But you know what ??? That was probably not U106.
Because U106 = R1b1a1a2a1a1 (and not R1b1b1a).
Source: https://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html
So it seems that the authors made a mistake. It was R1b, but not U106.
============
But it depends, because these designations like a1b1b1a... change over time.
Only names of SNPs don't change. Did they actually test them for U106 SNP?