Pre-Indo-European genetics?

[Albion]

OK, I'm quite confused. I've always thought R1b was native one of the founding haplogroups of Europe if you like and that the first Britons after the Last Glacial Maximum must have been R1b.
But I read on Europedia (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#R1b) that R1b is indo-European and replaced an earlier population and on the map below it is well-represented in the Basques, a people who don't speak Indo-European and are said to be pre-Indo-Europeans.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b.gif

So if R1b is Indo-European how did it come to dominate so much in the Basques? And what haplogroups are associated with Pre-Indo-Europeans? Are modern Europeans mostly pre-Indo-Europeans or Indo-Europeans in genes?

[Albion]

I just found the following on Wikipedia: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe)


From a Y-chromosome perspective, Semino proposed that the large haplogroup R1 is an ancient Eurasiatic marker brought in by Homo sapiens who diffused west into Europe ~ 40 ky ago. Haplogroup I might represent another putative Palaeolithic marker whose age has been estimated to ~ 22 kYa.


Cinnioglu sees evidence for the existence of an Anatolian refuge, which also harboured Hg R1b1b2.[66] Today, R1b dominates the y chromosome landscape of western Europe and the British Isles, suggesting that there could have been large population composition changes based on migrations after the LGM.
Semino, Passarino and Pericic place the origins of haplogroup R1a within the Ukrainian ice-age refuge. Its current distribution in eastern Europe and parts of Scandinavia are in part reflective of a re-peopling of Europe from the southern Russian/Ukrainian steppes during the Late Glacial Maximum.

I've never heard of the Anatolian LGM refuge and it seems totally weird to suggest that it came from Anatolia and then basically became the predominant type in Western Europe which is the opposite of what you'd expect (if it is from Anatolia then Eastern Europe would make more sense).
I don't know if I believe the Anatolia theory, I doubt that R1b was just subsequently pushed out of Eastern Europe or overwhelmed by R1a.

[Frederick]

Pre Indio European Y-DNA from Europe is unknown.
Y-DNA is very instabile in corpses and only with much luck you can get Y-DNA from a corpse older than say, 2-3K years.

The oldest ever really found Y-DNA on European soil is a R1a1a* one, in a "Corded Ware" (formerly known as "Battle Axe people") grave from 2600BC, found in East Germany.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Corded_Ware_culture.png

R1a male, K female and their children:
http://static.rp-online.de/layout/showbilder/39437-afp_skelett_NUR_TEXT_387474-01-08.jpg

http://static.rp-online.de/layout/fotos/457x325/39437-skelett_familie_387475-01-08.jpg

[Ibericus]

Pre Indio European Y-DNA from Europe is unknown.
pre-IE yDNA is tought to be subclades of haplogroup I, read the study of Balaresque et al. 2010

[Damião de Góis]

No one knows the answer to the questions you are asking. The current accepted theory is that R1b came from Anatolia into Europe. But if it came from the east, it doesn't make much sense that it's so strong in western Europe and close to absent in eastern Europe.

[Frederick]

pre-IE yDNA is tought to be subclades of haplogroup I, read the study of Balaresque et al. 2010

I prefer "smoking guns" (tested corpses).
All those theories change like some people change underwear.

in the 1990s they wanted to tell us that a large part of proto Europeans had been R1 and that the R1 that fled to Iberia became R1b and the R1 that fled to Ukraine became R1a.

Smoking guns or it hasnt happend. :D

[Sahson]

Battle axe culture, and Bell beaker culture were also pre-indo-european.

[Frederick]

Battle axe culture, and Bell beaker culture were also pre-indo-european.

There is no proof what language they spoke.

A few years back, the Battle Axe people had been thought the original Indo Europeans for example. ;)

The Nazis claimed the Battle Axe people to be the Masterrace that came to Europe.

Wonder what they would say now, if they knew all Battle Axe people tested so far are R1a LOL

[Agrippa]

The first problem is, that there were many waves of colonisers, coming from many directions, to the areas not or less densely populated during and after the last Ice Age.

This means that pre-Indo-European doesn't have to mean Palaeolithic, not even Mesolithic obviously.

Secondly, R1b might have been widespread already, when the Indo-Europeans came into existence, so it is just quite likely, that R1b-carriers, together with many other haplogroup-representatives, were present among PIE people and taken with those.

So my current opinion is, that we have to look for higher resolutions and subtypes of R1 rather, if wanting to differentiate non-IE from PIE.

Anyway, further tests might prove it, currently there is a huge study running, from what I gathered, about the Kurgan culture, they test a lot of samples, hopefully yDNA too, that, together with the already tested LBK and other samples, might really help to increase our knowledge about that crucial prehistoric issue.


Wonder what they would say now, if they knew all Battle Axe people tested so far are R1a

Not too many were tested so far though, and the same lines still exist in Germany, R1a is present among Germanics, up to Norway and Sweden.

Also, most of anthropologists of the 30's saw different influences coming together as well, in forming the Germanic people.

And we still don't know all processes behind the current distribution of haplogroups/-types.

F.e. I1 might have had expanded from a rather lower level in a rather short period of time:

According to Nordtvedt, most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of I1 lived from 4,000 to 6,000 years ago somewhere in the far northern part of Europe, perhaps Denmark. His descendants are primarily found among the Germanic populations of northern Europe and the bordering Uralic and Celtic populations, although even in traditionally German demographics I1 is overshadowed by the more prevalent Haplogroup R.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I1_(Y-DNA)

[Albion]

I was reading a few things, I generally got this picture:


R1 formed in Central Asia / Southern Siberia and R1b split off and headed to Europe in a East to West direction. At the same time I was entering the Balkans via Anatolia.
N originated in the Northern Urals or Samoyedia and spread to North East Europe and Finland.
Finally R1a entered from the same direction as R1b, partially displacing R1b, I and N perhaps through outbreeding them.
Other minor admixtures entered from the Middle East with Megalithic people and farming but didn't have much overall effect.


I've also read some stuff which goes against conventional views of Indo-European origins a bit, it goes something like this:


R1b carried "Vasconic Languages" into Europe which explains Basque. These languages were spoken by the Augrinacians and now form the substratum (retained features of past languages) in the Celtic and many other European language families.
The I populations may have spoken Vasconic, or something else which contributed to the non-IE superstratum in Germanic (Overlay of non-Indo European words)
The N population carried Finno-Ugric into Europe, the languages of the present Finns, Estonians, Magyars, Mari and etc.
Then R1b, N and I were joined by R1a which outbred the R1b, I and N groups in much of Europe. The R1a people brought the superior cold-adapted Gravettian culture as the climate deteriorated again, allowing for the quick spread of the culture and language across Europe. Before the culture was transmitted to the other groups it gave the R1a gravettians an advantage which allowed them to outbreed the other groups in much of Eastern Europe. The language they spoke could have been Indo-European.
The other groups eventually adopted the Gravettian or similar cultures and with it the Indo-European languages. With the adoption of the Gravettian culture, the other groups were able to survive and the haplogroups stabilised generally.
Basques and the Finnic languages represent the remnants of the non-IE languages.


So most of what I've written is probably controversial, in summary:


R1b and I were perhaps the first male lines in Europe, joined by N,R1a and then the minor ones.
The R1b and perhaps I groups spoke Vasconic which survives in Basque and the N spoke Finno-Ugric.
The climate deteriorated and the R1a brought a culture better adapted to the conditions and with it Indo-European languages which spread to most of the other groups.
Indo-European didn't arrive with farming but instead with the initial peopling of Europe.


So yeah, I really don't know how good any of this is,it is what I saw suggested on a few sites.

[Sturmgewehr]

Pre Indo European Haplogorups were the Neolithic E1b1b or more precisely the E V13 Subclade and J2b, also Haplogroup I

The Indo European Haplogroup as far as I have read is R1a

[Agrippa]

Pre Indo European Haplogorups were the Neolithic E1b1b or more precisely the E V13 Subclade and J2b, also Haplogroup I

The Indo European Haplogroup as far as I have read is R1a

Why should all Indo-Europeans, which for sure must have been a bigger population, being members of R1a? That is highly unlikely.

Practically all samples taken so far showed a mixed population with different haplogroups.

Why should the Indo-Europeans be such an exception? Of course, R1a was found and is proven now, but I'm still not convinced that it was exclusive - for proving that, much larger samples being needed from different presumably and proven early Indo-European remains.

[Frederick]

Some of them Nazis (sorry Agrippa, cant name names ;) ) had a quiet similiar idea as this from Grand:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Passing_of_the_Great_Race_-_Map_2.jpg

The Nordic race (pink color), originally spanning from Scandinavia to India.

The only haplogroup, that at least somewhat, resembles this spreading pattern, is R1a
http://pics.livejournal.com/purgine/pic/0002qwp3/s320x240

[Agrippa]

This wasn't just the idea of "the Nazis", but the status quo in the scientific work at that time, carried on by many scholars...

I don't even say that R1a1 wasn't important, most likely the "core group" among early Indo-Europeans, at least in the East, but the point is, some here think of it as being somewhat "exclusive", which is, like I pointed out with comparisons to other prehistorical groups, rather unlikely in my opinion.

After all, a Neolithic influence among the carriers must have been present (at least) too, be it R1b, J2, E-V13 or all of them - for example.

So it is rather erroneous to assume, that all early Indo-European/PIE were R1a1 carriers, even though it is quite likely, that this element was clearly predominant and more common in all IE groups, whereas some other might have been more common just in SOME early IE groups.

Anyway, as I said, there is a major study running right now, I hope they come up with meaningful results about the Eastern groups (Kurgan/Ockergrabkultur) and associated.

R1a1 is surely the single most important haplogroup among early IE, from what we know now, that's something I can stress...

[Albion]

What is the aDNA like for NW Europe? Are there any charts for France, Britain and the Low Countries?

[Scrapple]

What is the aDNA like for NW Europe? Are there any charts for France, Britain and the Low Countries?

http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2012/01/k12b-and-k7b-calculators.html

Has a link to spreadsheets and charts.

For more http://bga101.blogspot.com/

[Svartálfar]

No one knows the answer to the questions you are asking. The current accepted theory is that R1b came from Anatolia into Europe. But if it came from the east, it doesn't make much sense that it's so strong in western Europe and close to absent in eastern Europe.

In Eastern Europe R1b carriers were displaced by R1a1 carriers.

[Redar14]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/Andronovo_culture.png/300px-Andronovo_culture.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/77/Chariot_spread.png/300px-Chariot_spread.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Indo-Iranian_origins.png

Andronovo culture - first indo-european culture. Usually male skeletons of those people had R1a haplogroup, small minority had C3 haplogroup (In modern time the Highest frequencies of this haplogroup is among Polynesians, Vietnamese, Kazakhs, Mongolians, Manchurians and Koreans)

[safinator]

Why should all Indo-Europeans, which for sure must have been a bigger population, being members of R1a? That is highly unlikely.

Practically all samples taken so far showed a mixed population with different haplogroups.

Why should the Indo-Europeans be such an exception? Of course, R1a was found and is proven now, but I'm still not convinced that it was exclusive - for proving that, much larger samples being needed from different presumably and proven early Indo-European remains.

Well probably they carried also some G2 and J2 with them.
R1b according to latest findings isn't likely to be IE.

[Artek]

Well probably they carried also some G2 and J2 with them.
R1b according to latest findings isn't likely to be IE.
J2 and G2 surely come in some waves of Indoeuropeans,those haplogroups' non-trivial presence in India is an evidence for this.

But we must remember that in different regions, other haplogroups could have been picked up (like I1, I2, E-V13).

What about R1b Indo-Europeaniness or non-Indo-Europaniness? We need more proofs...

[Harkonnen]

On Baltic region there was N1c1. Also on the Balkans there was some different type of N present before Indoeuropean arrival. What might be the chances of some different clade of R1a arriving before the supposed Indoeuropean one?

[Peikko]

Eupedia:


Haplogroup I is the oldest haplogroup in Europe and in all probability the only one that originated there (apart from deep subclades of other haplogroups). It is thought to have arrived from the Middle East as haplogroup IJ sometime between 45,000 and 30,000 years ago, and developed into haplogroup I approximately 25,000 years ago. In other words, Cro-Magnons most probably belonged to IJ and I (alongside older haplogroups like F and possibly even C).

The I1 branch is estimated to have split away 20,000 years ago and evolved in isolation in Scandinavia during the late Paleolithic and Mesolithic. I1 is defined by at least 15 unique mutations, which indicates that this lineage experienced a serious population bottleneck. Men belonging to this haplogroup all descend from a single ancestor who lived between 10,000 and 7,000 years ago.

During the Mesolithic period, pre-I1 and I1 people were part of the sucessive Ertebølle culture (5300-3950 BCE), Funnelbeaker culture (4000-2700 BCE) and Pitted Ware culture (3200-2300 BCE). The latter two are sometimes considered as Neolithic cultures due the introduction of farming. However, Neolithic farmers from Germany penetrated late into Scandinavia and in small numbers, and the lifestyle remained primarily one of hunter-gatherers. This is probably the reason why Scandinavia retained one of the most substantial Paleolithic ancestry in Europe.

The big cultural and genetic upheaval came with the Indo-Europeans from Eastern Europe who brought Scandinavia into the Bronze Age with a very short Neolithic transition. The first Indo-Europeans to reach Scandinavia were the Corded Ware (3200-1800 BCE) people from modern Russia, Belarus and Poland, who are thought to have belonged predominantly to haplogroup R1a. These people carried similar maternal lineages as Scandinavian I1 inhabitants - in great majority U4 and U5 lineages.

The second major Indo-European migration to Scandinavia was that of haplogroup R1b, the branch that is thought to have introduced Proto-Germanic languages, as an offshoot of the Proto-Celto-Germanic speakers from Central Europe. R1b probably entered Scandinavia from present-day Germany as a northward expansion of the late Unetice culture (2300-1600 BCE).

According to the Germanic substrate hypothesis, first proposed by Sigmund Feist in 1932, Proto-Germanic was a hybrid language mixing Indo-European (R1b, and to a lower extent R1a) and pre-Indo-European (native Scandinavian I1) elements. This hybridisation would have taken place during the Bronze Age and given birth to the first truly Germanic civilization, the Nordic Bronze Age (1700-500 BCE).

[Peikko]

On Baltic region there was N1c1. Also on the Balkans there was some different type of N present before Indoeuropean arrival. What might be the chances of some different clade of R1a arriving before the supposed Indoeuropean one?

Eupedia:

N is found among Uralic speakers, from Finland to Siberia, and at minor frequencies as far as Korea and Japan. In Europe, haplogroup N is only found at high frequencies among modern Finns (58%), Lithuanians (42%), Latvians (38%), Estonians (34%) and northern Russians.

Haplogroup N is believed to have originated in Southeast Asia approximately 15,000 to 20,000 years ago, but the N1c1 subclade found in Europe likely arose in Southern Siberia circa 12,000 years ago, and spread to North-East Europe 10,000 years ago.

Haplogroup N1c1 is associated with the Kunda culture (8000-5000 BCE) and the Comb Ceramic culture (4200-2000 BCE), which evolved into Finnic and pre-Baltic people.The Indo-European Corded Ware culture (3200-1800 BCE) progressively took over the Baltic region and southern Finland from 2,500 BCE. The merger of the two gave rise to the hybrid Kiukainen culture (2300-1500 BCE). Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger of Uralic and Slavic cultures.

[Harkonnen]

Eupedia:

Do not quote those Eupedia loonies.

[Artek]

Eupedia has some sense but I don't like a generalisation made by them, their nomenclature and some theories as well...

[Peikko]

Do not quote those Eupedia loonies.
It's funny how you always pretend to be somekind of expert, but can never come up with any references except your own biased opinions. And you don't even seem to understand the basics of how modern populations have developed.

[Peikko]

Eupedia has some sense but I don't like a generalisation made by them, their nomenclature and some theories as well...
Yeah, but I think the generalisations are just necessary to keep it short. I mean, if one wanted to write detailed stuff about how modern populations have developed, it would require several books for each ethnic group.

[Artek]

Yeah, but I think the generalisations are just necessary to keep it short. I mean, if one wanted to write detailed stuff about how modern populations have developed, it would require several books for each ethnic group.
Most definitely. And also - that would discourage people who want to learn basics. Everyone started with no or little knowledge, even such "nerds" like Agrippa, Dienekes etc.