Why is the UK closer to Denmark than Ireland Genetically? Is it Bell beakers or Saxons?

[Bellbeaking]

Fst distance chart

83953

Did the UK get more bell beaker (proto-celtic/germanic) ancestry?


source: https://genome.cshlp.org/content/early/2009/03/05/gr.083394.108.full.pdf

[Bellbeaking]

Is this due to Reichs Dutch bell beakers replacing 90% of British ancestry but less in ireland, leaving the Irish with more Neolithic DNA?

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25738

[Thorns]

Could be something like that.

[Grace O'Malley]

Is this due to Reichs Dutch bell beakers replacing 90% of British ancestry but less in ireland, leaving the Irish with more Neolithic DNA?

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25738

No the Irish had the massive population replacement as well and have less Neolithic than the British and higher ANE. Britain is closer to all European populations than Ireland especially the English. There could be lots of factors but some of the reasons are just being closer geographically but also Ireland has been a bit more isolated and has had more drift than populations like the English. The English are also somewhat more admixed than the Irish. The same situation would be Orcadians but even more extreme than the Irish. The English would also be closer to a country like Denmark because the Anglo-Saxons who had a genetic input into Britain especially the English were very similar genetically to the Danes.

[Grace O'Malley]

Here's a FST genetic distance table just to illustrate my point about what happens to populations that are more isolated and suffer drift. This has Ireland and Orkney. Unfortunately it doesn't have the English or any other British population other than Orcadians. You can see the large genetic distances that Orcadians are to other populations.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3343/5815310162_b536dd4de5_b.jpg

Here's another one that has Irish, Scots, English so it is interesting to compare. This one is from Cavalli-Sforza. Notice the difference between English with all populations in comparison to the Irish.

https://slideplayer.com/slide/13159664/79/images/15/FST+Genetic+Distance+between+19+European+Populatio ns+%28x+10%2C000%29.jpg

[Bellbeaking]

No the Irish had the massive population replacement as well and have less Neolithic than the British and higher ANE. Britain is closer to all European populations than Ireland especially the English. There could be lots of factors but some of the reasons are just being closer geographically but also Ireland has been a bit more isolated and has had more drift than populations like the English. The English are also somewhat more admixed than the Irish. The same situation would be Orcadians but even more extreme than the Irish. The English would also be closer to a country like Denmark because the Anglo-Saxons who had a genetic input into Britain especially the English were very similar genetically to the Danes.

This is a good point, the Irish may have had more Drift. Though Britain got more Neolithic around 300 AD possibly from celtic invasions? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics. It is likely that the Brits got more Continental DNA over the years from both Neolithic and Yamnaya peoples.

Do you have a source for complete irish population replacement, I was under the impression it was only 2/3rds there? Also source for Ireland having less neolithic DNA, as Ireland is a little more similar to France, but england a little more similar to germany according to that PoBI study.

[Imperator Biff]

This is a good point, the Irish may have had more Drift. Though Britain got more Neolithic around 300 AD possibly from celtic invasions? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics. It is likely that the Brits got more Continental DNA over the years from both Neolithic and Yamnaya peoples.

Do you have a source for complete irish population replacement, I was under the impression it was only 2/3rds there? Also source for Ireland having less neolithic DNA, as Ireland is a little more similar to France, but england a little more similar to germany according to that PoBI study.
The POBI study focused on modern dna not ancient. And it was specifically northwest French. According to Reich himself English are more neolithic shifted due to their closer proximity to the continent. Irish have slightly more steppe ancestry than Brits and the beaker replacement was also just as total there.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43712587

[Dna8]

Apologies, I'm not familiar with your part of Europe.. so there is some kind of conclusive quantitative genetic evidence for dissimilarity between Ireland, and England, for instance?

How does one then account for the similarity in looks?

[Lucas]

There was suggestion (from Reich also?) that in SE-England some post-Roman settlers survived Anglo-Saxon invasion, especially in cities. They should be mostly local Briton genetically but some continental input can't be neglected among them. What do you think?

[Grace O'Malley]

Apologies, I'm not familiar with your part of Europe.. so there is some kind of conclusive quantitative genetic evidence for dissimilarity between Ireland, and England, for instance?

How does one then account for the similarity in looks?

No they are quite close genetically. England always had more interaction and geneflow from the European continent and just looking at a map will explain why. Ireland has always been more isolated due to geography and was always reached either through Britain i.e this is how the Normans came to Ireland and via sea i.e. Vikings etc. Romans for example never came to Ireland.

First people that came to Ireland also came via Britain first.

[Grace O'Malley]

There was suggestion (from Reich also?) that in SE-England some post-Roman settlers survived Anglo-Saxon invasion, especially in cities. They should be mostly local Briton genetically but some continental input can't be neglected among them. What do you think?

You've been looking at genetics now for quite a while. What's your take on the Irish and English i.e. differences or similarities?

[Bellbeaking]

1994 is way too old to be posting here as well, pls don't do that

[Bellbeaking]

Apologies, I'm not familiar with your part of Europe.. so there is some kind of conclusive quantitative genetic evidence for dissimilarity between Ireland, and England, for instance?

How does one then account for the similarity in looks?

Yes the post I sourced. Most Fst Charts also show England being closer to netherlands than Ireland. They look similar, but all NW euros look pretty similar barring slight differences in frequencies of hair/eye colour.

[Smaug]

Britain has higher input from the continent than Ireland.

[♥ Lily ♥]

Jutes came from Denmark. Also, half of England was once ruled by Danes. The genes must've come from the Jutes and also from the era of the Danelaw over England:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?244454-Danish-Kings-And-Rulers-Of-England

[Bellbeaking]

Jutes came from Denmark. Also, half of England was once ruled by Danes. The genes must've come from the Jutes and also from the era of the Danelaw over England:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?244454-Danish-Kings-And-Rulers-Of-England

Yes but this alone shouldn't be enough to pull the whole english genome towards denmark and netherlands. the Fst chart shows england as literally twice as close to the netherlands.

[Dna8]

Interesting posts.. still, to my eye, the closest aesthetics to the English one, are Irish/Welsh/Scottish, followed by Continental (including of course, Scandinavian) ones..

[Bellbeaking]

Interesting posts.. still, to my eye, the closest aesthetics to the English one, are Irish/Welsh/Scottish, followed by Continental (including of course, Scandinavian) ones..

Agree, they seem similar to south dutch and belgians too.

[Dacul]

You do not take into account that these graphs are made with a limited number of people from some area of England or Ireland?
England had AngloSaxons, Romans, Danes, besides Bretton Kelts.
Later, they got the Normans.
Is normal to have the English people quite diverse as genetics.

[Bellbeaking]

You do not take into account that these graphs are made with a limited number of people from some area of England or Ireland?
England had AngloSaxons, Romans, Danes, besides Bretton Kelts.
Later, they got the Normans.
Is normal to have the English people quite diverse as genetics.

very true dacul, how do i rep on here

[Dna8]

There was suggestion (from Reich also?) that in SE-England some post-Roman settlers survived Anglo-Saxon invasion, especially in cities. They should be mostly local Briton genetically but some continental input can't be neglected among them. What do you think?

I agree.. makes sense for some Continental gene flow..


No they are quite close genetically. England always had more interaction and geneflow from the European continent and just looking at a map will explain why. Ireland has always been more isolated due to geography and was always reached either through Britain i.e this is how the Normans came to Ireland and via sea i.e. Vikings etc. Romans for example never came to Ireland.

First people that came to Ireland also came via Britain first.

Presumably, the strongest and most proliferated genetic inputs had ages and ages to homogenize the British Isles to some extent, from the Mesolithic period to time of the first Roman landings?


Yes the post I sourced. Most Fst Charts also show England being closer to netherlands than Ireland. They look similar, but all NW euros look pretty similar barring slight differences in frequencies of hair/eye colour.

Cheers

I'm not sure how straightforwardly such data corresponds to phenotype.. IMO, English, Scottish, Irish, Northern Irish, Welsh all resemble each other more than they do any Continental types..


Britain has higher input from the continent than Ireland.

Agreed.. would you say a majority of foreign genetics, having made landing, spread outwards across today's countries?

[Dna8]

You do not take into account that these graphs are made with a limited number of people from some area of England or Ireland?
England had AngloSaxons, Romans, Danes, besides Bretton Kelts.
Later, they got the Normans.
Is normal to have the English people quite diverse as genetics.

Agreed.. and, I'd add, it would be normal for admixture to spread out from England..

[Bellbeaking]

It is an interesting Fst Chart, it would be good if we could get more of them!

[♥ Lily ♥]

You do not take into account that these graphs are made with a limited number of people from some area of England or Ireland?
England had AngloSaxons, Romans, Danes, besides Bretton Kelts.
Later, they got the Normans.
Is normal to have the English people quite diverse as genetics.

The Romans retreated from Great Britain after the Roman Empire collapsed, before Angles, Jutes, and Saxons invaded and took over our island. The Angles, Jutes, and Saxons came from Denmark and Northern Germany, prior to the Norse and Danish Viking settlers and the Danelaw over England, and prior to the Norman Conquest.

The Normans (which means 'North Man') were descended from Vikings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans

Indigneous Celts in the British Isles didn't arrive here from Brittany in north-west France... the Bretons descend from British Celts who migrated there from Cornwall and Devon.

Bretons didn't migrate to Great Britain;- it's the other way around.

Bretons trace much of their heritage to groups of Brittonic speakers who emigrated from southwestern Great Britain to Brittany in France, particularly from Cornwall and Devon, mostly during the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretons


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuJ6zeMlVSY