World Families Forums - Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA

ARCHIVAL COPY
Home Help Search Login Register

WorldFamilies has changed our Forum Operating system and migrated the postings from the prior system. We hope that you’ll find this new system easier to use and we expect it to manage spammers much better. If you can’t find an old posting, please check our Legacy Forum to see if you can see the old posting there.
+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: Maliclavelli)
| | |-+  Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 17 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA  (Read 121731 times)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #150 on: May 13, 2012, 04:46:09 PM »

I was just reading back through the history of the beaker model for R1b and it seems to go back to spring 2008 on rootsweb

Steve Rich posted somewhere that he saw it first on DNA Forums and gave the name of the chap who came up with it, but now I can't find that post. It was surely around before I arrived on DNA Forums (late 2008?), for I recall being impressed by Stevo's long thread on R1b being the other half of the Indo-European story. I wove that idea into the first version of Peopling of Europe in March 2009, if I recall rightly. I've always credited it to him.  
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 05:49:01 PM by Jean M » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #151 on: May 13, 2012, 05:24:18 PM »

I was just reading back through the history of the beaker model for R1b and it seems to go back to spring 2008 on rootsweb

Steve posted somewhere that he saw it first on DNA Forums and gave the name of the chap who came up with it, but now I can't find that post. It was surely around before I arrived on DNA Forums (late 2008?), for I recall being impressed by Steve's long thread on R1b being the other half of the Indo-European story. I wove that idea into the first version of Peopling of Europe in March 2009, if I recall rightly. I've always credited it to him.  

Steve-you mean Rich?  Think it was Rich who first linked it to the centum-saetem thing to R1b-R1a division.  It actually amazing the spring if 2008 was such a breakrhough time.  I think so much happened because of S116 demolishing the old idea that M269* was really old and U152 and U106 much younger.  I think (although I cant remember exact details) the variance crunchers like Ken, Vince V, Tim Jansen etc had started to show how it was simply impossible for R1b to be pre-Neolithic because in relative terms that would have made I about 80000 years old.  I think it was the discovery of P312 allowed it to be crunched separately that showed how badly wrong the old model was.  I remember a post by Tim stating that was what convinced me around spring 2008.  Prior to that in 2007 if not earlier the one person who really saw this early was Ellen Levy who was like a lone voice. Initially though the variance dates being suggested were well post-beaker (think it was something like 1500BC) which clearly didnt seem right.  I think that was down to them being intraclade dates.  More recently the the dates using interclades just keep falling  on the beaker period.   Actually the whole period in the 1st half of 2008 was probably the biggest single group volte-face in this hobby and a lot of effort prior to this was pretty pointless and I think a lot of folks (me included) would have done some sort of mass deletion of old posts if the format on rootsweb allowed it :0)  Still the original dates being offered made me do a ton of reading into the Upper Palaeolithic period which I suppose is useful even if it was all kind of pointless in terms of R1b in the end.  
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 05:26:19 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #152 on: May 13, 2012, 05:50:00 PM »

Steve-you mean Rich?   

Yes - sorry. Corrected.
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #153 on: May 13, 2012, 06:03:42 PM »

Steve Rich posted somewhere that he saw it first on DNA Forums and gave the name of the chap who came up with it, but now I can't find that post.

Found it! (I was looking on the wrong forum.)

Quote
Quote
The first person I ever recall making the Beaker Folk/R1b connection was a man named Rick Arnold. That was back in 2008 at the now-defunct dna-forums web site.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?27508-Bell-Beakers-from-Germany-Y-haplogroup-R1b
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 06:04:01 PM by Jean M » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #154 on: May 13, 2012, 06:06:07 PM »

I actually cant remember when I got into this hobby lol.  I think I first posted on rootsweb in 2006 but was lurking for a couple of years.  I got into the whole R1b thing donkeys years back and out of macro-interest and I got the book archaeolgenetics.  It wasnt for geneaological interest and I dont think I tested for anything until early 2008 a long time after I was first interested.  I was pleased it came up R1b though at the time then P312 then L21 etc.  I wonder how many people are around in the hobby who were posting on rootsweb when it took off 12 years ago.  
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #155 on: May 13, 2012, 06:08:32 PM »

Looks like Rick Arnold actually had this idea back in 2006.
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-10/1160236277

In this post 7 October 2006, he says :
Quote
This whole cline of R1b speaks Indo-European. Basque is the exception to this rule. It seems more parsimonious to argue that R1b brought Indo-European rather than had it imposed upon them all across W. Europe, with the single Basque exception. And if IE is as young as usually claimed, then this scenario, if supported, would seem to support the original post.

Elsewhere in the same thread Bell Beaker is specifically mentioned.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 06:11:03 PM by Jean M » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #156 on: May 13, 2012, 06:16:10 PM »

Steve Rich posted somewhere that he saw it first on DNA Forums and gave the name of the chap who came up with it, but now I can't find that post.

Found it! (I was looking on the wrong forum.)

Quote
Quote
The first person I ever recall making the Beaker Folk/R1b connection was a man named Rick Arnold. That was back in 2008 at the now-defunct dna-forums web site.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?27508-Bell-Beakers-from-Germany-Y-haplogroup-R1b

I always had mixed feelings about DNA forums and quit it a couple of times.  It was lively and easy to use but it always seemed to have a lot of hot heads popping up from time to time and IMO some more moderation was needed.  I think for a period a lot of the big guns on rootsweb didnt like the roughhouse aspect of DNA forums.  Rootsweb was drier but more civilised.  Now it just doesnt seem worth checking.   
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #157 on: May 13, 2012, 06:23:58 PM »

Looks like Rick Arnold actually had this idea back in 2006.
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-10/1160236277

In this post 7 October 2006, he says :
Quote
This whole cline of R1b speaks Indo-European. Basque is the exception to this rule. It seems more parsimonious to argue that R1b brought Indo-European rather than had it imposed upon them all across W. Europe, with the single Basque exception. And if IE is as young as usually claimed, then this scenario, if supported, would seem to support the original post.

Elsewhere in the same thread Bell Beaker is specifically mentioned.

Kudos to whoever that was because at that time it was gong against the grain.  The thread is way too big for me to look through.  The horror of Oppenheimers book!  That book actually was a major clue that the dating methods were wrong.  I think some of his clusters in Ireland were 4000 years older than the settlement of Ireland!  Also some of the obviously Viking movements from Scandinavia to NE Scotland came out Neolithic or Bronze Age.  His book really came out at a bad time and was pretty well disproved within months. 
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #158 on: May 13, 2012, 06:30:18 PM »

Has anyone noticed there is a big gap between the first ever post on DNA rootsweb and the next posts?  Weird.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #159 on: May 14, 2012, 07:54:32 PM »

Try this old thread from September of 2006. I am "Stevo" over at FTDNA's forum, as I was at dna-forums.

I was the first one that I know of to suggest the R1b/IE connection. Back then it was just not done. We were Cro-Magnons back then.

Rick Arnold was the first one to suggest a connection to the Beaker Folk, as I recall.
Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #160 on: May 15, 2012, 04:26:11 AM »

Thanks. I will adjust my acknowledgement. I don't give one specifically on Bell Beaker. That idea follows logically from the recognition of the overall correlation of R1a1a and R1b1b2 with IE languages, and the linguistic and archaeological links already deduced long before. 
« Last Edit: May 15, 2012, 05:21:36 AM by Jean M » Logged
Arwunbee
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47


« Reply #161 on: May 15, 2012, 05:50:02 AM »

Please also put in your acknowledgements that I was the first to suggest a link between M222 in Germany and randy Irish monks.
Logged

Map of L44 subclade (of U106): http://g.co/maps/9xswy
Maliclavelli
Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2189


« Reply #162 on: May 15, 2012, 06:16:26 AM »

Please also put in your acknowledgements that I was the first to suggest a link between M222 in Germany and randy Irish monks.
You will be the first candidate to the next IgNobel Prize.
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-Z2110


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #163 on: May 15, 2012, 06:52:08 AM »

Please also put in your acknowledgements that I was the first to suggest a link between M222 in Germany and randy Irish monks.

Oh is it yourself Miles? I get confused with all these sock-puppets running around the place. I will not be hinting at any variety of sexual scandal associated with any variety of religion. As we know religious persons are never associated with sexual scandal by anyone who wants to get through book-signings without being covered in the ingredients for Spanish omelette.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #164 on: May 15, 2012, 08:30:06 AM »

Try this old thread from September of 2006. I am "Stevo" over at FTDNA's forum, as I was at dna-forums.

I was the first one that I know of to suggest the R1b/IE connection. Back then it was just not done. We were Cro-Magnons back then.

Rick Arnold was the first one to suggest a connection to the Beaker Folk, as I recall.
This is what I remember as well.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #165 on: May 15, 2012, 03:36:41 PM »

Also kudos to the people like Mike and Ken whose interclade methods have been coming up with beaker period dates and now seem to being vindicated by the ancient DNA.  OK one sample is one sample (which goes for Corded Ware and R1a too) but the variance methods do seem to be getting vindicated and people who thought they were miles out, worthless and others who thought they were a little bit out (including me at times) seem to have been wrong to doubt.

The challenge now is to bring better focus into the M269-L23-L51-L11* sequence.  Somewhere in there must be the detail of the origins of these beaker R1b lines. 
Logged
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #166 on: May 18, 2012, 09:18:04 AM »

Some bad news regarding the German R1b+ BB samples: They have exhausted the DNA and therefore do not have the possibility to test for L23, L11, U152, L21, DF27.

It would be good for future BB studies to start with M269 and test downstream from there.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #167 on: May 18, 2012, 09:46:54 AM »

.....Either way, your graph does show interclades between U152, L21 and Z196 all being within the 3000-2800 BC time period, and we can expect the Z196 one to go higher with the inclusion of some DF27* folks in the future.
This it is also possible that the inclusion of DF27* folks with its Z196 subclade will not make DF27 look significantly older than Z196.  Z196's extant branching may be very diverse. In other words, enough diverse branches of the Z196 branches may have survived to give a representative estimate of age. DF27 just may not be that much older. We don't know.

We also know that the individual U152, L21 and Z196 coalescence dates are younger than the SNPs themselves because they only represent the successful lineages and do not take into account dead branches. The interclades may be for a common ancestor, but with the additional knowledge that the modals of U152, L21 and DF27 are identical, we can further deduce that their individual appearances was not far apart from each other. The point really is that 2500 BC is definitely not too old to be talking about U152, L21 and DF27 for these BB samples.
 
I absolutely agree.

To follow my previous scenario - if the extremely dense BB finds in Brittany were L51* or L11* or P312* - not only would these lineages have had to have died out in order to have L21 come in and completely replace them, but the same would have to have happened simultaneously in Iberia, the British Isles, the Rhine, the Rhone, N. Italy, etc. To me, the likelihood of that scenario is highly unlikely.
I don't know, but I tend to agree that L21 and his L51*, L11*, P312* cousins probably had similar technological and cultural practices as well as biological similarities, therefore we have no reason to think L21 could come in later and replace his cousins.

Let me argue the other side, though.  I could see the possibility of a scenario similar to the arrival of Europeans in parts of the New World.  Early explorers, hunters, trappers, etc. may have come in and intermarried with natives but not significantly changed the existing New World cultural practices and technologies. Later, a full wave of settlers may have come and truly colonized the new territories, truly changing the culture and changing the population structure.  This could have happened with some forms of L51*, L11*, P312* leading the way but essentially being swamped by the colonizing L21 led folks.

This alternative is possible, but I tend to think that didn't happen with L21 (coming later) in the British Isles. I lean towards Richard Rocca's view because L21's age is not that different than P312's or even L11's in Europe.  The first wave of R1b incomers that made a lasting impact probably included L21.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 09:48:38 AM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #168 on: May 18, 2012, 09:50:29 AM »

Some bad news regarding the German R1b+ BB samples: They have exhausted the DNA and therefore do not have the possibility to test for L23, L11, U152, L21, DF27.

It would be good for future BB studies to start with M269 and test downstream from there.
Wow!  I would have thought if I was dealing with something so perishable or in short supply I would have held off doing anything until I figured out how to do it all or leave open the door for comprehensive testing.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 06:39:18 PM by Mikewww » Logged

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

Posts: 523


« Reply #169 on: May 18, 2012, 09:57:04 AM »

Some bad news regarding the German R1b+ BB samples: They have exhausted the DNA and therefore do not have the possibility to test for L23, L11, U152, L21, DF27.

It would be good for future BB studies to start with M269 and test downstream from there.
Wow!  I would have thought if I was dealing with something so perishable or in short supply I would have held off doing anything until I figured out how to do or leave open the door for comprehensive testing.

Fortunately there are other teams in Europe looking to do BB aDNA extraction.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #170 on: May 18, 2012, 10:00:21 AM »

Let me argue the other side, though.  I could see the possibility of a scenario similar to the arrival of Europeans in parts of the New World.  Early explorers, hunters, trappers, etc. may have come in and intermarried with natives but not significantly changed the existing New World cultural practices and technologies. Later, a full wave of settlers may have come and truly colonized the new territories, truly changing the culture and changing the population structure.  This could have happened with some forms of L51*, L11*, P312* leading the way but essentially being swamped by the colonizing L21 led folks.

An excellent analogy, though in the case of the Copper Age we need to think in terms of much smaller numbers. In the Surfing hypothesis, L21 gained by being at the head of the wave of advance, where the number migrating is smallest. Multiplication took place at the destination end. Either way I agree that L21 must have been in the Copper Age sweep across France and the British Isles.

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

Posts: 2012


« Reply #171 on: May 18, 2012, 11:33:26 AM »

.....Either way, your graph does show interclades between U152, L21 and Z196 all being within the 3000-2800 BC time period, and we can expect the Z196 one to go higher with the inclusion of some DF27* folks in the future.
This it is also possible that the inclusion of DF27* folks with its Z196 subclade will not make DF27 look significantly older than Z196.  Z196's extant branching may be very diverse. In other words, enough diverse branches of the Z196 branches may have survived to give a representative estimate of age. DF27 just may not be that much older. We don't know.

We also know that the individual U152, L21 and Z196 coalescence dates are younger than the SNPs themselves because they only represent the successful lineages and do not take into account dead branches. The interclades may be for a common ancestor, but with the additional knowledge that the modals of U152, L21 and DF27 are identical, we can further deduce that their individual appearances was not far apart from each other. The point really is that 2500 BC is definitely not too old to be talking about U152, L21 and DF27 for these BB samples.
 
I absolutely agree.

To follow my previous scenario - if the extremely dense BB finds in Brittany were L51* or L11* or P312* - not only would these lineages have had to have died out in order to have L21 come in and completely replace them, but the same would have to have happened simultaneously in Iberia, the British Isles, the Rhine, the Rhone, N. Italy, etc. To me, the likelihood of that scenario is highly unlikely.
I don't know, but I tend to agree that L21 and his L51*, L11*, P312* cousins probably had similar technological and cultural practices as well as biological similarities, therefore we have no reason to think L21 could come in later and replace his cousins.

Let me argue the other side, though.  I could see the possibility of a scenario similar to the arrival of Europeans in parts of the New World.  Early explorers, hunters, trappers, etc. may have come in and intermarried with natives but not significantly changed the existing New World cultural practices and technologies. Later, a full wave of settlers may have come and truly colonized the new territories, truly changing the culture and changing the population structure.  This could have happened with some forms of L51*, L11*, P312* leading the way but essentially being swamped by the colonizing L21 led folks.

This alternative is possible, but I tend to think that didn't happen with L21 (coming later) in the British Isles. I lean towards Richard Rocca's view because L21's age is not that different than P312's or even L11's in Europe.  The first wave of R1b incomers that made a lasting impact probably included L21.

I would agree with that and that is what I was weighing up on the L51* thread.  I think the constant fission of lineages on the move would not only lose minority elements but create a string of founder effects at the head of the wave.  I totally agree that by the time P312 was reaching areas where a downstream clade like L21 was very dominant they must have already enterted the area in that kind of proportion. 

The way I look at it the section of the spread of M269 in the bell beaker zone probably commenced with a group with some L23* and L51* and L11* may well have been happening during the move too.  I would tend to think then that by the time th Rhone was reached that we had a fission that led to a group with only a small amount of L23* and L51* and L11* and P312 took off somewhere around the mouth of the Rhone or adjacent.  From there I imagine that P312* really took off accompanied by small amounts of upstream clades like L51* and L11* and set off in all directions. Subtle differences in location and direction may have meant that U152 expanded in the Alpine and Italian direction while another sailed west for Iberia.  Its extremely tempting to see L21 as having moved as P312* up the upper Loire with L21* occurring there and heading mainly up that route in a small group whose further fission meant it was very L21* rich.  I think you can see the effect of fission or founder effects in the limited distribution of L51* which appears to have ceased to be a factor that can be measured even in a large sample by around 2600BC when you compare its spread and beaker spread/dating.  Of course the pattern wasnt all set in one phase but I think it is likely that the strong regionalisation of clades like L21, U152 etc indicates that a lot of the basic bedrock of the pattern was set in an early phase.  If that is the case, more modest distances of movements (which may have been common) to and fro between area may not be detectable at that level of resolution.  I would imagine short hope exchange of genes would have been common and large leaps less so.  You would think that in a patriarchal society that males would do less friendly movement but the later Celtic practices of fosterage, warriors as dowrys coming with royal brides, traders being welcomed etc would have created at least some male gene flow too.  I also dont think an exploratory phase can be ruled out but we dont really need to cite that to explain L51* distribution other than the south Ulster blob because the distribution is very similar to that of early beaker in general and could have been people mixed in with L11 folks.   
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #172 on: May 18, 2012, 11:47:49 AM »

I dont know if this is right but I also would imagine the descrepancy between interclade dates for P312 and the intraclade dates could partly be due to a settling in period when the lineages were still a small minority and obviously lines could die out relativley easily.  Perhaps after a number of centuries the size of the P312 clade populations grew to the point that lineage loss would not have such a dramatic effect on intraclade dates.  I think we can see in the continuation of aspects of the pre-beaker traditions in the ritual sphere (even at Stonehenge) that there was a period when beaker type culture and lineages were a factor but not the only factor in the population.  I call this delayed hegemony where the real impact and ownershipof resources that gave unlimited growth may have been delayed a few centuries as their culture eclipsed the pre-beaker one.  You can see strong hints of this in Ireland where it was only a couple of centuries after the beaker arrival c. 2500-2400BC that classic beaker type single burial traditions become dominant around the food vessel period (which despite the pot change was very beaker orientated and apparently beaker in human phenotypes) c. 2200BC.  Prior to that you had a more patchy spread of beaker period Wedge tombs in key areas for metal orientated and trading people and incorporation of beaker elements within pre-beaker type cremations with token deposits in other area of Ireland.   
Logged
jerome72
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #173 on: May 18, 2012, 11:48:41 PM »

And if both German  was HT35!
 That would be proof that the Beaker is not responsible for the distribution of R1b in Western Europe!
 For me, this discovery proves nothing!
 Sorry!
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #174 on: May 19, 2012, 01:27:24 AM »

And if both German  was HT35!
 That would be proof that the Beaker is not responsible for the distribution of R1b in Western Europe!
 For me, this discovery proves nothing!
 Sorry!

I don't think anything has been proven other than we now know that R-M269 was among at least some elements of Bell Beakers.

We also know that R-M269 has NOT been found yet among at early Neolithic sites, although other clades (like Hg G) have. Neither has R-M343 (R1B) M269- been found in aDNA.

If the the Beaker aDNA in Germany was Ht35, that proves nothing as well.  We know from today's distribution that L11- types of R-M269 are found scattered across Europe along with with the predominate L11+ types.

However, I think we have to note there is the correlation of TMRCA dating for R-M269 L11 subclades with the finding of R-M269 (unknown types) Bell Beaker aDNA. This overlaps with at least parts of the Bell Beaker era.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2012, 10:16:56 AM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 17 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


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

Page created in 0.147 seconds with 19 queries.