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

[Bellbeaking]

Fst distance chart

DsucifTXgAEGz1a.jpg

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


source: https://genome.cshlp.org/content/ear...4.108.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.



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.

[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.