R-U106 counts and data - relationship to L21 and U152

[Mike Walsh]

Here is some more food for thought. Jean M has lot more detail but I'm just overlaying the best I can R-U106 and R-P312 aging. Looking at it from a R-L11 perspective, the closest immediate ancestor to both, may hold the key.

-- L23 - 5475+/-680
-- L51 - 5850+/-860
-- U106 - 4175+/-430
-- P312 - 3950+/-400
-- U152 - 4125+/-450
-- L21 - 3600+/-370  

.....
I guess I need to understand interclade variance better, rather than intraclade variance. Tim J has taken Ken N's latest version of interclade variance calculations and put them into an easier to use spreadsheet, but Tim still thinks the TMRCA's still add up like Anatole's.

Tim redid his TMRCA's and here is his latest perspective from another forum's posting yesterday.

M269: 6500-8500
L23: 6500-8000
L51: 5500-7000
L11: 5000-6500

U106: 4000-5500

P312: 4000-5500
 U152: 3500-5000
 L21: 3500-5500
 M167(SRY2627): 2600-3500

L11 is a key clade as it is where both U106 and P312 fall and it dominates Western Europe.  Using the Myres* data, L11 makes up 95% of all R-M343(R1b) in Western Europe.

Tim J's TMRCA estimate for L11 is essentially 3750 BC, give or take 1500 years. He is using Ken N's intra-clade techniques so I think this is as good as we can get.

Here is a relative aging given by Myres for all of U106 for the oldest locations.

Estonia     12.862
Poland      10.467
Slovakia    9.552
Switzerland 8.963

and below  for all of P312.

Turkey      13.043
Vaucluse(France) 11.270
Germany     10.245
France      10.097
Hungary     9.259
Poland      9.058

Estonia is the only Baltic state that Myres seems to have surveyed but these small states are just to the northeast of Poland. The path from the Polish/Baltic peak age of U106 and the peak for P312 in Anatolia(Turkey) crosses through areas that are considered by some to be the homeland of the Proto-Indo European language (PIE).

David Anthony, author of the "The Horse..." ** contends the Proto-Indo European langaguage (PIE) was spoken from 4000-2500 BC by the peoples in the steppes between the Carpathian and Ural Mountains just north of the Black and Caspian Seas. This overlays the Yamnaya (aka Pit Grave) Horizon or collection of cultures.

Related to the Germanic and Italo-Celtic split, here is what I gleaned from his book.

"It is probably safe to assume that the separations of several western Indo-European branches [Italic, Celtic and Germanic] were associated somehow with these"... three "archeological cross-culture contact areas" between the Yamnaya and to the west from "about 3100 to 2600 BC," during the Early Bronze Age.

1) About 3100-2800 BC, there was "Close integration" with the steppe Usatovo culture (of the lower Danube) and the late Tripolye villages of the upper Dniester and Prut Valleys.  There was clear military dominance of the Usatovo steppe peoples over the upland farmers...  Anthony believes the Usatov culture was mix of the Yamnaya and Tripolye and believes the Pre-Germanic languages started with them.

2) "True folk migration" of Yamnaya horizon peoples in significant numbers into the lower Danube valley (Romania) and the Carpathian Basin (Hungary) and another branch south into Bulgaria. There was a "massive sustained flow of outsiders into a previously settled land". There was some integration with the Corsofeni culture. The Yamnaya in "eastern Hungary" occupied by "larger population of immigrants"  "This regional group could have spawned both pre-Italic and pre-Celtic. Bell beaker sites of the Csepel type around Budapest, west of the Yamnaya settelment region are dated about 2800-2600 BC.  They could have been a bridge between Yamnaya on their east and Austria/Southern Germany to their west, through which Yamnaya dialects spreads from Hungary into Austria and Bavaria, where they later developed into Proto-Celtic. Pre-Italic could have developed  among the dialects that remained in Hungary, ultimately spreading into Italy through the Urnfield and Villanovan cultures."

3) About 2800-2600 BCE "Yamnaya expanded toward the border with the Corded Ware horizon on the Dniester in far northwestern Ukraine." "This meeting was another opportunity for language shift and it is possible that the Pre-Germanic dialects either originated here or were enriched by this additional contact.

Note that Anthony emphasized the Italo-Celtic branch involves "true folk migrations" whereas the Germanic branch involved "close integration". As it turns out Germanic cultures have a strong mix of Hg I people to go with R-U106 and some R1a. Where the Celtic cultures were heaviest, frequencies of R-P312 are quite high, seemingly meaning the Celtic cultures were less mixed, Y DNA wise.

It is interesting, as Jean M has noted, that the Maykop Culture is one of the earliest for metal working and it was in the Caucasus on the southern edge of the Yamnaya's.

Also, it is interesting that if you follow Hawks' "Neolithic Milk Fog" blog logic on including the people of Pakistan/NW India with the same milk drinking gene into the analysis, you'd move the Zeder/Berger's (Speigel article) lactose tolerance core region to the east of Hungary right into these same steppes and just about over the Black Sea.

* "A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe" - 2010.  I used Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Austria, N. Italy AND everything west of these countries as Western Europe.

** "The Horse the Wheel and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes shaped the Modern World" - 2007 by David Anthony

[alan trowel hands.]

I dont know what it is about Anthony's book.   He is very lightweight on the part of the IE story west of eastern Europe although I suppose that isnt the main thrust of what he is saying.  II find his book a very dull read.  Its better than sleeping pills or counting sheep!. Mallory's books on this subject are 100 times more readable. 

[IALEM]

I wa wondering, everybody is trying to link Genes with Languages and Cultures, something I have found rather odd, since biological and cultural traits follow very different patterns. So, thinking about those lines, what if the regions in which the different haplogroups are predominant configure just natural regions in which internal movement of population is easy while movements out of those natural regions are more difficult? I dont exclude the case for the influence of cultural traits separating populations, but it could have worked in an inverse order, first we have a population in a natural region in which an haplogroup becomes dominant, then parto of that population adquires a particular language, so that the speakers of that language have that particular genetic configuration. I think it suits very well the case of Basques and why not, IE languages if they are considered as separated languages rather than monolithic blocks.

[Mike Walsh]

I wa wondering, everybody is trying to link Genes with Languages and Cultures...

I don't think linking these things together is an end in itself. You are right, they don't necessarily align, but sometimes they do, at least partially.

People create, evolve, and expand cultures and leave artifacts behind. People speak languages. People also have genes. They are just puzzle pieces that I think we are speculating with to see if some alignments make sense.

[Mike Walsh]

I was asked this on another forum...

Unfortunately, I don't think there is any truly representative cross-sectional sample of Europe's Y-DNA so the answer to your question is dependent on the data source.

I think "A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe" by Myres et al (2010) is a good as we have for a broad but deep clade tested sample. Here are the percentages of these major subclades expressed in terms of R-M343 (R1b) in Western Europe.

U106 ____ 20.% of all M343
P312 ____ 71.2% " "
_ U152 __ 16.1% " "
_ L21 ___ 15.1% " "
_ P312x _ 40.0% " " (P312* and SRY2627 and M153)

For the definition of Western Europe, look at this map's yellow-dotted lines. http://tiny.cc/9gahy  I also have it subdivided by SW and NW Europe (I have Italy with SE Europe.)

[Mike Walsh]

... Here are the percentages of these major subclades expressed in terms of R-M343 (R1b) in Western Europe.

U106 ____ 20.% of all M343
P312 ____ 71.2% " "
_ U152 __ 16.1% " "
_ L21 ___ 15.1% " "
_ P312x _ 40.0% " " (P312* and SRY2627 and M153)

Below is another view of this looking at FTDNA project data for deep clade tested R-M269 folks, specifically R-L11. I downloaded all of the deep clade tested R-P312 and R-U106 guys I could find but there aren't many R-L11* guys so I didn't include them.

I had to normalize (inflate) U106 up a bit because I didn't do all of the Ysearch research for them like I did for P312. I believe that there is a bias towards L21 because of the amount of testing from British Isles descendant people. I didn't try to normalize for Isles bias so I created 3 categories for Western Europe so you can "normalize" in your own mind. The whole thing is a bit interesting.

% of each P312 and U106 Subclade of the total P312 and U106 with Western Europe Most Distant Known Ancestors in FTDNA projects*

Subclade ____________ W.Cont. _ B.Isles _ Scand. Total

P312/L21 _____________ 18.4% __ 54.8% __ 19.9% ___ 44.0%
P312/SRY2627 __________ 6.6% ___ 3.0% ___ 2.0% ____ 3.8%
P312/L176.2xSRY2627 ___ 0.1% ___ 0.3% ___ 0.7% ____ 0.3%
P312/U152 ____________ 22.8% ___ 5.7% ___ 9.3% ___ 10.1%
P312* ________________ 17.9% ___ 5.8% __ 13.2% ____ 9.2%

U106/L1/Null439 _______ 0.9% ___ 3.1% ___ 2.1% ____ 2.5%
U106/L48 _____________ 13.2% ___ 9.9% __ 20.1% ___ 11.2%
U106/U198 _____________ 0.9% ___ 3.0% ___ 0.0% ____ 2.3%
U106* ________________ 19.2% __ 14.4% __ 32.8% ___ 16.5%

P312 All _____________ 65.8% __ 69.6% __ 45.0% ___ 67.4%
U106 All _____________ 34.2% __ 30.4% __ 55.0% ___ 32.6%

- W. Cont. is West European Continental. (does not include Italy because Myres didn't)
- B. Isles is British Isles
- Scand. is Scandinavia
* Major haplogroup and geographic projects.

[TomGull]

... Here are the percentages of these major subclades expressed in terms of R-M343 (R1b) in Western Europe.

U106 ____ 20.% of all M343
P312 ____ 71.2% " "
_ U152 __ 16.1% " "
_ L21 ___ 15.1% " "
_ P312x _ 40.0% " " (P312* and SRY2627 and M153)

Below is another view of this looking at FTDNA project data for deep clade tested R-M269 folks, specifically R-L11. I downloaded all of the deep clade tested R-P312 and R-U106 guys I could find but there aren't many R-L11* guys so I didn't include them.

I had to normalize (inflate) U106 up a bit because I didn't do all of the Ysearch research for them like I did for P312. I believe that there is a bias towards L21 because of the amount of testing from British Isles descendant people. I didn't try to normalize for Isles bias so I created 3 categories for Western Europe so you can "normalize" in your own mind. The whole thing is a bit interesting.

% of each P312 and U106 Subclade of the total P312 and U106 with Western Europe Most Distant Known Ancestors in FTDNA projects*

Subclade ____________ W.Cont. _ B.Isles _ Scand. Total

P312/L21 _____________ 18.4% __ 54.8% __ 19.9% ___ 44.0%
P312/SRY2627 __________ 6.6% ___ 3.0% ___ 2.0% ____ 3.8%
P312/L176.2xSRY2627 ___ 0.1% ___ 0.3% ___ 0.7% ____ 0.3%
P312/U152 ____________ 22.8% ___ 5.7% ___ 9.3% ___ 10.1%
P312* ________________ 17.9% ___ 5.8% __ 13.2% ____ 9.2%

U106/L1/Null439 _______ 0.9% ___ 3.1% ___ 2.1% ____ 2.5%
U106/L48 _____________ 13.2% ___ 9.9% __ 20.1% ___ 11.2%
U106/U198 _____________ 0.9% ___ 3.0% ___ 0.0% ____ 2.3%
U106* ________________ 19.2% __ 14.4% __ 32.8% ___ 16.5%

P312 All _____________ 65.8% __ 69.6% __ 45.0% ___ 67.4%
U106 All _____________ 34.2% __ 30.4% __ 55.0% ___ 32.6%

- W. Cont. is West European Continental. (does not include Italy because Myres didn't)
- B. Isles is British Isles
- Scand. is Scandinavia
* Major haplogroup and geographic projects.

One quick note on this similar to one I almost posted in a DNA Forums thread. There, I waited too late and the thread got locked due to being a complete train wreck <g>.

The sentence I was going to look at there was "U106 has its highest frequency in the Netherlands" because it was used in a way that also implied that you would find the most actual U106 men in the Netherlands. Given the much larger populations of Germany and the UK, nothing could be less correct. So I was going to note that people should not equate the frequency of one SNP as a percent of R1b-M269 or some other marker with the actual geographic location that has the largest number of people bearing that SNP. You have to multiply by the male population to understand where the largest actual count occurs.

Similarly, when I saw the table above, my first reaction was to go look at the U106 project because I was sure that Scandinavia doesn't have anywhere near that large a percentage of the actual individuals with the U106+ SNP. This is clearly obvious from the map. Then I checked the table again figuring I misunderstood it, and indeed I had. The table is looking at P312 and U106 relative to the sum of those two in the big geographic areas, figuring out how frequent they are in relation to each other. But the numbers might be taken to imply that U106 men are really numerous in Scandinavia and less so further south. Again, if you multiply the actual population sizes out, this just isn't the case. If you look at the maps, that is easy to see, as the UK and Germany and other continental areas have many more hits than Scandinavia in total.

So I guess I'm trying to encourage people to look not only at the SNP percentages in relation to their own groupings, but to recalculate the actual numbers of men in the various areas who carry the SNP. Each metric has something to teach us and I think we've been focused almost exclusively on relative frequencies. While amusing myself with the (freq x population) data one night, I think I realized that Russia may actually have the largest number of U106 men in Europe due to its huge population interacting with the small relative percentage of men there who are U106. A very large number times a very small percentage can still yield a larger total than a small number times a large percentage. 

To say nothing of how many U106 men may exist in the Americas...

[TomGull]

I think it was easy to have a mindset of "U106 is a late invader of the Alps/southern Germany" when people believed it didn't have a solid presence there. But by now, we should be noticing that this isn't what the projects show for sure and now isn't what the studies show. It's a major subclade in those areas. So if a similar subclade is assumed to have a long presence there due to its weighting, it seems gratuituously inconsistent to insist that U106+ arrived much later...

Ken Nordtvedt posted a related observation a few days ago on the Genealogy-DNA RootsWeb list:

"When most people take P312 and U106 haplotype collections and estimate tmrcas for the two they typically come out to be very similar and around 4000 years ago.  But there is a third estimation which can and should be performed --- the node age for the MRCA ancestral to both the P312 and U106 populations.  That age also comes out very close to the same 4000 years.  This means there probably was not much time between the single man ancestral to both haplogroups and the individual MRCAs of the two haplogroups. 

I think this makes it more difficult to sustain scenarios in which the migratory history and geographical details leading up to the two founding events and locations are excessively different from each other. 

There are some constraints in place which probably favor some geographical closeness between these foundings.."