitic Languages
University of California, Los Angeles


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 03, 2012, 06:24:47 PM
...  One can argue that the sample sizes are rather small, but it is all we got now both from the hobbyist community and Academic studies. In both cases using 10, 37, or 67 STRs the paragroup R1b-M269(xL23) has consistently more variance in Europe than outside of it.

I agree with you that some of the sample sizes and available STRs in some cases are quite limiting. Geographic divisions also have some nuances - for instance how to handle some religious groups or how to handle the Steppes areas.  Where did you count R-M269* folks like the below?


f163904   Urovish   Belarus (Jewish project)
f48217   Glotzer   Belarus, Pinsk (Jewish project)
f101029   Arcus   Belarus, Slutsk, Minsk (Jewish project)
f158476   Sosimov   Ukraine
f113425   Netzky   Ukraine (Jewish project)
f126775   Bardige   Ukraine, Berestechko (Jewish project)
f2146   Volvovansky   Ukraine, Dashev (Jewish project)
fN23148   Chernow   Ukraine, Kiev (Jewish project)
f78221   Schor   Ukraine, Kiev, Skvira (Jewish project)


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 03, 2012, 07:03:14 PM
Where did you count R-M269* folks like the below?


f163904   Urovish   Belarus (Jewish project)
f48217   Glotzer   Belarus, Pinsk (Jewish project)
f101029   Arcus   Belarus, Slutsk, Minsk (Jewish project)
f158476   Sosimov   Ukraine
f113425   Netzky   Ukraine (Jewish project)
f126775   Bardige   Ukraine, Berestechko (Jewish project)
f2146   Volvovansky   Ukraine, Dashev (Jewish project)
fN23148   Chernow   Ukraine, Kiev (Jewish project)
f78221   Schor   Ukraine, Kiev, Skvira (Jewish project)

Fair enough, so I took those folks out of the calculations, now do you think these folks are Jewish:

f999 Gdala (Blacher), b. ABT 1780, Zwolen, Poland
fN60445 Chevallier Barnoux, 1794 France
f95752 Giuseppe Fiozzo b.c. 1700 Italy
f65964 Antonio Mirante, Italy
f36953 Grandfather giuseppe miceli born january 1st 1883, Italy
f220813 Lo Piccolo, Italy
f46835 Italy

Because using those samples that have 67 STRs available, I get the following variance.
The 7 described above with European origin

Italy-5
Poland-1
France-1


There are 5 with known SW Asian origin:

Turkey-3
Syria-1
Armenia-1


R1b-M269(xL23) using 67 STRs

Europe (n=7, var=0.2814)

SW Asia (n=5, var=0.1642)

Now there are 10 European typed for 37 STRs. Out of those 1-Italian has some uncertainty in the STR values, so I didn't included.  Other than the kits mentioned above there are the following kits:

fN82972 Vincenzo Catougno, born c. 1878, Italy
f89847 William Blanchard, b. about 1669, Scituate, R.I.,UK

Now there are 9 with known European origin:

Italy-6
Poland-1
France-1
UK-1


There are 7 with known SW Asian origin:

Turkey-4
Syria-1
Armenia-1
Kazakhstan-1


For what it is worth:

R1b-M269(xL23) using 37 STRs

Europe (n=9, var=0.3423)

SW Asia (n=7, var=0.2857)

So if anything the presence of Jewish members actually lowered the diversity of R1b-M269(xL23) in Europe, this is likely due to some sort of Jewish cluster. Like I said before this is in agreement with the data from Myres et al(2010) where

R1b-M269(xL23) using 10 STRs

Europe (n=17, var=0.2706)

SW Asia (n=13, var=0.2385)



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: rms2 on June 03, 2012, 07:05:48 PM


I doubt the Anglo-Saxons would have conquered the Britons if they hadnt been disarmed by the Romans for 400 years and expecting professional protection.  If the Anglo-Saxons had tried to cross to Britain in pre-Roman times I think they would have quickly been sent packing and would probably have just been pirates (without the hook hand, wooden leg, eye patch and parrot)

True, plus the fact that the Britons warred against each other and at times allied themselves to the Anglo-Saxons. Look at the betrayal and murder of Urien of Rheged by fellow Britons just when he was about to drive the Northumbrians into the sea.

I also suspect, given the widespread survival of L21 in what is now England, that young British warriors took service in Anglo-Saxon warbands (the Gefolge or Posse Comitatus).



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on June 03, 2012, 07:09:48 PM
[quote author=intrestedinhistory link=topic=10670.msg132167#msg132167
And Anatolia is a broad term. R1b diversity seems to suggest it origin n the area encompassing Eastern Anatolia, Northern Iraq, Armenia and NW Iran. Hardly what I would call European.
[/quote]

Europe is also a large enough continent that there is gentic diversity from Greece to Iceland, or to Finland. Somewhere close to Greece is imaginable and not at all unrealistic. Heck, I think the Balkans as a point of origin for R1b is to some extent viable. However, West-Central Anatolia is the best bet when all things considered if you examine the distribution of R1b1* and R1b1c.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: acekon on June 03, 2012, 08:28:46 PM
Where did you count R-M269* folks like the below?


f163904   Urovish   Belarus (Jewish project)
f48217   Glotzer   Belarus, Pinsk (Jewish project)
f101029   Arcus   Belarus, Slutsk, Minsk (Jewish project)
f158476   Sosimov   Ukraine
f113425   Netzky   Ukraine (Jewish project)
f126775   Bardige   Ukraine, Berestechko (Jewish project)
f2146   Volvovansky   Ukraine, Dashev (Jewish project)
fN23148   Chernow   Ukraine, Kiev (Jewish project)
f78221   Schor   Ukraine, Kiev, Skvira (Jewish project)

Fair enough, so I took those folks out of the calculations, now do you think these folks are Jewish:

f999 Gdala (Blacher), b. ABT 1780, Zwolen, Poland
fN60445 Chevallier Barnoux, 1794 France
f95752 Giuseppe Fiozzo b.c. 1700 Italy
f65964 Antonio Mirante, Italy
f36953 Grandfather giuseppe miceli born january 1st 1883, Italy
f220813 Lo Piccolo, Italy
f46835 Italy

Because using those samples that have 67 STRs available, I get the following variance.
The 7 described above with European origin

Italy-5
Poland-1
France-1


There are 5 with known SW Asian origin:

Turkey-3
Syria-1
Armenia-1


R1b-M269(xL23) using 67 STRs

Europe (n=7, var=0.2814)

SW Asia (n=5, var=0.1642)

Now there are 10 European typed for 37 STRs. Out of those 1-Italian has some uncertainty in the STR values, so I didn't included.  Other than the kits mentioned above there are the following kits:

fN82972 Vincenzo Catougno, born c. 1878, Italy
f89847 William Blanchard, b. about 1669, Scituate, R.I.,UK

Now there are 9 with known European origin:

Italy-6
Poland-1
France-1
UK-1


There are 7 with known SW Asian origin:

Turkey-4
Syria-1
Armenia-1
Kazakhstan-1


For what it is worth:

R1b-M269(xL23) using 37 STRs

Europe (n=9, var=0.3423)

SW Asia (n=7, var=0.2857)

So if anything the presence of Jewish members actually lowered the diversity of R1b-M269(xL23) in Europe, this is likely due to some sort of Jewish cluster. Like I said before this is in agreement with the data from Myres et al(2010) where

R1b-M269(xL23) using 10 STRs

Europe (n=17, var=0.2706)

SW Asia (n=13, var=0.2385)




What do you think of the following Polish cluster.

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/probasco-bartoszewski-bartos/default.aspx?section=yresults


and kits #s
1)Ysearch-U98VT-[Czech]

2)kit#176123-Ysearch-99SC2- L150+L584-L51-[Poland] 23@me, 1gp, Ashkenazi, and Colonial checked, 0.0%-0.3%, Not declared Ashkenazi 47.5%-47.9%.





Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on June 03, 2012, 10:39:50 PM
I'm not entirely convinced that R1b1b2a cut across Poland in ancient times.  There are many explanations as to how a few L23* haplotypes arrived there. It is probably a very complex story. (Italy, Balkans, Central Asia...etc and a near infinite other set of possibilities)

This wouldn't have bearing on whether or not you had a high Ashkenazi percentage or not. The high % share is the result of recent founding effect - they are more related to one another than with any single outgroup, where as a single R1b1b2a* individual could have arrived in his current location 1000 years ago or more from another near infinite number of possibilites.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: razyn on June 03, 2012, 11:22:34 PM
What do you think of the following Polish cluster.

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/probasco-bartoszewski-bartos/default.aspx?section=yresults

I think almost all of them tested long ago -- only two within the last two years.  They look like L150* to me, but could perhaps be something a little more specific that wasn't known that long ago.  And btw the most recent tester with that haplotype, 176123, is also in the project -- just a little farther down.  Your post mentions him separately.

This Polish cluster (or family) looks like a group that might nominate a member for a WTY or a genome scan.  With regard to their asterisk, the ISOGG tree and Thomas Krahn's tree don't show any alternatives for M269, L23, or L150 except M51 (for which these guys have already tested negative).  But the invisibility of some SNP on either of those trees is not an indication that the said SNP does not exist.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 03, 2012, 11:54:21 PM
Where did you count R-M269* folks like the below?

f163904   Urovish   Belarus (Jewish project)
f48217   Glotzer   Belarus, Pinsk (Jewish project)
f101029   Arcus   Belarus, Slutsk, Minsk (Jewish project)
f158476   Sosimov   Ukraine
f113425   Netzky   Ukraine (Jewish project)
f126775   Bardige   Ukraine, Berestechko (Jewish project)
f2146   Volvovansky   Ukraine, Dashev (Jewish project)
fN23148   Chernow   Ukraine, Kiev (Jewish project)
f78221   Schor   Ukraine, Kiev, Skvira (Jewish project)

Fair enough, so I took those folks out of the calculations, now do you think these folks are Jewish:

f999 Gdala (Blacher), b. ABT 1780, Zwolen, Poland
fN60445 Chevallier Barnoux, 1794 France
f95752 Giuseppe Fiozzo b.c. 1700 Italy
f65964 Antonio Mirante, Italy
f36953 Grandfather giuseppe miceli born january 1st 1883, Italy
f220813 Lo Piccolo, Italy
f46835 Italy

Because using those samples that have 67 STRs available, I get the following variance.
The 7 described above with European origin
Italy-5
Poland-1
France-1


There are 5 with known SW Asian origin:
Turkey-3
Syria-1
Armenia-1


R1b-M269(xL23) using 67 STRs
Europe (n=7, var=0.2814)
SW Asia (n=5, var=0.1642)

Now there are 10 European typed for 37 STRs. Out of those 1-Italian has some uncertainty in the STR values, so I didn't included.  Other than the kits mentioned above there are the following kits:

fN82972 Vincenzo Catougno, born c. 1878, Italy
f89847 William Blanchard, b. about 1669, Scituate, R.I.,UK

Now there are 9 with known European origin:
Italy-6
Poland-1
France-1
UK-1


There are 7 with known SW Asian origin:
Turkey-4
Syria-1
Armenia-1
Kazakhstan-1


For what it is worth:
R1b-M269(xL23) using 37 STRs
Europe (n=9, var=0.3423)
SW Asia (n=7, var=0.2857)

So if anything the presence of Jewish members actually lowered the diversity of R1b-M269(xL23) in Europe, this is likely due to some sort of Jewish cluster. Like I said before this is in agreement with the data from Myres et al(2010) where

R1b-M269(xL23) using 10 STRs
Europe (n=17, var=0.2706)
SW Asia (n=13, var=0.2385)  

I'm not about to discern the Jewish from the non-Jewish.  I think it is something to deal with but I don't want to touch discerning who is really who and whether they are sourced out of the Near East or not - which is a critical discussion.

Have you tried to compare these variance results with the large L11 subclades? As you know, I try to cross-check haplogroups and data.  The below is what I have from our DNA projects as far as relative variance.

67 STR Ht's...
R-M269* All_________:  Var=0.96 [Mixed 49]  (N=22)
R-M269* All_________:  Var=0.71 [Linear 36]  (N=22)
37 STR Ht's...
R-M269* All_________:  Var=1.02 [Linear 16]  (N=32)
R-M269* All_________:  Var=1.15 [Mixed 24]  (N=32)


Any fewer STRs I don't think are worth looking at much.  That's just my opinion from experience of how much relative variance jumps around at shorter haplotypes.

Oh, perhaps the most important thing is that the relative variance numbers above are relative to P312 "all" and U152 actually has slightly higher variance.  Why do I bring this point up?  R-M269 should be quite a bit older, right?  Why do these numbers for R-M269* show up as being around P312's (which would be 1.0.)?   You guessed it, these samples of R-M269* are not representative of the true diversity of R-M269*.        

The net is looking at very low sample sizes with a limited number of STRs for R-M269* is not that meaningful.

I tried to make this point on R-L51* too.  Try to go back and visualize the whole Y DNA tree from R1b (M343) down.  There is a tremendous amount of data for L11, particularly P312 and U106. These two are very heavy/big branches to a lopsided R1b-M343 bush. There are scant remnant branches of the M343+ L23- and to the L23+ L11- branches, but they are are scant enough to be possibly misleading.  Major parts of those old branches are missing and have gone extinct or have otherwise died off.

This is just my opinion, but beyond L11, the only groupings of R1b that have enough data and differentiation in data to discern much with are R-L23xL11 groups.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 04, 2012, 12:33:36 AM
I tried to make this point on R-L51* too.  Try to go back and visualize the whole Y DNA tree from R1b (M343) down.  There is a tremendous amount of data for L11, particularly P312 and U106. These two are very heavy/big branches to a lopsided R1b-M343 bush. There are scant remnant branches of the M343+ L23- and to the L23+ L11- branches, but they are are scant enough to be possibly misleading.  Major parts of those old branches are missing and have gone extinct or have otherwise died off.

This is just my opinion, but beyond L11, the only groupings of R1b that have enough data and differentiation in data to discern much with are R-L23xL11 groups.

Perhaps this is just anecdotal information, but if we want to look for where R1b-M269 is from then we might want to look at his brothers and cousins and see where they intersect with R-M269 (R1b1a2).

The most populous would be:
R1b-V88 (R1b1c) - Wikipedia: "Apart from individuals in southern Europe and Western Asia, the majority of R-V88 was found in northern and central Africa"
R1b-M73 (R1b1a1) - Myres: ""all except two Russians occurred outside Europe, either in the Caucasus, Turkey, the Circum-Uralic and North Pakistan regions."
R1b-P25* (R1b1*) - Wikipedia: "like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey."


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Maliclavelli on June 04, 2012, 04:31:36 AM
Perhaps this is just anecdotal information, but if we want to look for where R1b-M269 is from then we might want to look at his brothers and cousins and see where they intersect with R-M269 (R1b1a2).

The most populous would be:
R1b-V88 (R1b1c) - Wikipedia: "Apart from individuals in southern Europe and Western Asia, the majority of R-V88 was found in northern and central Africa"
R1b-M73 (R1b1a1) - Myres: ""all except two Russians occurred outside Europe, either in the Caucasus, Turkey, the Circum-Uralic and North Pakistan regions."
R1b-P25* (R1b1*) - Wikipedia: "like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey."
R-V88+ went to Africa from elsewhere (someone thinks from Asia, I think from Europe: Spain or Italy). They lack the ancestor R-V88-, present in Sardinia and Europe (3 out of 5 in the paper of Cruciani).

R-M73 is diffused in Central Asia, but also in Europe, and I think with higher variance.

R1b1* (i.e. R-V88-) is present amongst Jews, but in an unique haplotype, come as usual from elsewhere, but massively in Spaniards and British, with highest variance. I have written infinite times that from these European haplotypes with YCAII=18-22 and 18-23 (present both only in Italy) derive the European subclades and not from the Eastern with YCAII=21-23 or 23-23.

R-M335 descend from R-V88- with YCAII=18-23, the European one and not the eastern one.

Your war is lost at least from 6 years, from when I began to write in these forums.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 04, 2012, 06:47:19 AM
I find this fairly recent paper suggesting that before even Mycenean Greek that Greece had an Anatolian speakng population speaking a language like Luwian itself related to Hittite.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/86330088/8/anatolian-languages-and-the-aegean-substratum


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 04, 2012, 07:18:23 AM
I'm not about to discern the Jewish from the non-Jewish.  I think it is something to deal with but I don't want to touch discerning who is really who and whether they are sourced out of the Near East or not - which is a critical discussion.

There seems to be quite a significant amount of R1b-M269(xL23) in the Balkans, at least relative to other places.

Have you tried to compare these variance results with the large L11 subclades? As you know, I try to cross-check haplogroups and data.  The below is what I have from our DNA projects as far as relative variance.

67 STR Ht's...
R-M269* All_________:  Var=0.96 [Mixed 49]  (N=22)
R-M269* All_________:  Var=0.71 [Linear 36]  (N=22)
37 STR Ht's...
R-M269* All_________:  Var=1.02 [Linear 16]  (N=32)
R-M269* All_________:  Var=1.15 [Mixed 24]  (N=32)


Any fewer STRs I don't think are worth looking at much.  That's just my opinion from experience of how much relative variance jumps around at shorter haplotypes.

No, I haven’t tried to compare the variance of paragroup R1b-M269(xL23) to that of everything that is R1b-P312+, mainly due to the fact that R1b-M269(xL23) is very scarce, unlike R1b-L23(xL51) which is to the Caucasus R1b what R1b-P312 is to Western European R1b.



Oh, perhaps the most important thing is that the relative variance numbers above are relative to P312 "all" and U152 actually has slightly higher variance.  Why do I bring this point up?  R-M269 should be quite a bit older, right?  Why do these numbers for R-M269* show up as being around P312's (which would be 1.0.)?   You guessed it, these samples of R-M269* are not representative of the true diversity of R-M269*.

Ok, feel free to think whatever you want about the representativeness of the samples, interestingly enough they seem to yield similar results, be it the Myres.et.al.2010 data, or be it the data collected from ht35.  Of course, in order to push for a West Asian origin, etc, one has to ignore certain data. Hopefully sometime in the future we’ll get enough data regarding R1b-M269(xL23), I think more data can only do good, so the more the better.

The net is looking at very low sample sizes with a limited number of STRs for R-M269* is not that meaningful.

Ht35 haplotypes used has low sample sizes(i.e. 9 and 7) but used decent amount of STRs, Myres.et.al.2010 had a decent sample size, but used low amount of STRs, yet both yielded the same results. Interesting to say the least, maybe we are looking at the first ever example of an error giving consistent results.

I tried to make this point on R-L51* too.  Try to go back and visualize the whole Y DNA tree from R1b (M343) down.  There is a tremendous amount of data for L11, particularly P312 and U106. These two are very heavy/big branches to a lopsided R1b-M343 bush. There are scant remnant branches of the M343+ L23- and to the L23+ L11- branches, but they are are scant enough to be possibly misleading.  Major parts of those old branches are missing and have gone extinct or have otherwise died off.

Well, L23(xL51) is heavily used in terms of calculating variance, are we to be worried about major parts of those old branches being missing or having gone extinct? I mean some of the meaningful conclusions about the origin of R1b in Europe have been based off L23(xL51) diversity, but since you mentioned those concerns, now I’m starting to worry.
This is just my opinion, but beyond L11, the only groupings of R1b that have enough data and differentiation in data to discern much with are R-L23xL11 groups.


How do you know they have enough data? They (L23xL51) seem to be big enough in places like the Caucasus, and Turkey, the Middle East, as they are the dominant R1b clade  over there, what makes you think that they haven’t suffered the same effects as R1b-M269(xL23), I mean perhaps European L23xL51 is nothing but what survives of a recent expansion, the old L23xL51 folks are either long dead, or show up as outlier haplotypes every now and then, but given the samples sizes they have very little effect on the variance of L23xL51.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 04, 2012, 07:22:42 AM
Perhaps this is just anecdotal information, but if we want to look for where R1b-M269 is from then we might want to look at his brothers and cousins and see where they intersect with R-M269 (R1b1a2).

The most populous would be:
R1b-V88 (R1b1c) - Wikipedia: "Apart from individuals in southern Europe and Western Asia, the majority of R-V88 was found in northern and central Africa"
R1b-M73 (R1b1a1) - Myres: ""all except two Russians occurred outside Europe, either in the Caucasus, Turkey, the Circum-Uralic and North Pakistan regions."
R1b-P25* (R1b1*) - Wikipedia: "like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey."


Are you sure about the presence of R1b-P25*  in Turkey?

Quote from: Cruciani.et.al.2010
In total, 997 chromosomes belonging to the haplogroup R1b were found. The paragroup R-M343*, earlier reported in a single subject from Turkey,28 was not observed. The overall scenario was characterized by a strong inter-continental differentiation (Table 1). All the African R1b chromosomes, with the exception of one eastern- and a few northern-African R-M269 chromosomes, turned out to belong to the haplogroup R-V88. About one third of the African R-V88 chromosomes carried mutation V69, which was not observed outside Africa. The large majority of R1b chromosomes from western Eurasia carried, as expected, the M269 mutation; only five R-V88 chromosomes were observed, three of which carried distinctive mutations (M18, V35, and V7). The rare R1b chromosomes observed in Asia were either R-M73 or R-M269. The R-P25* paragroup was only found in five subjects from Europe (3), western Asia (1), and eastern Asia (1) (Table 1).



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: OConnor on June 04, 2012, 08:46:26 AM
Could the domestication of the horse tie in with the spread of R1b?
(or some of the later clades)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090423142541.htm


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 04, 2012, 10:14:33 AM
The net is looking at very low sample sizes with a limited number of STRs for R-M269* is not that meaningful.

Ht35 haplotypes used has low sample sizes(i.e. 9 and 7) but used decent amount of STRs, Myres.et.al.2010 had a decent sample size, but used low amount of STRs, yet both yielded the same results. Interesting to say the least, maybe we are looking at the first ever example of an error giving consistent results.

"maybe we are looking at the first ever example of an error...".....
You are kidding me on this response, right?  If we see red come up three times in row on a roulett.e wheel should we think all  spins will result in red? I've seen that so perhaps that is the second ever example of a misleading result from limited underlying data popping up in multiple ways.



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 04, 2012, 10:26:53 AM
Perhaps this is just anecdotal information, but if we want to look for where R1b-M269 is from then we might want to look at his brothers and cousins and see where they intersect with R-M269 (R1b1a2).

The most populous would be:
R1b-V88 (R1b1c) - Wikipedia: "Apart from individuals in southern Europe and Western Asia, the majority of R-V88 was found in northern and central Africa"
R1b-M73 (R1b1a1) - Myres: ""all except two Russians occurred outside Europe, either in the Caucasus, Turkey, the Circum-Uralic and North Pakistan regions."
R1b-P25* (R1b1*) - Wikipedia: "like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey."


Are you sure about the presence of R1b-P25*  in Turkey?

Quote from: Cruciani.et.al.2010
In total, 997 chromosomes belonging to the haplogroup R1b were found. The paragroup R-M343*, earlier reported in a single subject from Turkey,28 was not observed. The overall scenario was characterized by a strong inter-continental differentiation (Table 1). All the African R1b chromosomes, with the exception of one eastern- and a few northern-African R-M269 chromosomes, turned out to belong to the haplogroup R-V88. About one third of the African R-V88 chromosomes carried mutation V69, which was not observed outside Africa. The large majority of R1b chromosomes from western Eurasia carried, as expected, the M269 mutation; only five R-V88 chromosomes were observed, three of which carried distinctive mutations (M18, V35, and V7). The rare R1b chromosomes observed in Asia were either R-M73 or R-M269. The R-P25* paragroup was only found in five subjects from Europe (3), western Asia (1), and eastern Asia (1) (Table 1).

No, I am not sure. I just quoted Wikipedia, that "like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey." This is cited from URL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_(Y-DNA)

They cite their source as
Quote
4. Cinnioğlu, C; King, R; Kivisild, T; Kalfoğlu, E; Atasoy, S; Cavalleri, GL; Lillie, AS; Roseman, CC et al. (2004). "Excavating Y-chromosome haplotype strata in Anatolia". Human Genetics 114 (2): 127–48. DOI:10.1007/s00439-003-1031-4. PMID 14586639.

If you think it is wrong, please contact them and see if you can get it updated. It would be of value for everyone. Thanks in advance if you choose to.

I see you have a source, Cruciani 2010, that shows "R-P25* paragroup" as appearing in West Asia and East Asia.  I wonder how there could be such a rare find as far away as East Asia? particularly given that testing rates are so much higher in Europe than in Asia?

I'll re-iterate this point that I've made before. Do you see what happens when we (I'm including myself) start arguing by exception from anecdotal data?  It means very little and is wide open to cherry picking.



I am also not sure that R1b is from Asia. It could have originated in Europe. You could be right if that is what you are proposing.  I don't think R1b originated in Europe, though, for a variety of reasons, but none the least are the anciently related cousins like R1a, R2, and Q (the P haplogroup (M45) family) found out that direction.

Quote from: Wikipedia
Haplogroup P is a branch of Haplogroup MNOPS, which is a branch of Haplogroup K (M9). It is believed to have arisen north of the Hindu Kush, in Siberia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, or along the Silk Road in the region of Xinjiang, Gansu, or Ningxia, before being pressed North, approximately 35,000 years ago. An alternate postulated theory supported by Gansu, Ningxia is that this group moved along the opposite side of the Tibetan plateau along the Sichuan Mountains, before taking the silk route and Bering land bridge. The climate was much different and would have supported more life and grasslands in Tarim Basin, Mongolia, and Manchuria. The sea levels were up to 370 feet lower 18,000 years ago, and significantly lower the last 100,000 years, allowing for an easy expansion of Haplogroup K throughout East Asia, and through the grasslands north of Beijing, going West to the Tarim Basin and North East to Manchuria.
The descendant haplogroups of P include Q (M242) and R (M207).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_P_(Y-DNA)

Since this thread is about Klyosov's paper, we should note that Klyosov ascribes to this general concept.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 04, 2012, 10:50:53 AM
I am not at all sure that the idea that L23* in Europe were IE's but L51 and downstream were earlier non-IEs.  I understand that, other than perhaps Romania, L23xL51 is about the same age as L51 derived clades.  That makes L23* sound rather like a remnant element among the L51 and derived thrust into Europe.  It also seems a perculiar deduction given that L51 derived clades appear so overwhelmingly IE while L23xL51 is a mixed bag of IE and non-IE.  I would also feel that L51 is more likely to be derived from non-Anatolian L23* because the IE languages of western Europe are not derived from the side branch that is the Anatolian languages but from a branch who remained closer to the PIE core for longer and according to Kurgan type models that would imply a thrust into central Europe and beyond from an area to the north of Anatolia.  All western and central IE languages are derived from PIE not Anatolian. 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 04, 2012, 11:04:44 AM
....
I tried to make this point on R-L51* too.  Try to go back and visualize the whole Y DNA tree from R1b (M343) down.  There is a tremendous amount of data for L11, particularly P312 and U106. These two are very heavy/big branches to a lopsided R1b-M343 bush. There are scant remnant branches of the M343+ L23- and to the L23+ L11- branches, but they are are scant enough to be possibly misleading.  Major parts of those old branches are missing and have gone extinct or have otherwise died off.

Well, L23(xL51) is heavily used in terms of calculating variance, are we to be worried about major parts of those old branches being missing or having gone extinct? I mean some of the meaningful conclusions about the origin of R1b in Europe have been based off L23(xL51) diversity, but since you mentioned those concerns, now I’m starting to worry.

This is just my opinion, but beyond L11, the only groupings of R1b that have enough data and differentiation in data to discern much with are R-L23xL11 groups.

How do you know they have enough data? They (L23xL51) seem to be big enough in places like the Caucasus, and Turkey, the Middle East, as they are the dominant R1b clade  over there, what makes you think that they haven’t suffered the same effects as R1b-M269(xL23), I mean perhaps European L23xL51 is nothing but what survives of a recent expansion, the old L23xL51 folks are either long dead, or show up as outlier haplotypes every now and then, but given the samples sizes they have very little effect on the variance of L23xL51.

I am not at all sure if we have enough data and that it is representative enough.  I am saying that there is a difference between looking at R-M269xL23 data versus R-L23xL11 versus R-P312 or R-U106 long haplotype data from our DNA projects.

M269 has to be older than L23, phylogenetically speaking, and should exhibit much higher STR diversity than its g-grandsons P312 and U106.  However, the M269* from long haplotypes in our DNA projects does not exhibit the relative STR diversity reflective of its age.

L23 has to be younger than M269 and older than P312 and U106, phylogenetically speaking. Therefore L23xL11 should have less STR diversity than M269 and more than P312 and U106.

This is simplistic and inconclusive, but I'll report on this and you (all) decide. Here are the relative variances (to P312) for are all of the L23xL11 67 STR haplotypes I can find in our DNA projects.

R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.53 [Mixed 49]  (N=166)
R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.49 [Linear 36]  (N=166)


166 in total, not a small data set, but do you notice these numbers like 1.53 and 1.49 represent about 50% greater variance than P312 and a bit more than that for U106?  In my opinion, a 50% difference is worth considering.

Let's consider the Steppes as NOT being European for purposes of this discussion (BTW, I've been doing this all along so I apologize if I've not been clear.)

Let's remove the European and New World MDKAs and I come up with 88 67 STR haplotypes that are effectively SW Asian and Steppes related.

R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.75 [Mixed 49]  (N=88)
R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.75 [Linear 36]  (N=88)


Variance increased another 25%!  The locations included are:
Armenia
Belarus
Egypt
Georgia
Iraq
Lebanon
Pakistan
Turkey
Saudi Arabia
Syria
United Arab Emerites
Ukraine


I'm not sure on much of anything, but this is not a bad data set as far as size and resolution (# STRs.)  I reported it.  You (all) decide if it means anything.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: A_Wode on June 04, 2012, 11:37:08 AM
Perhaps this is just anecdotal information, but if we want to look for where R1b-M269 is from then we might want to look at his brothers and cousins and see where they intersect with R-M269 (R1b1a2).

The most populous would be:
R1b-V88 (R1b1c) - Wikipedia: "Apart from individuals in southern Europe and Western Asia, the majority of R-V88 was found in northern and central Africa"
R1b-M73 (R1b1a1) - Myres: ""all except two Russians occurred outside Europe, either in the Caucasus, Turkey, the Circum-Uralic and North Pakistan regions."
R1b-P25* (R1b1*) - Wikipedia: "like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey."
R-V88+ went to Africa from elsewhere (someone thinks from Asia, I think from Europe: Spain or Italy). They lack the ancestor R-V88-, present in Sardinia and Europe (3 out of 5 in the paper of Cruciani).

R-M73 is diffused in Central Asia, but also in Europe, and I think with higher variance.

R1b1* (i.e. R-V88-) is present amongst Jews, but in an unique haplotype, come as usual from elsewhere, but massively in Spaniards and British, with highest variance. I have written infinite times that from these European haplotypes with YCAII=18-22 and 18-23 (present both only in Italy) derive the European subclades and not from the Eastern with YCAII=21-23 or 23-23.

R-M335 descend from R-V88- with YCAII=18-23, the European one and not the eastern one.

Your war is lost at least from 6 years, from when I began to write in these forums.

You're cherry picking a handful of British Americans (among dozens of Near-Easterners) when the individuals themselves sometimes don't even have solid family trees. Even then we can only trace back a few hundred years most of the time, and certainly it's impossible to say where people originated 500+ years back in most places of Europe.

In terms of the M335 "Germans", and the R1b1* Spaniards. Three guesses what population of expelled people lived in those countries?

The war is far from lost, in fact the evidence grows stronger as we have collected more data that R1b1*, and R1b1c most likely did not originate in Europe.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 04, 2012, 12:29:10 PM
....
I tried to make this point on R-L51* too.  Try to go back and visualize the whole Y DNA tree from R1b (M343) down.  There is a tremendous amount of data for L11, particularly P312 and U106. These two are very heavy/big branches to a lopsided R1b-M343 bush. There are scant remnant branches of the M343+ L23- and to the L23+ L11- branches, but they are are scant enough to be possibly misleading.  Major parts of those old branches are missing and have gone extinct or have otherwise died off.

Well, L23(xL51) is heavily used in terms of calculating variance, are we to be worried about major parts of those old branches being missing or having gone extinct? I mean some of the meaningful conclusions about the origin of R1b in Europe have been based off L23(xL51) diversity, but since you mentioned those concerns, now I’m starting to worry.

This is just my opinion, but beyond L11, the only groupings of R1b that have enough data and differentiation in data to discern much with are R-L23xL11 groups.

How do you know they have enough data? They (L23xL51) seem to be big enough in places like the Caucasus, and Turkey, the Middle East, as they are the dominant R1b clade  over there, what makes you think that they haven’t suffered the same effects as R1b-M269(xL23), I mean perhaps European L23xL51 is nothing but what survives of a recent expansion, the old L23xL51 folks are either long dead, or show up as outlier haplotypes every now and then, but given the samples sizes they have very little effect on the variance of L23xL51.

I am not at all sure if we have enough data and that it is representative enough.  I am saying that there is a difference between looking at R-M269xL23 data versus R-L23xL11 versus R-P312 or R-U106 long haplotype data from our DNA projects.

M269 has to be older than L23, phylogenetically speaking, and should exhibit much higher STR diversity than its g-grandsons P312 and U106.  However, the M269* from long haplotypes in our DNA projects does not exhibit the relative STR diversity reflective of its age.

L23 has to be younger than M269 and older than P312 and U106, phylogenetically speaking. Therefore L23xL11 should have less STR diversity than M269 and more than P312 and U106.

This is simplistic and inconclusive, but I'll report on this and you (all) decide. Here are the relative variances (to P312) for are all of the L23xL11 67 STR haplotypes I can find in our DNA projects.

R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.53 [Mixed 49]  (N=166)
R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.49 [Linear 36]  (N=166)


166 in total, not a small data set, but do you notice these numbers like 1.53 and 1.49 represent about 50% greater variance than P312 and a bit more than that for U106?  In my opinion, a 50% difference is worth considering.

Let's consider the Steppes as NOT being European for purposes of this discussion (BTW, I've been doing this all along so I apologize if I've not been clear.)

Let's remove the European and New World MDKAs and I come up with 88 67 STR haplotypes that are effectively SW Asian and Steppes related.

R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.75 [Mixed 49]  (N=88)
R-L23xL11___________:  Var=1.75 [Linear 36]  (N=88)


Variance increased another 25%!  The locations included are:
Armenia
Belarus
Egypt
Georgia
Iraq
Lebanon
Pakistan
Turkey
Saudi Arabia
Syria
United Arab Emerites
Ukraine


I'm not sure on much of anything, but this is not a bad data set as far as size and resolution (# STRs.)  I reported it.  You (all) decide if it means anything.


wow!  75% older than L11.  L11 keeps coming in about 4600 years old so that makes L23xL11 around 8000 years old - 6000BC.  That is old and presumably older than any single one of the surviving L23 subclades or regional groups.  However, it is not as old as the inception of farming and again I have to emphasise that everything - distribution of R1b above L51, variance, the shape of the R1b tree etc all point to most R1b being holed up in a non-farming area before then and not on the path into Europe.  A date of 6000BC is close to the date of dairy pastoralism in NW Anatolia and spreading into Europe a few centuries later.  However, I am no longer convinced of the link because dairy pastoralism spread steadily through Europe from SE to NW c. 5500-4000BC and I dont think that well matches the picture of L11 at all.   


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: acekon on June 04, 2012, 12:31:11 PM
I'm not entirely convinced that R1b1b2a cut across Poland in ancient times.  There are many explanations as to how a few L23* haplotypes arrived there. It is probably a very complex story. (Italy, Balkans, Central Asia...etc and a near infinite other set of possibilities)

This wouldn't have bearing on whether or not you had a high Ashkenazi percentage or not. The high % share is the result of recent founding effect - they are more related to one another than with any single outgroup, where as a single R1b1b2a* individual could have arrived in his current location 1000 years ago or more from another near infinite number of possibilites.


Which is the Ashkenazi line, with a founding effect?
Are they L584- or L584+ or do they fit in with, L945+L945+L946
kit#45475?
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/default.aspx?section=yresults

kit#45475-_R1b1a2a1b1: L23+ L584+ L943+ L944+ L945+ & L946+ (Ashkenazi "Group C")

One of these groups,separated by DYS426's .00009 low mutation rate?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Y-STR_markers


http://www.familytreedna.com/public/JewishR1b/default.aspx?section=yresults

Group A or Group B?

or" 12 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 14 29 - 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 17 - 11 11 19 23 16 16 18 17 37 38 12 12 (L23, Jewish)"Klyosov grouping

How does this fit in with Iraqi group?

"Another half of the Assyrian hap-lotypes in the Project, mostly from Iran, have a slightly mutated “classical” European R1b1a2 base haplotype (with DYS464 = 15 15 17 17), and a common ancestor of 850 ± 360 ybp calcu-lated from the first 12 markers, and 1100 ± 280 ybp from the first 37 markers. This R1b evidence is clearly a relatively recent event in Assyrian population, brought from Europe. "


Many more questions than answers.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 04, 2012, 02:12:48 PM
No, I am not sure. I just quoted Wikipedia, that "like R1b* is rare. As mentioned above, examples are described in older articles, for example two in a sample from Turkey." This is cited from URL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_(Y-DNA)

They cite their source as
Quote
4. Cinnioğlu, C; King, R; Kivisild, T; Kalfoğlu, E; Atasoy, S; Cavalleri, GL; Lillie, AS; Roseman, CC et al. (2004). "Excavating Y-chromosome haplotype strata in Anatolia". Human Genetics 114 (2): 127–48. DOI:10.1007/s00439-003-1031-4. PMID 14586639.

If you think it is wrong, please contact them and see if you can get it updated. It would be of value for everyone. Thanks in advance if you choose to.

Well the findings weren’t duplicated on other studies(i.e. Myres.et.al.2010, Cruciani.et.al.2010), so it could have been a fluke.

I see you have a source, Cruciani 2010, that shows "R-P25* paragroup" as appearing in West Asia and East Asia.  I wonder how there could be such a rare find as far away as East Asia? particularly given that testing rates are so much higher in Europe than in Asia?

I'll re-iterate this point that I've made before. Do you see what happens when we (I'm including myself) start arguing by exception from anecdotal data?  It means very little and is wide open to cherry picking.

The only thing that finding R-P25* paragroup in East Asia says is that R-P25* is likely really old, and had enough time to be widespread. There is no cherry picking or anything involved in here, simply that the R-P25* paragroup appears in Europe, West and East Asia, albeit at very low frequencies.



I am also not sure that R1b is from Asia. It could have originated in Europe. You could be right if that is what you are proposing.  I don't think R1b originated in Europe, though, for a variety of reasons, but none the least are the anciently related cousins like R1a, R2, and Q (the P haplogroup (M45) family) found out that direction.

Well at some point someone must have come from Asia, be it R1b-M269, or R1b-P25, or R1b-M343. So what’s R1b, R-M343? If so, well, yes R2, and Q suggest and otherwise Central Asian origin, but the same reasoning would apply to the I and J folks given the distribution and origin of haplogroup J.

 
I am not at all sure if we have enough data and that it is representative enough.  I am saying that there is a difference between looking at R-M269xL23 data versus R-L23xL11 versus R-P312 or R-U106 long haplotype data from our DNA projects.

M269 has to be older than L23, phylogenetically speaking, and should exhibit much higher STR diversity than its g-grandsons P312 and U106.  However, the M269* from long haplotypes in our DNA projects does not exhibit the relative STR diversity reflective of its age.

Well, M269 has to be older than L23, that is completely correct, now R1b-M269(xL23) might or might not be older than L23(xL51). I already noticed that there is a drop in variance when members of the Jewish project are  included, so I’m not sure what you mean about it being reflective of its age, it likely is, if you use the right samples,  for example R1b-M269(xL23) using 37 STRs, gives a variance for Europe (n=9) of 0.3423.

L23 has to be younger than M269 and older than P312 and U106, phylogenetically speaking. Therefore L23xL11 should have less STR diversity than M269 and more than P312 and U106.

Not necessarily, L23xL11 doesn’t have to be older than P312 or U106, mainly because they could easily descend from any other SNP that occur much later than both P312 or U106.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 04, 2012, 04:58:54 PM

I am also not sure that R1b is from Asia. It could have originated in Europe. You could be right if that is what you are proposing.  I don't think R1b originated in Europe, though, for a variety of reasons, but none the least are the anciently related cousins like R1a, R2, and Q (the P haplogroup (M45) family) found out that direction.

Well at some point someone must have come from Asia, be it R1b-M269, or R1b-P25, or R1b-M343. So what’s R1b, R-M343? If so, well, yes R2, and Q suggest and otherwise Central Asian origin, but the same reasoning would apply to the I and J folks given the distribution and origin of haplogroup J.

I am not an expert on Hg's J and I, but I don't think Hg IJK is considered to have originated and expanded the same way as Hg P.  IJK is truly more "Middle Eastern", I think.

Quote from: Wikipedia
Haplogroup IJK
Possible time of origin    40,000-45,000 years BP
Possible place of origin    Southwest Asia
Ancestor    Haplogroup F
Descendants    IJ, K
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_P_(Y-DNA)

Quote from: Wikipedia
Haplogroup P
Possible time of origin    27,000-41,000 years BP[1]
Possible place of origin    Central Asia - South Asia
Ancestor    MNOPS
Descendants    P*, Q, R
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_IJK_(Y-DNA)



I am not at all sure if we have enough data and that it is representative enough.  I am saying that there is a difference between looking at R-M269xL23 data versus R-L23xL11 versus R-P312 or R-U106 long haplotype data from our DNA projects.

M269 has to be older than L23, phylogenetically speaking, and should exhibit much higher STR diversity than its g-grandsons P312 and U106.  However, the M269* from long haplotypes in our DNA projects does not exhibit the relative STR diversity reflective of its age.

Well, M269 has to be older than L23, that is completely correct, now R1b-M269(xL23) might or might not be older than L23(xL51). I already noticed that there is a drop in variance when members of the Jewish project are  included, so I’m not sure what you mean about it being reflective of its age, it likely is, if you use the right samples,  for example R1b-M269(xL23) using 37 STRs, gives a variance for Europe (n=9) of 0.3423.

L23 has to be younger than M269 and older than P312 and U106, phylogenetically speaking. Therefore L23xL11 should have less STR diversity than M269 and more than P312 and U106.

Not necessarily, L23xL11 doesn’t have to be older than P312 or U106, mainly because they could easily descend from any other SNP that occur much later than both P312 or U106.


Exactly! L23xL11 doesn't have to be older because its remnants may not represent all of the non L11 parts of L23 well.  In the case of L23xL11 it appears that since the diversity is higher than down in L11 branching that L23xL11 actually represents a number of older lineages.

This is the difference for R-M269xL23.  Since we aren't seeing STR diversity that is great in it (with the long ht's from projects), the implication is that the remnants are very limited branches of the old and total R-M269 tree.  Other than L23 guys, the M269 tree got wacked pretty good! Therefore, we can't tell much from comparing M269xL23 variance from region to region.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 04, 2012, 06:14:30 PM
Exactly! L23xL11 doesn't have to be older because its remnants may not represent all of the non L11 parts of L23 well.  In the case of L23xL11 it appears that since the diversity is higher than down in L11 branching that L23xL11 actually represents a number of older lineages.

Actually we don’t know if it is a number of older lineages or not. For all we know all L23(xL51) in the Caucasus, Anatolia, the ME could belong to a subclade L-XX, but it just so happens that L-XX, was born before P312, and is somewhat older than P312. Now, what would happen if it turns out that the Europe L23(xL51) was 90% L-XX, but 10% L23(xL51,L-XX), that would certainly change the dynamics. This is exactly what I have been saying, L23xL11 being older than P312, doesn’t really say much about it. In fact I’m actually running a couple of experiments, and will soon post the outcomes, we shall see if the variance of L23x51 being older in West Asia than Europe still holds when 24 STRs with mutation rates less than 0.001 are used. 

This is the difference for R-M269xL23.  Since we aren't seeing STR diversity that is great in it (with the long ht's from projects), the implication is that the remnants are very limited branches of the old and total R-M269 tree.  Other than L23 guys, the M269 tree got wacked pretty good! Therefore, we can't tell much from comparing M269xL23 variance from region to region.


No, I actually think we can, the fact that most M269xL23 survives in the Balkans today, a region that was heavily colonized in the Neolithic, points to the fact that M269xL23 must have been pretty big in there pre-Neolithic, or otherwise it would have banished nowadays. Add to it, that M269xL23 appears to be consistently older in Europe than in West Asia, be it using 10 STR from Myres.et.al.2010, or 37 STR from the ht35 project is too much of a coincidence.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 04, 2012, 07:08:24 PM
"Another half of the Assyrian hap-lotypes in the Project, mostly from Iran, have a slightly mutated “classical” European R1b1a2 base haplotype (with DYS464 = 15 15 17 17), and a common ancestor of 850 ± 360 ybp calcu-lated from the first 12 markers, and 1100 ± 280 ybp from the first 37 markers. This R1b evidence is clearly a relatively recent event in Assyrian population, brought from Europe. "


Many more questions than answers.

He is referring to our R-L584 men.  As stated previously here, and at another forum, an 1100 ± 280 ybp age is untenable for a variety of reasons.  Looking at it from the perspective of the Y chromosome:

Marko's R tree

R1b1a2a1b (L584)

Assyrian #1, kit # 205749: TMRCA of 1848 years with Askhenazi and Syrian Jewish men.

Assyrian #2, kit # 213562: TMRCA of 2239 years with Assyrian #1 and Askhenazi and Syrian Jewish men. Another 1011 years (3250 years), connects him to four men. One of the men lists France as an origin.

Assyrian #3*, kit # 147979: TMRCA of 3293 years with two men of unknown origin. One of the two men lists "Strickland" as a surname.

Assyrian #4, kit # 184027: TMRCA of 1505 years with three men. At least two appear to be Armenian. Further removed from present, this branch appears dominated by Armenians.

Assyrian #5, kit # 90492: TMRCA of 1735 years with a man listing Ireland as an origin. Another 2025 years (3760 years), connects him with a number of what appear to be Armenian and European men.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
This cannot be correct.  The lines he is referring to are R-L584.  They most certainly did not arrive 1100 ± 280 ybp. This is the same line that appears to be, albeit slightly mutated, the modal haplotype among the Alawites.  And the one shared with the Cohanim Jewish men.

GD to Al-Jeloo, based on 67 markers.  All of the men, save for one, are members of the "Nestorian" church.  The other one, Hermes, may be from the "Nestorian" church.  We still have not tested the Syriac Orthodox and Chaldean Catholics to any significant extent, unfortunately.  

205749    Al-Jeloo   L584 (Assyrian #1)

213562   David 13 L584
90492   Barkho 21   L584
147979   Hermes   21
184027   Gorgis   26  L584

There are additional R-L584 men in the project, and one at SMGF.  However, they are not tested through 67 markers.





Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: acekon on June 05, 2012, 12:29:14 AM
http://dna.reinyday.com/464/
http://www.smgf.org/ychromosome/marker_details.jspx?marker=DYS464



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Arwunbee on June 06, 2012, 01:48:45 AM
We all want our ancestors, especially those in our own direct y-dna line, to be heroic and larger than life.
The attraction for me in tracing the yDNA line is that it is conceptually an easier picture to hold in my mind's eye.  But I sometimes contemplate the sobering thought that there were almost certainly a number of rapes/rapists along the yDNA line.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Jean M on June 06, 2012, 09:41:49 AM

I can't find the source for Klyosov stating that the oldest Bell Beaker artefacts are found in the Pyrenees. 

There is no such source.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mark Jost on June 06, 2012, 10:07:27 AM

I can't find the source for Klyosov stating that the oldest Bell Beaker artefacts are found in the Pyrenees. 

There is no such source.

I remember this also so I found the reference in this paper.

Proceedings of the Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy
2011 June Volume 4, No. 6
publisher: Anatole A. Klyosov
Page 1178
Quote
This part of the hypothesis is supported by archaeological data, according to
which the oldest artifacts related to the
and dated by 2900-2500 BC (Muller et al, 2001).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_beaker
Quote
Iberian peninsula
Vessel from Ciempozuelos (Spain) dated from the Bronze Age (M.A.N., Madrid)
The Bell Beaker phenomenon in the Iberian peninsula defines the late phase of the local Chalcolithic and even intrudes in the earliest centuries of the Bronze Age.[36] A review of radiocarbon dates for Bell Beaker across Europe found that some of the earliest were found in Portugal, where the range from Zambujal and Cerro de la Virgen ran between 2900 BC and 2500 BC, in contrast to the rather later range for Andalusia (between 2500 BC to 2200 BC).[9]

...Very early dates for Bell Beakers were found in Castelo Velho de Freixo de Numão in Guarda, Northern Portugal. The site was located on the summit of a spur.

Has this information changed?

MJost


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mark Jost on June 06, 2012, 11:08:20 AM
Anatole A. Klyosov's papers found Proceedings of the Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy Section:

http://aklyosov.home.comcast.net


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 06, 2012, 11:43:43 AM
Exactly! L23xL11 doesn't have to be older because its remnants may not represent all of the non L11 parts of L23 well.  In the case of L23xL11 it appears that since the diversity is higher than down in L11 branching that L23xL11 actually represents a number of older lineages.

Actually we don’t know if it is a number of older lineages or not. For all we know all L23(xL51) in the Caucasus, Anatolia, the ME could belong to a subclade L-XX, but it just so happens that L-XX, was born before P312, and is somewhat older than P312. Now, what would happen if it turns out that the Europe L23(xL51) was 90% L-XX, but 10% L23(xL51,L-XX), that would certainly change the dynamics. This is exactly what I have been saying, L23xL11 being older than P312, doesn’t really say much about it. In fact I’m actually running a couple of experiments, and will soon post the outcomes, we shall see if the variance of L23x51 being older in West Asia than Europe still holds when 24 STRs with mutation rates less than 0.001 are used.  

You have a good point. In other words, what I said was poorly worded when I said "...that L23xL11 actually represents a number of older lineages."  In reality, all lineages of surviving people are of the same age.

As you said, however, the cause for L23xL11's higher diversity could be a clade "L-XX" that is older than P312.  You may think that doesn't tell us much, but time in place can be an indicator of origin or at least direction of movement.  P312 may have a cousin subclade that is older than P312.

If you use only slow STRs, as you are planning, you'll find the results will jump around a bit when comparing relative haplogroups. The problem, I think, is what Ken Nordtvedt has alluded to....  that when using only slow clocks, you lose precision. You are measuring minutes with a calendar. You have to have immense and very representative sample size for things to "average" out and be consistent.  The variance results I've calculated with different sets of STRs, did not involve cherry picking based on my own analysis.  I used Marko H's analysis or just Ken's advice to throw out multi-copy markers.  When I tried to do my own sets based on slow markers I saw the inconsistencies I mentioned.

This is the difference for R-M269xL23.  Since we aren't seeing STR diversity that is great in it (with the long ht's from projects), the implication is that the remnants are very limited branches of the old and total R-M269 tree.  Other than L23 guys, the M269 tree got wacked pretty good! Therefore, we can't tell much from comparing M269xL23 variance from region to region.


No, I actually think we can, the fact that most M269xL23 survives in the Balkans today, a region that was heavily colonized in the Neolithic, points to the fact that M269xL23 must have been pretty big in there pre-Neolithic, or otherwise it would have banished nowadays. Add to it, that M269xL23 appears to be consistently older in Europe than in West Asia, be it using 10 STR from Myres.et.al.2010, or 37 STR from the ht35 project is too much of a coincidence.

M269 may have been big in the Neolithic in the Balkans. We don't know if it originated there or not, though.  Since the M269xL11 STR diversity is low, lower than P312's, I'm not sure if we care if modern M269xL23 lineages are older in West Asia versus the Balkans.  Since we are looking at "youthful" subclades, younger than P312, any movements detected could just be very recent, possibly historical timeframe movements.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Humanist on June 06, 2012, 12:36:03 PM
http://dna.reinyday.com/464/
http://www.smgf.org/ychromosome/marker_details.jspx?marker=DYS464



DYS464 does not trump all other (and many times, more reliable) indicators regarding recent relatedness between populations.  I am referring to SPA, fastIBD, Chromo-Painter, fineSTRUCTURE, IBS, ADMIXTURE...

The DYS464 values for the most frequent Iraqi Arab R-L23* (xL584) haplotype, based on the data listed on the Iraqi Arab project page, are 14-15-17-17.  It may or may not be of particular relevance here.  But, it is something worth investigating.  


acekon.  Are you "Silesian" from the other forum?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 06, 2012, 12:48:24 PM
M269 may have been big in the Neolithic in the Balkans. We don't know if it originated there or not, though. Since the M269xL11 STR diversity is low, lower than P312's, I'm not sure if we care if modern M269xL23 lineages are older in West Asia versus the Balkans.  Since we are looking at "youthful" subclades, younger than P312, any movements detected could just be very recent, possibly historical timeframe movements.

That’s not true according to the data collected from Myres.et.al.2010, at least not in the European case.

European R1b-L23+ (n=812, var=0.2377)

European R1b-M269(xL23) (n=17, var=0.2706)

Feel free to analyze the data yourself, it is found in Table-S3 of Myres.et.al.2010.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 06, 2012, 01:13:28 PM
I have enjoyed Jean L and Mike W's debate on this because I much prefer contrary positions as they sharpen and refine arguements in a way you wouldnt get with consensus/apathy.  However, at most, all this has raised for me is the question that R1b at the M269* or L23* stage could have been on either side of the Bosphorus or on the steppe or somewhere on the fringes south of the steppe.  It in no way presents any strong evidence for the roots of L51 derived clades being in the west of Europe.

I suppose one of the biggest arguements against L51 derived clades not being IE is simply that beaker is the last pan west (and central) European cultures.  If beaker was not IE then it leaves absolutely nothing other than the terrible outmoded house of cards that trying to explaing ALL Celtic language by the La Tene-Hallstatt-Urnfield model is.  If beaker and L11 was not IE then I would find it impossible to sustain the languages spread with genes idea. 

As for some P312 and indeed some beaker not being in what were IE speaking areas at the start of written records, the same can be said for several Urnfield areas which are best represented in non-IE area.  Highest urnfield in Spain?  I believe it was Catalonya where the Iberians were located.  Highest Urnfield in Italy?  I believe it was in Tuscany where the Etruscans were located.  Are we to use the same arguements being used against beaker and suggest that Urnfield was non-IE?  Well if we did this, we would end up being thrown back on the untenable idea that Celtic is late and related to Hallstatt C and D and La Tene which clearly cannot be true.   

I personally see Basque/Iberian as an exception to the rule that P312 was associated with the Celtic, Italic and perhaps Germanic languages. Unless I see evidence showing that   


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on June 06, 2012, 01:35:31 PM
I have enjoyed Jean L and Mike W's debate on this because I much prefer contrary positions as they sharpen and refine arguements in a way you wouldnt get with consensus/apathy.  However, at most, all this has raised for me is the question that R1b at the M269* or L23* stage could have been on either side of the Bosphorus or on the steppe or somewhere on the fringes south of the steppe.  It in no way presents any strong evidence for the roots of L51 derived clades being in the west of Europe.

I suppose one of the biggest arguements against L51 derived clades not being IE is simply that beaker is the last pan west (and central) European cultures.  If beaker was not IE then it leaves absolutely nothing other than the terrible outmoded house of cards that trying to explaing ALL Celtic language by the La Tene-Hallstatt-Urnfield model is.  If beaker and L11 was not IE then I would find it impossible to sustain the languages spread with genes idea. 

As for some P312 and indeed some beaker not being in what were IE speaking areas at the start of written records, the same can be said for several Urnfield areas which are best represented in non-IE area.  Highest urnfield in Spain?  I believe it was Catalonya where the Iberians were located.  Highest Urnfield in Italy?  I believe it was in Tuscany where the Etruscans were located.  Are we to use the same arguements being used against beaker and suggest that Urnfield was non-IE?  Well if we did this, we would end up being thrown back on the untenable idea that Celtic is late and related to Hallstatt C and D and La Tene which clearly cannot be true.   

I personally see Basque/Iberian as an exception to the rule that P312 was associated with the Celtic, Italic and perhaps Germanic languages. Unless I see evidence showing that   

Urnfielders in Catalonia lived side-by-side with non-Urnfelders, so don't let the broad stroke painted maps fool you.

The earliest Urnfield cultures in Italy (Scamozzina and Canegrate) are from North-West Italy and date to the 13c BC. There is no doubt that IE was spoken there since at least the 6c BC.

There may have been a mix of IE and non-IE settlements on the edges of Urnfield,  but I don't think I've ever heard of that being the case at its core.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 06, 2012, 01:42:10 PM
I am no Basque expert but I was reasonable convinced by an article which placed Aquitanian (early Basque) in the same language family as Iberian i.e they were cousin languages.  I think if we understood a bit more about the Iberians we would indirecly understand the Basques better.  I really am unclear about the origin of the Iberians but I tend to favour the idea of them as a superstrate rather than a substrat.  They may for an odd break in the Italic/Ligurian/Lusitanian type dilalects that we see from the Adriatic to Atlantic Iberia, as of course do the Etruscans. 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on June 06, 2012, 01:51:27 PM
I am no Basque expert but I was reasonable convinced by an article which placed Aquitanian (early Basque) in the same language family as Iberian i.e they were cousin languages.  I think if we understood a bit more about the Iberians we would indirecly understand the Basques better.  I really am unclear about the origin of the Iberians but I tend to favour the idea of them as a superstrate rather than a substrat.  They may for an odd break in the Italic/Ligurian/Lusitanian type dilalects that we see from the Adriatic to Atlantic Iberia, as of course do the Etruscans. 

Something to keep in mind on that front: http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif (http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif)


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: acekon on June 06, 2012, 02:02:32 PM
http://dna.reinyday.com/464/
http://www.smgf.org/ychromosome/marker_details.jspx?marker=DYS464



DYS464 does not trump all other (and many times, more reliable) indicators regarding recent relatedness between populations.  I am referring to SPA, fastIBD, Chromo-Painter, fineSTRUCTURE, IBS, ADMIXTURE...

The DYS464 values for the most frequent Iraqi Arab R-L23* (xL584) haplotype, based on the data listed on the Iraqi Arab project page, are 14-15-17-17.  It may or may not be of particular relevance here.  But, it is something worth investigating.  


acekon.  Are you "Silesian" from the other forum?

 However for the samples in Eastern Europe, there is some continuity +/- 1 step, 14-15-16-19 is uncommon.

Eastern European variants
14-15-16-17 [1.854%]
14-15-16-18 [.546%]
14-15-16-19[0.061%]
Iraqi Base.
14-15-17-17[1.869%]
http://www.smgf.org/ychromosome/marker_details.jspx?marker=DYS464

                                                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                      2M759                                                                                                                  
D3TNG    Skoda    Split, Croatia    
DB9H7    Katranov    Ukraine    
DDHPK  Bartoszewski    .                                                                                                                                                
EKXJ7    Necsefor    Woloshka, Ukraine
                                                          
MK9TU    Burda    Silesia, Germany                                                                                                                                            
P7U4J    Necsefor    Woloshka, Ukraine    
RBNQT    Gabert    Carani, Romania
TMGGE    Eskulic    Ceskoslovensko                                  22                                        
XQHH7    Banuk    Musnik, Lithuania    
Y2H3T    Rimmasch    Glommen, Preußen/Prussia, Germany                                                                                                                  
99SC2 Silesia
U98VT [1180 CE Czech sample is also most likely part of this group,even though his 464 values are not mapped out.]

" I am referring to SPA, fastIBD, Chromo-Painter, fineSTRUCTURE, IBS, ADMIXTURE..".

True we have to use many different tools.
I learned that last month, when I got my 2nd 12 marker match From Northern Germany/Denmark.
What are the chances someone matches all first twelve markers coming from the same region[little to the North] as you but is in a different  group, I'm L51- matching more closely to Necsefor/   Katranov types from Ukraine, while he his is   R1b1a2a1a1b4_L21{at 37 markers huge variance between us}?


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 06, 2012, 03:27:27 PM
I am no Basque expert but I was reasonable convinced by an article which placed Aquitanian (early Basque) in the same language family as Iberian i.e they were cousin languages.  I think if we understood a bit more about the Iberians we would indirecly understand the Basques better.  I really am unclear about the origin of the Iberians but I tend to favour the idea of them as a superstrate rather than a substrat.  They may for an odd break in the Italic/Ligurian/Lusitanian type dilalects that we see from the Adriatic to Atlantic Iberia, as of course do the Etruscans. 

Something to keep in mind on that front: http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif (http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif)

Yeah that is interesting the way that in the west it does have some correpsondence with non-IE languages which some argue all are in some way related - Iberian, Basqie and Palaeo-Sardinian although I am well aware that is all a bit speculative.  I suppose there might be some temptation to think there is a link with the Cardial culture but I dont know enough about the details of the I clade to comment.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Jean M on June 06, 2012, 04:25:46 PM
I remember this also so I found the reference in this paper.

Proceedings of the Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy
2011 June Volume 4, No. 6
publisher: Anatole A. Klyosov
Page 1178
Quote
This part of the hypothesis is supported by archaeological data, according to
which the oldest artifacts related to the
and dated by 2900-2500 BC (Muller et al, 2001).

A review of radiocarbon dates for Bell Beaker across Europe found that some of the earliest were found in Portugal

...Very early dates for Bell Beakers were found in Castelo Velho de Freixo de Numão in Guarda, Northern Portugal. The site was located on the summit of a spur.

Has this information changed?

MJost

The source cited by Wikipedia is the same as that cited by Klyosov: Müller and van Willigen 2001, which refers to early dates in Portugal, not the Pyrenees. There were also pretty early dates for some sites in Southern France (which would encompass the southern end of the Pyrenees), but there is no statement that the earliest BB artefacts were from the Pyrenees.

Since then a new paper has rehabilitated some early dates for the Netherlands.


  


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on June 06, 2012, 04:28:21 PM
I am no Basque expert but I was reasonable convinced by an article which placed Aquitanian (early Basque) in the same language family as Iberian i.e they were cousin languages.  I think if we understood a bit more about the Iberians we would indirecly understand the Basques better.  I really am unclear about the origin of the Iberians but I tend to favour the idea of them as a superstrate rather than a substrat.  They may for an odd break in the Italic/Ligurian/Lusitanian type dilalects that we see from the Adriatic to Atlantic Iberia, as of course do the Etruscans. 

Something to keep in mind on that front: http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif (http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif)

Yeah that is interesting the way that in the west it does have some correpsondence with non-IE languages which some argue all are in some way related - Iberian, Basqie and Palaeo-Sardinian although I am well aware that is all a bit speculative.  I suppose there might be some temptation to think there is a link with the Cardial culture but I dont know enough about the details of the I clade to comment.

Just thinking out loud, it would seem to me that haplogroup I is not related to Cardial Ware migrations because...

- The Epi-Cardial samples from Catalonia were G2a and E1b
- Haplogroup G is rare in Basques (less than 1%)
- There is a supposed lack of "Caucasus" scores for modern Basques (Eurogenes)
- Cardial Ware doesn't seem to have had an impact on modern day Basque Country

So, it would seem (to me anyway) that haplogroup I is either a hunter-gatherer marker in Sardinia and Iberia or is a separate Neolithic wave from Cardial Ware.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Jean M on June 06, 2012, 05:13:19 PM
Just thinking out loud, it would seem to me that haplogroup I is not related to Cardial Ware migrations because...

- The Epi-Cardial samples from Catalonia were G2a and E1b
- Haplogroup G is rare in Basques (less than 1%)
- There is a supposed lack of "Caucasus" scores for modern Basques (Eurogenes)
- Cardial Ware doesn't seem to have had an impact on modern day Basque Country

So, it would seem (to me anyway) that haplogroup I is either a hunter-gatherer marker in Sardinia and Iberia or is a separate Neolithic wave from Cardial Ware.

Can't agree. Cardial Ware does not have to be linked to one haplogroup alone. There is scant evidence of human life on Sardinia before farming arrived. I2a1a-M26 on Sardinia looks like a founder effect and pretty certainly Neolithic.  Two examples of I2a1 have been found in the DNA of Neolithic farmers. They were among the burials in the Cave of Treilles in Aveyron, in the South of France.

I2a1a-M26 is also found in other places where Cardial Ware turns up in the archaeological record, such as eastern Spain. It runs at between 3% and 9% in Pyrennean Basques and their French neighbours in Béarn and Chalosse.

I am not suggesting that this is the sole origin of the Basques. I ended up feeling that they are a genetic mixture, like other European populations, of waves into Gascony at different times. [Note that my online Basque page is out of date and due to be taken down when I can get around to it. I no longer buy the proposed common linguistic origin of Basque, Iberian and Palaeo-Sardinian.]  



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 06, 2012, 06:23:17 PM
I am not suggesting that this is the sole origin of the Basques. I ended up feeling that they are a genetic mixture, like other European populations, of waves into Gascony at different times. [Note that my online Basque page is out of date and due to be taken down when I can get around to it. I no longer buy the proposed common linguistic origin of Basque, Iberian and Palaeo-Sardinian.]  
I think JeanL was on to something here that is in agreement. Even within the R1b Y lineages, there appears different waves. SRY2627 and L21 have completely different distribution patterns that are much larger than Basque or pre-Basque territories.  M153 is really just a sub-element of NS-Cluster or Z209/Z220+.  It may or may not have arrived with the SRY2627. A bit of U152 has also impacted them.  We'll know more as DF27 unfolds.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: JeanL on June 06, 2012, 09:52:35 PM
... A bit of U152 has also impacted them.  We'll know more as DF27 unfolds.

Actually according to Table-S3 of the Martinez-Cruz.et.al.2012 study R1b-U152+ (that is everything that is downstream of R1b-U152) is as follows:

R1b-U152+

Gascony

Bigorre: 1/44 or 2.27%
Bearn: 1/56 or 1.79%
Chalosse: 2/58 or 3.45%

French Basque

Lapurdi/Baztan: 1/44 or 2.27%
Lapurdi Nafarroa: 1/66 or 1.52%
Zuberoa: 0/53 or 0 %

Navarra

Roncal and Salazar valleys: 3/53 or 5.66%
Central Western Nafarroa: 0/60 or 0%
North Western Nafarroa:  3/51 or 5.88%

Spanish Basque

Gipuzkoa: 0/47 or 0%
SouthWestern Gipuzkoa: 0/57 or 0%
Araba: 2/51 or 3.92%
Bizkaia: 2/57 or 3.51%

North Spain

La Rioja: 2/54 or 3.70%
North Aragon: 1/27 or 3.70%*(Sample size is small compared to others. )

So the presence of R1b-U152 in Basques can be considered of historical arrival, as it is found in the same levels that R1b-U106+ is found. For comparison according to Table-S3 of the Martinez-Cruz.et.al.2012 study R1b-U106+ (that is everything that is downstream of R1b-U106) is as follows:

R1b-U106+

Gascony

Bigorre: 2/44 or 4.55%
Bearn: 1/56 or 1.79%
Chalosse: 4/58 or 6.90%

French Basque

Lapurdi/Baztan: 0/44 or 0%
Lapurdi Nafarroa: 3/66 or 4.55%
Zuberoa: 0/53 or 0 %

Navarra

Roncal and Salazar valleys: 1/53 or 1.89%
Central Western Nafarroa: 0/60 or 0%
North Western Nafarroa:  3/51 or 5.88%

Spanish Basque

Gipuzkoa: 0/47 or 0%
SouthWestern Gipuzkoa: 0/57 or 0%
Araba: 0/51 or 0%
Bizkaia: 0/57 or 0%

North Spain

La Rioja: 0/54 or 0%
North Aragon: 0/27 or 0%*(Sample size is small compared to others. )




Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Richard Rocca on June 06, 2012, 10:58:02 PM
Just thinking out loud, it would seem to me that haplogroup I is not related to Cardial Ware migrations because...

- The Epi-Cardial samples from Catalonia were G2a and E1b
- Haplogroup G is rare in Basques (less than 1%)
- There is a supposed lack of "Caucasus" scores for modern Basques (Eurogenes)
- Cardial Ware doesn't seem to have had an impact on modern day Basque Country

So, it would seem (to me anyway) that haplogroup I is either a hunter-gatherer marker in Sardinia and Iberia or is a separate Neolithic wave from Cardial Ware.

Can't agree. Cardial Ware does not have to be linked to one haplogroup alone. There is scant evidence of human life on Sardinia before farming arrived. I2a1a-M26 on Sardinia looks like a founder effect and pretty certainly Neolithic.  Two examples of I2a1 have been found in the DNA of Neolithic farmers. They were among the burials in the Cave of Treilles in Aveyron, in the South of France.

I2a1a-M26 is also found in other places where Cardial Ware turns up in the archaeological record, such as eastern Spain. It runs at between 3% and 9% in Pyrennean Basques and their French neighbours in Béarn and Chalosse.

I am not suggesting that this is the sole origin of the Basques. I ended up feeling that they are a genetic mixture, like other European populations, of waves into Gascony at different times. [Note that my online Basque page is out of date and due to be taken down when I can get around to it. I no longer buy the proposed common linguistic origin of Basque, Iberian and Palaeo-Sardinian.]  

I certainly don't (and didn't) rule out a Neolithic arrival for I-M26. However, I do think it had a different expansion time and route from G2. Certainly they both have different TMRCAs in Sardinia.

At 3,000 BC, the classification of the Treilles samples as Neolithic is somewhat misleading. Farming had spread thousands of years before the Treilles samples and by then the European Copper Age had already begun. All major haplogroups had probably moved into Europe by 3,000 BC and more than likely they all practiced farming in some way or another.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mark Jost on June 06, 2012, 11:32:18 PM
Continuing the BeakerBell info. A nice over view map.

http://what-when-how.com/ancient-europe/bell-beakers-from-west-to-east-consequences-of-agriculture-5000-2000-b-c-ancient-europe/

CHRONOLOGY

In the archaeological literature, there exists a widely held theory about the principal trends in the stylistic development (i.e., the relative chronology) of Bell Beaker ceramic ware. At the beginning were the Maritime beakers, after which follow various types of ceramic ware that have a regional dimension characterized by more squat proportions. A principal change has occurred in our knowledge of the duration of the Bell Beaker period. The image of Bell Beakers as a short-term event that took place at the end of the Copper Age and the beginning of the

Bronze Age is a thing of the past. Accurate chronological data from carbon-14 testing of samples from various regions show that Bell Beakers were a long-lasting and dynamic phenomenon. An analysis by Johannes Muller and Samuel van Willigen published in 2001 took into consideration selected car-bon-14 determinations on short-lived substances such as bone and plant seeds while omitting samples from long-lasting sources such as wood charcoal. Results of this dating provide a picture of an extended Bell Beaker development period having various features in different regions. Its earliest beginnings were in the southern province (Iberian Peninsula, southern France, and northern Italy) about 2800 b.c. The latest dates extend into the first centuries of the second millennium b.c. and are found in the western and northern provinces. Chronological data show that the development of Bell Beakers took place from the west (more specifically from the southwest) toward the east and northeast.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Arwunbee on June 07, 2012, 02:13:23 AM
I also suspect, given the widespread survival of L21 in what is now England, that young British warriors took service in Anglo-Saxon warbands (the Gefolge or Posse Comitatus).

How much of the L21 population in England could be attributed to input from the various Germanic invasions?



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: rms2 on June 07, 2012, 10:05:54 AM
I also suspect, given the widespread survival of L21 in what is now England, that young British warriors took service in Anglo-Saxon warbands (the Gefolge or Posse Comitatus).

How much of the L21 population in England could be attributed to input from the various Germanic invasions?



Myres and Busby didn't find all that much L21 in the old homelands of the Anglo-Saxons, so it isn't likely there was much of an L21 component among them. There is a fair amount of L21 in Norway, and it could be ancient, but that is a matter of controversy, so I can't say whether or not L21 was much of a factor among Norwegian Vikings.

It seems to me the distribution of L21 makes it pretty plain that, in terms of the historical period, it is an overwhelmingly Celtic y haplogroup. Its strong appearance in England is, I think, evidence that the Britons survived there, albeit much reduced from their original predominance.

Where I think there is some potential for confusion is in the possibility that some British L21 may actually be Norman in origin. L21 is pretty frequent in Normandy.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: ironroad41 on June 07, 2012, 11:04:59 AM
I would guess that most of the R=L21 in Brittany is the result of the emigration out of the Wales area after the departure of the Romans and the invasions into England by the Scottis and the Picts, c. 440 AD.  I would be interested in knowing, however, what sub-clade of R-L21 the French Normans are?

re: the Norwegian R-L21's, I would hazard a guess part of them might have arrived from Dublin, the headquarters for the slave trade of the Norwegians c. 700-800 AD+.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 07, 2012, 02:41:42 PM
I also suspect, given the widespread survival of L21 in what is now England, that young British warriors took service in Anglo-Saxon warbands (the Gefolge or Posse Comitatus).

How much of the L21 population in England could be attributed to input from the various Germanic invasions?



I had a very open mind about the whole L21=pre-Roman/U106=historic period germanics concept and I pressed people a lot who automatically assumed this.  However, Having thought a bit more deeply about it, it appears that U106 west of Poland has a variance that suggests it only moved east in the end of the Bronze Age.  This does pretty well fit into the traditional model of the expansions of the germanics and I now doubt much U106 reached Britain in pre-Roman times.  As for L21 in England it really does rise hugely in the more holdout British (I.e. non Anglo-Saxon) areas such as the the West Country, the Pennines (Elmet) etc and falls off a great deal as one heads to the south and east.  It is very high indeed in Wales and Scotland (even in the north-east).  I am always very harsh in questioning theories when I think they are stereotyped but I think the L21-U106 ratio is probably a pretty good idea of the Celtic survival vs Anglo-Saxons.  That is not to say that both peoples did not include other haplotypes but it provides a simple indicator IMO.  It shows that England is divided into a south and east where L21 is not very high by isles standards and a west and north where it is very high although not as high as Wales, Scotland or Ireland.  I think probably that pre-A-S male lineages are predominant among the English in the western half of the country and not just Cornwall etc.  This is not surprising given historical evidence too. 


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 07, 2012, 02:45:49 PM
I would guess that most of the R=L21 in Brittany is the result of the emigration out of the Wales area after the departure of the Romans and the invasions into England by the Scottis and the Picts, c. 440 AD.  I would be interested in knowing, however, what sub-clade of R-L21 the French Normans are?

re: the Norwegian R-L21's, I would hazard a guess part of them might have arrived from Dublin, the headquarters for the slave trade of the Norwegians c. 700-800 AD+.


I doubt that the Bretons are predominantly British L21.  There are far too few matches between British and Breton people.  L21 is a substantial clade all the way from the Seine to the Pyrenees in France and even into the basque area in Spain. It is clearly a significant Atlantic clade in that entire stretch and looks like it ruled the waves.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: ironroad41 on June 07, 2012, 03:30:58 PM
You may be correct.  I would expect some Pictish folks also, based on the similarity of the standing stones near Aberdeen and Brittany?  I don't think Brittany was a byway for R-L21 as it travelled out of Iberia/Switzerland into France and subsequently the Isles.  It may be a mixture, but Caesar admired their seamanship, so that may be a hint?  


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: rms2 on June 07, 2012, 06:41:59 PM
Brittany was an important part of the Bell Beaker network, if that is the right thing to call it. It was also a key part of later trade between the Continent and the Isles.

As Alan said, our Bretons don't get the Welsh and Cornish matches one would expect if they were descended from Post-Roman British refugees.

I think L21 probably got to Brittany before it got to Britain.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: rms2 on June 07, 2012, 06:48:49 PM
I also suspect, given the widespread survival of L21 in what is now England, that young British warriors took service in Anglo-Saxon warbands (the Gefolge or Posse Comitatus).

How much of the L21 population in England could be attributed to input from the various Germanic invasions?



I had a very open mind about the whole L21=pre-Roman/U106=historic period germanics concept and I pressed people a lot who automatically assumed this.  However, Having thought a bit more deeply about it, it appears that U106 west of Poland has a variance that suggests it only moved east in the end of the Bronze Age.  This does pretty well fit into the traditional model of the expansions of the germanics and I now doubt much U106 reached Britain in pre-Roman times.  As for L21 in England it really does rise hugely in the more holdout British (I.e. non Anglo-Saxon) areas such as the the West Country, the Pennines (Elmet) etc and falls off a great deal as one heads to the south and east.  It is very high indeed in Wales and Scotland (even in the north-east).  I am always very harsh in questioning theories when I think they are stereotyped but I think the L21-U106 ratio is probably a pretty good idea of the Celtic survival vs Anglo-Saxons.  That is not to say that both peoples did not include other haplotypes but it provides a simple indicator IMO.  It shows that England is divided into a south and east where L21 is not very high by isles standards and a west and north where it is very high although not as high as Wales, Scotland or Ireland.  I think probably that pre-A-S male lineages are predominant among the English in the western half of the country and not just Cornwall etc.  This is not surprising given historical evidence too.  

That's right. If you look at the distribution of L21 in the Isles, and the contrasting distributions of U106 and I1, it's hard not to conclude that L21=Celts and those others=Germanics (Anglo-Saxons, Vikings). It slaps you right in the face, it seems to me.

(http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/7587/haplogroupr1bl21.gif) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/98/haplogroupr1bl21.gif/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

(http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/4239/haplogroupr1bs21.th.gif) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/607/haplogroupr1bs21.gif/)

(http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/131/haplogroupi1.th.gif) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/341/haplogroupi1.gif/)

Please be sure to notice that those three maps use different shading scales.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 08, 2012, 11:15:52 AM
I would guess that most of the R=L21 in Brittany is the result of the emigration out of the Wales area after the departure of the Romans and the invasions into England by the Scottis and the Picts, c. 440 AD.  I would be interested in knowing, however, what sub-clade of R-L21 the French Normans are?

re: the Norwegian R-L21's, I would hazard a guess part of them might have arrived from Dublin, the headquarters for the slave trade of the Norwegians c. 700-800 AD+.


I doubt that the Bretons are predominantly British L21.  There are far too few matches between British and Breton people.  L21 is a substantial clade all the way from the Seine to the Pyrenees in France and even into the basque area in Spain. It is clearly a significant Atlantic clade in that entire stretch and looks like it ruled the waves.

I don't know what the percentage of Bretons is that are L21, but it is true that they don't generally fit into British Isles clusters well.

It is also noteworthy that the ratio M222 to L21 is much higher in Ireland than in Scandinavia. The implication is that the majority of L21 in Scandinavia did not come from Ireland in the Viking age where slave trade is often held out as an alternative. That's not to say that some L21 and M222 couldn't have come with slave trade and/or merchant/shipping.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 08, 2012, 01:12:59 PM
I would guess that most of the R=L21 in Brittany is the result of the emigration out of the Wales area after the departure of the Romans and the invasions into England by the Scottis and the Picts, c. 440 AD.  I would be interested in knowing, however, what sub-clade of R-L21 the French Normans are?

re: the Norwegian R-L21's, I would hazard a guess part of them might have arrived from Dublin, the headquarters for the slave trade of the Norwegians c. 700-800 AD+.


I doubt that the Bretons are predominantly British L21.  There are far too few matches between British and Breton people.  L21 is a substantial clade all the way from the Seine to the Pyrenees in France and even into the basque area in Spain. It is clearly a significant Atlantic clade in that entire stretch and looks like it ruled the waves.

I don't know what the percentage of Bretons is that are L21, but it is true that they don't generally fit into British Isles clusters well.

It is also noteworthy that the ratio M222 to L21 is much higher in Ireland than in Scandinavia. The implication is that the majority of L21 in Scandinavia did not come from Ireland in the Viking age where slave trade is often held out as an alternative. That's not to say that some L21 and M222 couldn't have come with slave trade and/or merchant/shipping.

I agree with the first paragraph but I have always wondered about the arguement in the 2nd.  One thing that has to be taken into account is where in Ireland were most of the permanent Viking settlements.  Basically the most enduring run along the SE to SW part of the coast (Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick).  What I would be interrested to know is what is the amount of M222 in those areas and secondly how many of them have northern names that suggest they have only got there in the post-Viking era (probably the last 400 years in fact).  I would reckon that the figure reached would be a great deal lower than the M222 average for Ireland.   


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 08, 2012, 03:58:47 PM
I would guess that most of the R=L21 in Brittany is the result of the emigration out of the Wales area after the departure of the Romans and the invasions into England by the Scottis and the Picts, c. 440 AD.  I would be interested in knowing, however, what sub-clade of R-L21 the French Normans are?

re: the Norwegian R-L21's, I would hazard a guess part of them might have arrived from Dublin, the headquarters for the slave trade of the Norwegians c. 700-800 AD+.


I doubt that the Bretons are predominantly British L21.  There are far too few matches between British and Breton people.  L21 is a substantial clade all the way from the Seine to the Pyrenees in France and even into the basque area in Spain. It is clearly a significant Atlantic clade in that entire stretch and looks like it ruled the waves.

I don't know what the percentage of Bretons is that are L21, but it is true that they don't generally fit into British Isles clusters well.

It is also noteworthy that the ratio M222 to L21 is much higher in Ireland than in Scandinavia. The implication is that the majority of L21 in Scandinavia did not come from Ireland in the Viking age where slave trade is often held out as an alternative. That's not to say that some L21 and M222 couldn't have come with slave trade and/or merchant/shipping.

I agree with the first paragraph but I have always wondered about the arguement in the 2nd.  One thing that has to be taken into account is where in Ireland were most of the permanent Viking settlements.  Basically the most enduring run along the SE to SW part of the coast (Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick).  What I would be interrested to know is what is the amount of M222 in those areas and secondly how many of them have northern names that suggest they have only got there in the post-Viking era (probably the last 400 years in fact).  I would reckon that the figure reached would be a great deal lower than the M222 average for Ireland.  

I tried to figure this out. Fortunately, we do have a lot of granularity in our DNA project MDKA's, more so than in the major studies.

You are right that Leinster's M222/L21 ratio is lower than Ulster's.   Here are the ratios I have from our DNA project data.  This is not scientifically sampled, just whatever reflects who's been testing.

Nordic: 4%
Leinster: 28%
Highland & Islands: 13%
Ulster: 43%

I don't think there is any doubt that Ulster is M222 land.

Just looking at the Nordic Countries, I get that 40% of the L21 is unassignable to a cluster.  The biggest variety of L21 I find is Irish Sea (Z255.) I get that 12% of the Nordic L21 is Irish Sea.

There are only a couple of Scots Modal folks and Irish II that I can find in Scandinavia. Zero Irish III.

After looking at the Nordic ht's, and given all of the work that has been given to identifying clusters, I don't think much of the Nordic L21 is due to slave trade.  I don't know, but maybe 10% or even only a percent or two.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: alan trowel hands. on June 08, 2012, 06:09:05 PM
I would guess that most of the R=L21 in Brittany is the result of the emigration out of the Wales area after the departure of the Romans and the invasions into England by the Scottis and the Picts, c. 440 AD.  I would be interested in knowing, however, what sub-clade of R-L21 the French Normans are?

re: the Norwegian R-L21's, I would hazard a guess part of them might have arrived from Dublin, the headquarters for the slave trade of the Norwegians c. 700-800 AD+.


I doubt that the Bretons are predominantly British L21.  There are far too few matches between British and Breton people.  L21 is a substantial clade all the way from the Seine to the Pyrenees in France and even into the basque area in Spain. It is clearly a significant Atlantic clade in that entire stretch and looks like it ruled the waves.

I don't know what the percentage of Bretons is that are L21, but it is true that they don't generally fit into British Isles clusters well.

It is also noteworthy that the ratio M222 to L21 is much higher in Ireland than in Scandinavia. The implication is that the majority of L21 in Scandinavia did not come from Ireland in the Viking age where slave trade is often held out as an alternative. That's not to say that some L21 and M222 couldn't have come with slave trade and/or merchant/shipping.

I agree with the first paragraph but I have always wondered about the arguement in the 2nd.  One thing that has to be taken into account is where in Ireland were most of the permanent Viking settlements.  Basically the most enduring run along the SE to SW part of the coast (Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick).  What I would be interrested to know is what is the amount of M222 in those areas and secondly how many of them have northern names that suggest they have only got there in the post-Viking era (probably the last 400 years in fact).  I would reckon that the figure reached would be a great deal lower than the M222 average for Ireland.  

I tried to figure this out. Fortunately, we do have a lot of granularity in our DNA project MDKA's, more so than in the major studies.

You are right that Leinster's M222/L21 ratio is lower than Ulster's.   Here are the ratios I have from our DNA project data.  This is not scientifically sampled, just whatever reflects who's been testing.

Nordic: 4%
Leinster: 28%
Highland & Islands: 13%
Ulster: 43%

I don't think there is any doubt that Ulster is M222 land.

Just looking at the Nordic Countries, I get that 40% of the L21 is unassignable to a cluster.  The biggest variety of L21 I find is Irish Sea (Z255.) I get that 12% of the Nordic L21 is Irish Sea.

There are only a couple of Scots Modal folks and Irish II that I can find in Scandinavia. Zero Irish III.

After looking at the Nordic ht's, and given all of the work that has been given to identifying clusters, I don't think much of the Nordic L21 is due slave trade.  I don't know, by maybe 10% or even only a percent or two.

I would bet too that a lot of the Leinster 25% have surnames that indicate origins in the north in the last few centuries.  On top of that I would think a lot of the M222 is from the north of Leinster i.e Meath, which wasnt really part of Leinster in the Viking period but was part of the Ui Neill grouping that had extended into that area from the west.  I would  tend to look at the chief counties where Vikings had long lasting influence as Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork and Limerick.  I would love to see a percentage of M222 against L21 'all' for those counties of highest Viking impact combined.  Bear in mind too that even that figure would be a maximum due to later drift.  Edit-You would need to exclude urban Dublin too because is basically sucked in half of Ireland so it wont be saft.  Rural Co. Dublin would be OK though.  I could be wrong but I think that little list would drop the maximum.  Once you have a list it then needs to be scrutinised for Ui Neill blow on surnames.  If someone can get a list of surnames of M222 in those counties I am sure I could have a go at that although there is another guy who would do it better who posts here sometimes.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: OConnor on June 08, 2012, 10:09:36 PM
I suspected the bulk of M222 could have arrived in Ireland from Scotland as Gallowglass.

"The first record of gallowglass service under the Irish was in 1259, when Aedh Ó Conchobair, King of Connacht, received a dowry of 160 Scottish warriors from the daughter of the King of the Hebrides. They were organised into groups known as a "Corrughadh", which consisted of about 100 men. In return for military service, gallowglass contingents were given land and settled in Irish lordships, where they were entitled to receive supplies from the local population."

"In 1569 Turlough O'Neill married Lady Agnes MacDonald of Kintyre. Her dowry consisted of at least 1200 galloglass fighters. Along with support of two young men as support and friends on top to assist or fight this could easily have numbered over 5,000 current and future Gallowglass coming into the area"

By 1512, there were reported to be fifty-nine groups throughout the country under the control of the Irish nobility. Though initially they were mercenaries, over time they settled and their ranks became filled with native Irish men.

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



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: NealtheRed on June 08, 2012, 11:12:22 PM
I suspected the bulk of M222 could have arrived in Ireland from Scotland as Gallowglass.

"The first record of gallowglass service under the Irish was in 1259, when Aedh Ó Conchobair, King of Connacht, received a dowry of 160 Scottish warriors from the daughter of the King of the Hebrides. They were organised into groups known as a "Corrughadh", which consisted of about 100 men. In return for military service, gallowglass contingents were given land and settled in Irish lordships, where they were entitled to receive supplies from the local population."

"In 1569 Turlough O'Neill married Lady Agnes MacDonald of Kintyre. Her dowry consisted of at least 1200 galloglass fighters. Along with support of two young men as support and friends on top to assist or fight this could easily have numbered over 5,000 current and future Gallowglass coming into the area"

By 1512, there were reported to be fifty-nine groups throughout the country under the control of the Irish nobility. Though initially they were mercenaries, over time they settled and their ranks became filled with native Irish men.

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



I am definitely sure that some M222 went back and forth from Ulster to the Western Isles, but I think the signature is much more apparent among those Irish chieftains who hired the gallowglass (i.e. the O'Donnells, O'Neills, etc.).

The MacDonnells of Antrim immediately come to mind when you mention gallowglass soldiers being invited by Irish chieftains. The MacDonnell chiefs inherited a Norwegian R1a1 signature, although I suspect Z255 (and to a lesser degree, M222) was among those soldiers allied to Clan Donald and other clans of the Hebrides.

Sorry about the digression!


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Heber on June 09, 2012, 10:31:04 AM
I would guess that most of the R=L21 in Brittany is the result of the emigration out of the Wales area after the departure of the Romans and the invasions into England by the Scottis and the Picts, c. 440 AD.  I would be interested in knowing, however, what sub-clade of R-L21 the French Normans are?

re: the Norwegian R-L21's, I would hazard a guess part of them might have arrived from Dublin, the headquarters for the slave trade of the Norwegians c. 700-800 AD+.


I doubt that the Bretons are predominantly British L21.  There are far too few matches between British and Breton people.  L21 is a substantial clade all the way from the Seine to the Pyrenees in France and even into the basque area in Spain. It is clearly a significant Atlantic clade in that entire stretch and looks like it ruled the waves.

I don't know what the percentage of Bretons is that are L21, but it is true that they don't generally fit into British Isles clusters well.

It is also noteworthy that the ratio M222 to L21 is much higher in Ireland than in Scandinavia. The implication is that the majority of L21 in Scandinavia did not come from Ireland in the Viking age where slave trade is often held out as an alternative. That's not to say that some L21 and M222 couldn't have come with slave trade and/or merchant/shipping.

I agree with the first paragraph but I have always wondered about the arguement in the 2nd.  One thing that has to be taken into account is where in Ireland were most of the permanent Viking settlements.  Basically the most enduring run along the SE to SW part of the coast (Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick).  What I would be interrested to know is what is the amount of M222 in those areas and secondly how many of them have northern names that suggest they have only got there in the post-Viking era (probably the last 400 years in fact).  I would reckon that the figure reached would be a great deal lower than the M222 average for Ireland.  

I tried to figure this out. Fortunately, we do have a lot of granularity in our DNA project MDKA's, more so than in the major studies.

You are right that Leinster's M222/L21 ratio is lower than Ulster's.   Here are the ratios I have from our DNA project data.  This is not scientifically sampled, just whatever reflects who's been testing.

Nordic: 4%
Leinster: 28%
Highland & Islands: 13%
Ulster: 43%

I don't think there is any doubt that Ulster is M222 land.

Just looking at the Nordic Countries, I get that 40% of the L21 is unassignable to a cluster.  The biggest variety of L21 I find is Irish Sea (Z255.) I get that 12% of the Nordic L21 is Irish Sea.

There are only a couple of Scots Modal folks and Irish II that I can find in Scandinavia. Zero Irish III.

After looking at the Nordic ht's, and given all of the work that has been given to identifying clusters, I don't think much of the Nordic L21 is due slave trade.  I don't know, by maybe 10% or even only a percent or two.

I would bet too that a lot of the Leinster 25% have surnames that indicate origins in the north in the last few centuries.  On top of that I would think a lot of the M222 is from the north of Leinster i.e Meath, which wasnt really part of Leinster in the Viking period but was part of the Ui Neill grouping that had extended into that area from the west.  I would  tend to look at the chief counties where Vikings had long lasting influence as Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork and Limerick.  I would love to see a percentage of M222 against L21 'all' for those counties of highest Viking impact combined.  Bear in mind too that even that figure would be a maximum due to later drift.  Edit-You would need to exclude urban Dublin too because is basically sucked in half of Ireland so it wont be saft.  Rural Co. Dublin would be OK though.  I could be wrong but I think that little list would drop the maximum.  Once you have a list it then needs to be scrutinised for Ui Neill blow on surnames.  If someone can get a list of surnames of M222 in those counties I am sure I could have a go at that although there is another guy who would do it better who posts here sometimes.

Alan,

About 66% of surnames in Ireland were of Gaelic origin.
The rest being a mixture of Norman, Scottish, Viking and Gallowglass with smaller communities of Huguenot and Palatine Germans.

The Gaelic names such as O Neill, O Donnell, Magennis, Maguire, O Reilly, MacMahon, O Farrell, O Connor, O Rourke, Mc Donagh, O Hara, Mc Dermott, O Toole, O Byrne, O Kennedy, O Madden, O Brian,  O Carroll, Mc Carthy, O Sullivan etc had specific Clan territories and are well documented on the Irish History in Maps site. A complete list of Gaelic names and their locations is given here.

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~irlkik/ihm/irenames.htm

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~irlkik/ihm/
This site gives a good indication of the evolution of Clans by century from the earliest times to the 20th C.

The Scottish names such as Mac Donnell, Macquillan, MacKeon were confined to the North East Antrim area. Most of these were Dalriada, so they came from Ireland originally and were probably M222.
Gallowglasses such as McSweeney were concentrated in Donegal with small scatterings such as MacSheehy, McCabe, McDonald further south. These were a mixture of Gaelic Dalriada (M222) and Viking.
Vikings such as Harold, Cotter, Coppinger, as you rightly pointed out were we're concentrated in the towns of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Drougheda.
The Normans such as Butler, Walsh, Burke, Power, Fitzgerald, Roche, FitzMaurice, Barry, de Lacey etc were clustered around their castles in the Pale and towns like Trim, Kilkenny, Waterford, Wexford, Portumna etc.
A complete list of Normal names and their location is given here:

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~irlkik/ihm/irename2.htm

You can plug in a name in the Irish Origenes Surname Database for a map of its distribution and origin.
This is based on data from the 1911 census. For a bit more granualarity you can search on the 1901 Census.

http://www.irishorigenes.com/surnames-database

We are now getting close to being able to match the Clan, Sept and Family name tree to the halpogroup tree.


Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: OConnor on June 09, 2012, 05:07:23 PM
It makes some sense to me that people would adopt names when their time came to do so.   Perhaps some, or many people adopted the closest Irish sept name?

I see m222 in the Sweeney Project. This surname is associated with Gallowglass and Donegal. Although they are a Scottish clan, they claim descent from Niall.
Convienient?



Title: Re: New Klyosov paper on R1b from Central Asia via multiple routes
Post by: Dubhthach on June 10, 2012, 12:12:50 PM
As Alan mentioned the modern province of Leinster is considerably larger then historic kingdom of Leinster. Which was basically restricted to South of Dublin and consisting of only the counties of Wicklow, Wexford, Kildare. The sub-kingdom of Osraighe (Killkenny/Laois) was basically independent and generally the Kings of Munster counted them as vassals. The liffey in Dublin was often seen as a borderzone between Meath and Leinster. One of reasons the Vikings were so successfully able to settle there.

The royal house of Dublin was heavily intermarried with the Leinster royalty so it's not surprising that the likes of Z255/L159.2 would spread into Norse world of the 9-12th centuries.

Maps:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Kingdom_of_Mide-900.svg/1000px-Kingdom_of_Mide-900.svg.png

versus modern day province:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/Leinster_locator_map.svg/1000px-Leinster_locator_map.svg.png

Meath (Mí -- Midhe in "Middle Irish") was obviously the realm of the Southern Uí Néill dynasty, likewise Connacht was under controll of related dynasties of Uí Briúin and Uí Fiachrach. We see M222+ results for these dynastical groupings. There were no successfull Viking settlements that survived more then 10-15 years north of Dublin in the East or North of Limerick in the Mid-West. Given that area is heart of M222+ in Ireland (going on Trinity study for one + Busby) it's not surprising we don't see a huge amount of M222 flow into Scandinavia.

With regards to Irish Type III (L226), well the Dál gCais are of course famous for conqueoring the Viking city of Limerick which ended up with it been a Vassal of Brian. The city was actually sacked. Of course the city of Dublin was by far the most important Viking settlement in Ireland and one of their largest trading ports in Europe.