R1b in Western Europe

[1798]

It is great news that we have ancient R1b dna from Spain dated to 7,000ybp. That doesn't infer that all western Europeans are descended from this R1b but its shows that some R1b was in Iberia in 5000 BC. This ancient dna does not have any ANE so had no links to ancient northern Eurasians. 7000 ybp La Brana had 3.98% ANE so there remains a lot of unanswered questions.

[T E Peterman]

If a handful of R1b migrated in from the steppes in the Mesolithic/ Neolithic & settled among the I1 & G2a populations & assimilated as hunter gatherers or pre-equine farmers, intermarried with them over and over, the y-DNA would persist. But the autosomal would quickly be withered to nothing. It takes a wave of settlement to change the autosomal composition of a population.

The R1b found in Spain was not M269+ and likely didn't even share a common ancestor with M269 for at least a few more thousand years in the past.

Timothy Peterman

[1798]

If a handful of R1b migrated in from the steppes in the Mesolithic/ Neolithic & settled among the I1 & G2a populations & assimilated as hunter gatherers or pre-equine farmers, intermarried with them over and over, the y-DNA would persist. But the autosomal would quickly be withered to nothing. It takes a wave of settlement to change the autosomal composition of a population.

The R1b found in Spain was not M269+ and likely didn't even share a common ancestor with M269 for at least a few more thousand years in the past.

Timothy Peterman

Why do I still have 17%ANE after 1000s of years? Why do I still have 64%WHG after 1000s of years?

[Piquerobi]

I think they did the right think. They tested first the core steppe area, not the area near Cucuteni. I'm sure if they had tested near Cucuteni, and it was R1b, you'd be claiming R1b as a Neolithic marker. Now, it turns out R1b is as old as R1a in that area, they both are associated with Eastern European hunter gatherers on an autosomal level, plotting very closely on a genetic map, and both located in Northern Russia. So far, R1b and R1a are Eastern European hunter gatherer markers, from which PIE would emerge. IE expansions carried them far and wide to many different parts of the world. R1b-M269+, R1a-Z93+ and R1a-Z283+ can already be established as part of that, at least speaking of the main Chiefs.

[Piquerobi]

R -> ~ 24000 years ago
R1a and R1b > ~ 7000 years ago

Their locations:


Oldest R1a and R1b and their close autosomal relationship, they lived ~7000 years ago:

[Armando]

Why do I still have 17%ANE after 1000s of years? Why do I still have 64%WHG after 1000s of years?

For one, because it's an apples to oranges comparison. You are comparing two programs based on different source populations. Until David creates a Yamnaya calculator, which still won't be exactly the same thing, you can't even compare them.

Additionally, it also matters how much of a population replacement there has been. If a person moves into a population that is 100% of a certain ancestry then his descendants over 7-8 generations become 100% of that ancestry as long as they always marry someone they aren't related to.

[1798]

For one, because it's an apples to oranges comparison. You are comparing two programs based on different source populations. Until David creates a Yamnaya calculator, which still won't be exactly the same thing, you can't even compare them.

Additionally, it also matters how much of a population replacement there has been. If a person moves into a population that is 100% of a certain ancestry then his descendants over 7-8 generations become 100% of that ancestry as long as they always marry someone they aren't related to.

The 64% WHG that I have is from HG people of western Europe and they were not a big population.


The 14% ENF is from the Middle eastern farmers.


The 17% ANE that I have is from the same group that Motala 12 belonged to. That is how I see it.

[Armando]

The 64% WHG that I have is from HG people of western Europe and they were not a big population.


The 14% ENF is from the Middle eastern farmers.


The 17% ANE that I have is from the same group that Motala 12 belonged to. That is how I see it.

As I have stated before, you will see your Yamnaya ancestry once a calculator is made for it. Then you will have something closer to an apples to apples comparison.

[MMaddi]

I think they did the right think. They tested first the core steppe area, not the area near Cucuteni. I'm sure if they had tested near Cucuteni, and it was R1b, you'd be claiming R1b as a Neolithic marker. Now, it turns out R1b is as old as R1a in that area, they both are associated with Eastern European hunter gatherers on an autosomal level, plotting very closely on a genetic map, and both located in Northern Russia. So far, R1b and R1a are Eastern European hunter gatherer markers, from which PIE would emerge. IE expansions carried them far and wide to many different parts of the world. R1b-M269+, R1a-Z93+ and R1a-Z283+ can already be established as part of that, at least speaking of the main Chiefs.

Thanks for a very concise, yet accurate summary of the findings of the new study. Unfortunately, your explanation will not even get to first base with 1798. He's committed to believing that the ancestors of the R1b that dominates Europe today were in western Europe, specifically in Ireland, 10,000+ years ago.

This is why he picks the fact that a 7,000 year old R1b was found in Spain and omits the fact that the several Yamnaya in the study were of the lineage of modern European R1b. And the 7,000 year old Spanish R1b was not of the lineage of modern European R1b. Dozens of DNA results of European remains from the period of 5,000 to 7,000 years ago show a clear majority of G2 and only one R1b, not related to modern European R1b.

Any reasonable person who's interested in understanding the origin of R1b in Europe would say that it's far more likely, even closed to being established, that it came from the Eurasian steppes about 4,000-5,000 years ago. Only someone with a huge agenda would believe that the one 7,000 year old Spanish R1b not related to modern European R1b means that the ancestors of modern European R1b have been in western Europe for 10,000+ years!

[1798]

Thanks for a very concise, yet accurate summary of the findings of the new study. Unfortunately, your explanation will not even get to first base with 1798. He's committed to believing that the ancestors of the R1b that dominates Europe today were in western Europe, specifically in Ireland, 10,000+ years ago.

This is why he picks the fact that a 7,000 year old R1b was found in Spain and omits the fact that the several Yamnaya in the study were of the lineage of modern European R1b. And the 7,000 year old Spanish R1b was not of the lineage of modern European R1b. Dozens of DNA results of European remains from the period of 5,000 to 7,000 years ago show a clear majority of G2 and only one R1b, not related to modern European R1b.

Any reasonable person who's interested in understanding the origin of R1b in Europe would say that it's far more likely, even closed to being established, that it came from the Eurasian steppes about 4,000-5,000 years ago. Only someone with a huge agenda would believe that the one 7,000 year old Spanish R1b not related to modern European R1b means that the ancestors of modern European R1b have been in western Europe for 10,000+ years!

I am not committed to anything.

It is not surprising that you are ignoring the presence of R1b in Europe before 4000 ybp. All R1b men descend from the same ancestor.

You certainly are not being reasonable. You have only half the amount of ANE that I have.

[MMaddi]

You certainly are not being reasonable. You have only half the amount of ANE that I have.

Is that supposed to be a putdown of me??!! RFLMAO!

If so, that sounds a bit racist to me, like you're saying the only true Europeans are descended from Ancient North Eurasians.

[Piquerobi]

You are welcome! I thank you and Armando for making clear too this important milestone we have reached in understanding R1b-M269. We can be quite certain it is a steppe marker. There is no way it is a native Western European yDNA haplogroup.

Thanks for a very concise, yet accurate summary of the findings of the new study. Unfortunately, your explanation will not even get to first base with 1798. He's committed to believing that the ancestors of the R1b that dominates Europe today were in western Europe, specifically in Ireland, 10,000+ years ago.

This is why he picks the fact that a 7,000 year old R1b was found in Spain and omits the fact that the several Yamnaya in the study were of the lineage of modern European R1b. And the 7,000 year old Spanish R1b was not of the lineage of modern European R1b. Dozens of DNA results of European remains from the period of 5,000 to 7,000 years ago show a clear majority of G2 and only one R1b, not related to modern European R1b.

Any reasonable person who's interested in understanding the origin of R1b in Europe would say that it's far more likely, even closed to being established, that it came from the Eurasian steppes about 4,000-5,000 years ago. Only someone with a huge agenda would believe that the one 7,000 year old Spanish R1b not related to modern European R1b means that the ancestors of modern European R1b have been in western Europe for 10,000+ years!

[1798]

Is that supposed to be a putdown of me??!! RFLMAO!

If so, that sounds a bit racist to me, like you're saying the only true Europeans are descended from Ancient North Eurasians.

No,one would think that the Yamnaya would have left a lot more ANE in the likes of Italy on their way to Ireland.

[MMaddi]

No,one would think that the Yamnaya would have left a lot more ANE in the likes of Italy on their way to Ireland.

I'm sure that an esteemed R1b researcher such as yourself is aware of the fact that R1b is dominant in northern and western Europe, but not so in Italy and the Balkans. One explanation for that, which I believe is true, is that the Carpathians and Alps were a natural barrier to R1b spreading west in Europe through a southern route, so it took a more northerly route.

By the way, that plausible theory would also explain why the P312-/U106- R1b, which is found more in Italy and the Balkans, entered Europe at a different time (the Neolithic) and from a different source (Anatolia) than the the dominant R1b (P312+ or U106+) found in northern and western Europe. This would support a different time (Bronze Age) and different source (the steppes) for this migration of R1b into northern and western Europe. More supporting evidence for what this study found.

Look at a map and the position of the Carpathian and Alps mountain ranges and you'll see how this certainly explains a lot if the ancestors of modern R1b European men entered Europe from the steppes north of the Black Sea.

[1798]

I'm sure that an esteemed R1b researcher such as yourself is aware of the fact that R1b is dominant in northern and western Europe, but not so in Italy and the Balkans. One explanation for that, which I believe is true, is that the Carpathians and Alps were a natural barrier to R1b spreading west in Europe through a southern route, so it took a more northerly route.

By the way, that plausible theory would also explain why the P312-/U106- R1b, which is found more in Italy and the Balkans, entered Europe at a different time (the Neolithic) and from a different source (Anatolia) than the the dominant R1b (P312+ or U106+) found in northern and western Europe. This would support a different time (Bronze Age) and different source (the steppes) for this migration of R1b into northern and western Europe. More supporting evidence for what this study found.

Look at a map and the position of the Carpathian and Alps mountain ranges and you'll see how this certainly explains a lot if the ancestors of modern R1b European men entered Europe from the steppes north of the Black Sea.

The 7000 ybp R1b Spaniard shows that there was multiple R1b migrations into western Europe. You and I should have the same ANE since we are supposed to belong to the same group. That was the point that I was making but you got it all wrong.