Steppe Ancestry in western Eurasia and the spread of the Germanic Languages

[Rodoorn]

Excited to see so much R-Z18 in this study. I wonder when they will release the data. It's particularly interesting to see a good amount of R-Z18 in the far north of Norway, especially since prior to this study the oldest R-Z372 sample was up there as well.

I hope future studies have far more Swedish samples. R-Z18 seems particularly oriented towards Sweden in modern times, so I'm wondering how early they had a significant presence there.

Looks like it spread there with the East Scandinavian and/or South Scandinavian ancestry. R-U106, R-L11, and maybe R-L238.  The paper indicates the West Scandinavian ancestry didn't really move much once it arrived in Norway, and that is most strongly linked with R1a.

The P312+ branches are most likely more modern or related to ESE movements from Jutland.

I guess the P312+ branches were pretty much there in in the East North Sea cluster that was about 400 AD replaced by the Danish IA (South Scandinavian cluster).

Here we see the impact iin the Netherlands, see here the R1b S116 Y-DNA that most probably had a connection with the BB derived East North Sea Cluster. 

About 400 AD  there was an influx of the Danish IA/ South Scandinavian cluster. They had the most impact in the North in Friesland/ (Groningen) along the coast, especially in the western part called Westergo, that was about 400 AD most probably empty land, so the ENS cluster was already gone there. In the center of the Netherlands we see in the Veluvian part still dark red, less impact of the Danish IA/South Scandinavian cluster.

[Webb]

GBVPK Bell Beaker, Narbonne, South-France, 3890 C14 BP
from Seguin-Orlando's Heterogeneous Hunter-Gatherer and Steppe-Related Ancestries in Late Neolithic and Bell Beaker Genomes from Present-Day France formely known as the oldest DF27 relabelled R-L21.

S2 clustered ancient samples row 1613

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/...nload=true

I went back to the original study and looked at the Supplementary Tables, and it looks like the original determination of  R1b1a1b1a1a2a1, or DF27>Z195 was done using Yleaf.  Yleaf can give false reads, so I would would be interested in seeing what software was used in determining the sample is L21 instead of DF27.

[Bollox79]

I'm certainly no expert - I find it hard to read though long papers... BUT... Considering the topic of this paper... this paper might be worth checking out. "Celts and Germans of the first century BC-second century AD: an old question, a modern synthesis." Granted... this paper is from 2006.

https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/29925

The Greeks considered the barbarians of Central and Northern Europe to be Celts in the west, and Scythians in the east. Poseidonius was the first known authority to mention the Germanoi which he described as Celtic tribes of the Middle and Lower Rhineland, although he did not regard the Cimbri, Teutones and Ambrones as Germanoi.

Caesar manipulated Poseidonius' term Germanoi to create a new deceptive concept of an ethnic divide between the tractable Galli west of the Rhine and the warlike, feral Germani east of the Rhine. Caesar's first encounter with these tribes was through Ariovistus, King of the Germani and his tribal confederacy. Caesar later equated the Germani with the Teutonic Suebi, which became his archetypal Germani. Caesar did this for his own political ends.

Many detailed scholarly studies have been undertaken in the isolation of one discipline on the origins of the tribes of Germania. By combining the three disciplines of History, Linguistics and Archaeology, a clearer and more complete picture will emerge. The assimilation of the complicated and often ambiguous nature of the three disciplines will be undertaken.

Following Ariovistus' settlement in Gaul, and Caesar's Gallic campaigns, a major Teutonic advance on Central Europe from Scandinavia and northern and eastern Germania occurred. This contributed to the fall of the oppida and Celtic tribal structure between the Main, Lippe, Weser, and also south of the Main. It resulted in the ethnogenesis of the Celtic and immigrant Teutonic tribes in Germania, e.g. the Chatti. These produced hybrid archaeological material cultures, mixed linguistic groupings, and increasing assimilation to Teutonic language and culture. An assessment of tribal, personal, place, river, forest, mountain, town, and fort names, demonstrates the ethnic and linguistic groupings of the tribes east and west of the Rhine. This is also true of military and religious inscriptions, e.g. the Matronae. The material cultures found in regions east of the Rhine, assumed to be populated by Teutonic tribes, are sometimes found to be solely La Tene.

The Augustan advance on Germania prompted increased militarization and consolidation of tribal confederations with a shift from native Rhenish confederations, e.g. the Sugambri, Usipetes and Tencteri, to an increasing focus on the Teutonic confederations of the north and east, e.g. Cherusci and Suebi. This was combined with a second wave of Teutonic migration from Scandinavia and northern Germania into central Germania. Augustan and post-Augustan re-settlement of Germani in Gaul, the ensuing tribal flux, reformulation, and the interaction ofthe immigrant Germani and native Galli, resulted in ethnogenesis and the creation of new tribal units, e.g. Batavi, Cugerni, Tungri, Texuandri.

The rediscovery of Tacitus' Germania in the fifteenth century reawakened an interest in the Germani amongst the German speaking peoples. The growth of German Nationalism culminated in the Unification of Germany in 1870. Later, the Fascists of the Third Reich formed an Imperial Association for German Prehistory (Reichsbundfur deutsche Vorgeschichte), which denied any suggestion of the Teutonic origins of the German people being mixed with those of the cultures of neighbouring non-Teutonic speaking peoples. This enforced the idea that the indigenous people of modern Germany were all of Teutonic origin.

When taken as a whole, the Historical, Linguistic and Archaeological evidence demonstrates that the picture which emerges is of Celtic tribes east of the Rhine which had been subsumed and assimilated by the increasingly dominant peoples of Teutonic culture. There is no doubt that many of the tribes of Germania, who by the Augustan era had adopted Teutonic language and Northern German-Scandinavian archaeological culture, had Celtic origins. Between the time of Caesar in the mid-first century BC, and the end of the first century AD, a great movement of Teutonic tribes entered the already densely populated regions of Celtic central Germania and northern and eastern Gaul. They altered the ethnic, linguistic and cultural nature of the area and produced a hybrid population.

If anyone knows of any other papers on this subject... (in English at least! Actually any language really if I can translate it online etc!!) please post! Cheers!

[miquirumba]

GBVPK Bell Beaker, Narbonne, South-France, 3890 C14 BP
from Seguin-Orlando's Heterogeneous Hunter-Gatherer and Steppe-Related Ancestries in Late Neolithic and Bell Beaker Genomes from Present-Day France formely known as the oldest DF27 relabelled R-L21.
S2 clustered ancient samples row 1613
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/...nload=true
I think somebody should ask authors about this review because PECH MAHO PECH8 is confirmed l R-L21
where is raw data to check that
   
PECH8  brunel_2020_pnas

Pech Maho
France
WesternEurope
France_IronAge_LaTene

R1b1a1b1a1a2c1
R1b-L21

[Dewsloth]

This paper has 14 samples at L11 and another 14 at P312.
I'm looking forward to folks getting to peer a little closer at those to see if more can be tweezed out.

[Rodoorn]

I'm certainly no expert - I find it hard to read though long papers... BUT... Considering the topic of this paper... this paper might be worth checking out. "Celts and Germans of the first century BC-second century AD: an old question, a modern synthesis." Granted... this paper is from 2006.

https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/29925

The Greeks considered the barbarians of Central and Northern Europe to be Celts in the west, and Scythians in the east. Poseidonius was the first known authority to mention the Germanoi which he described as Celtic tribes of the Middle and Lower Rhineland, although he did not regard the Cimbri, Teutones and Ambrones as Germanoi.

Caesar manipulated Poseidonius' term Germanoi to create a new deceptive concept of an ethnic divide between the tractable Galli west of the Rhine and the warlike, feral Germani east of the Rhine. Caesar's first encounter with these tribes was through Ariovistus, King of the Germani and his tribal confederacy. Caesar later equated the Germani with the Teutonic Suebi, which became his archetypal Germani. Caesar did this for his own political ends.

Many detailed scholarly studies have been undertaken in the isolation of one discipline on the origins of the tribes of Germania. By combining the three disciplines of History, Linguistics and Archaeology, a clearer and more complete picture will emerge. The assimilation of the complicated and often ambiguous nature of the three disciplines will be undertaken.

Following Ariovistus' settlement in Gaul, and Caesar's Gallic campaigns, a major Teutonic advance on Central Europe from Scandinavia and northern and eastern Germania occurred. This contributed to the fall of the oppida and Celtic tribal structure between the Main, Lippe, Weser, and also south of the Main. It resulted in the ethnogenesis of the Celtic and immigrant Teutonic tribes in Germania, e.g. the Chatti. These produced hybrid archaeological material cultures, mixed linguistic groupings, and increasing assimilation to Teutonic language and culture. An assessment of tribal, personal, place, river, forest, mountain, town, and fort names, demonstrates the ethnic and linguistic groupings of the tribes east and west of the Rhine. This is also true of military and religious inscriptions, e.g. the Matronae. The material cultures found in regions east of the Rhine, assumed to be populated by Teutonic tribes, are sometimes found to be solely La Tene.

The Augustan advance on Germania prompted increased militarization and consolidation of tribal confederations with a shift from native Rhenish confederations, e.g. the Sugambri, Usipetes and Tencteri, to an increasing focus on the Teutonic confederations of the north and east, e.g. Cherusci and Suebi. This was combined with a second wave of Teutonic migration from Scandinavia and northern Germania into central Germania. Augustan and post-Augustan re-settlement of Germani in Gaul, the ensuing tribal flux, reformulation, and the interaction ofthe immigrant Germani and native Galli, resulted in ethnogenesis and the creation of new tribal units, e.g. Batavi, Cugerni, Tungri, Texuandri.

The rediscovery of Tacitus' Germania in the fifteenth century reawakened an interest in the Germani amongst the German speaking peoples. The growth of German Nationalism culminated in the Unification of Germany in 1870. Later, the Fascists of the Third Reich formed an Imperial Association for German Prehistory (Reichsbundfur deutsche Vorgeschichte), which denied any suggestion of the Teutonic origins of the German people being mixed with those of the cultures of neighbouring non-Teutonic speaking peoples. This enforced the idea that the indigenous people of modern Germany were all of Teutonic origin.

When taken as a whole, the Historical, Linguistic and Archaeological evidence demonstrates that the picture which emerges is of Celtic tribes east of the Rhine which had been subsumed and assimilated by the increasingly dominant peoples of Teutonic culture. There is no doubt that many of the tribes of Germania, who by the Augustan era had adopted Teutonic language and Northern German-Scandinavian archaeological culture, had Celtic origins. Between the time of Caesar in the mid-first century BC, and the end of the first century AD, a great movement of Teutonic tribes entered the already densely populated regions of Celtic central Germania and northern and eastern Gaul. They altered the ethnic, linguistic and cultural nature of the area and produced a hybrid population.

If anyone knows of any other papers on this subject... (in English at least!) please post! Cheers!

I guess the paper at stake delivers an important correction in that sense. 

For example the Frisii, first of all the paper:

We further find that the IA Southern Scandinavians that arose from admixture between Bronze Age Southern and Eastern Scandinavians are central to understanding the Germanic dispersal. After the Pre-Roman Iron Age, around 2000 BP, Proto-Germanic diverged into North, East and West Germanic. The spread of West Germanic to Germany, the Netherlands and Britain, appears to be closely related to populations migrating from the Jutland Peninsula.

In these regions, we see the transition from Bell Beaker-related to the Corded Ware-related Southern Scandinavian ancestry. For Germany and Britain, where Celtic was known to be spoken, this period also saw a linguistic transition to Germanic. In the Netherlands, IA Southern Scandinavians’ ancestry became dominant in the place of a distinct Eastern North Sea population. The linguistic affiliation of this population is unknown. According to the linguistic ‘Nordwestblock’ hypothesis, the Netherlands may have harboured a language distinct from both Celtic and Germanic80. Given that ENS is a Bell Beaker subcluster, which is associated with Celtic languages in Britain and France, our results can alternatively be brought in line with theories of Celtic speakers, perhaps including the Frisii of the Roman Period, inhabiting the Dutch North Sea coast during the Early Iron Age 81. 

Although no unadmixed ENS populations are found during the migration period, the incoming Southern Scandinavians carry small proportions of ENS ancestry, indicating the migrations were not a complete replacement. Dutch coastal areas see a habitation hiatus around 1600 BP and subsequent appearance of a new material culture that is often referred to as Anglo-Saxon in nature 82, mirroring the genetics and timing of the Late Iron Age, linguistically West-Germanic Frisians in this dataset. In addition, we find that the Southern Scandinavianancestry of these migrating populations is better modelled by individuals near Southern rather than the Northern Jutland, and that the migrating populations often carry varying but minor proportions of ENS ancestry, inherited from the earlier people who previously lived in the region. In contrast to previous studies, which relied on Scandinavian samples postdating the Migration Period 47, we can now reject the Danish Isles and Sweden as a source area for the Anglo-Saxons in Britain, as these were dominated by Eastern Scandinavian ancestry prior to the Viking Age (Figure 6).

The sources never mentioned the Frisii as Germani!

See, Looijenga, Popkema and Slofstra (2017) in Dutch (and Frisian) so I translated the crucial parts. 

In general they state:
"Among the many Germanic people names that we find among Greek and Roman geographers and historians, that of the Frisians is missing (page 13)."

Some Greek "literati".

Nicolaus of Damascus states:
"The Celts who are near the Ocean, consider it a shame to flee when their wall or house breaks in. When the flood comes in from the outer sea, they meet it armed and hold out until they are swept away. They want namely, not fleeing to give the impression that they are afraid of death."

Diodorus Siculus states:
"The part of Gaul that lies between the little dipper and big dipper stars (= the northernmost) has particularly cold winters. In the winter season, a lot of snow falls on cloudy days instead of rain. The air becomes excessively full of ice, causing the rivers to freeze and, in their peculiar condition, to serve as bridges. Not only do a few random passers-by travel across the ice on foot, but also armies of tens of thousands of men with pack animals and heavily loaded wagons cross safely."

Germani is a Roman "invention" for the Keltoi that were outside the civilized world, so above the Limes, above the Rhine. The Keltoi beneath the Rhine already were less barbarian, took more and more part of the Roman world.

We see only use of the label Germani in Roman context, if someone from above the Rhine wanted to take part of the Roman world (as part of the military) he had no choice to bow for the label Germani (see Tacitus). Important foederati from above the Rhine, kings that got "subsidiary" from the Romans had the same.

But this was skin deep, because Romans gone the label German gone until the sixteenth century. With the nation state and unification drives the label Germani had a comeback, before that Deutsch or Dutch- means of the people- was prefered!

I guess the paper underlines that real "Germanization" (what's in a name   of big parts of the Netherlands and England, was a product of the migration ages in which West Germanic, Danish IA related, South Scandic cluster (all based on the paper) drove the Bell Beaker cluster in England as in the Netherlands the in the paper called East North Sea cluster out and partly fuzed with it!

Short version: the Frisii of Iron Age Roman times were part of a Bell Beaker derived in the paper called East North Sea cluster weren't part of the Germanic lineage not in genetic nor in language sense....

[Naudigastir]

Excited to see so much R-Z18 in this study. I wonder when they will release the data. It's particularly interesting to see a good amount of R-Z18 in the far north of Norway, especially since prior to this study the oldest R-Z372 sample was up there as well.

I hope future studies have far more Swedish samples. R-Z18 seems particularly oriented towards Sweden in modern times, so I'm wondering how early they had a significant presence there.

Looks like it spread there with the East Scandinavian and/or South Scandinavian ancestry. R-U106, R-L11, and maybe R-L238.  The paper indicates the West Scandinavian ancestry didn't really move much once it arrived in Norway, and that is most strongly linked with R1a.

The P312+ branches are most likely more modern or related to ESE movements from Jutland.

The initial entry and spread of R-Z18 is definitely associated with the South Scandinavian BA-cluster, but it changes over time. By the Iron Age all bar one R-Z18-samples in Denmark are grouped in either the East Scandinavian or West Scandinavian IA-clusters. Although by that time, what's called the West Scandinavian cluster is on average basically 75% or more of East Scandinavian BA-ancestry and very little actual West Scandinavian BA-ancestry.

[Rodoorn]

And it must be said it was Angles who was way before the paper pointing of the familiarity between my North Dutch ancestry and the Danish IA.....

right pops:
Villabruna
Vestonice16
Ust_Ishim_published.DG
Kostenki14.SG
GoyetQ116-1_udg_published
MA1.SG
GanjDareh
BOT14.SG
Kostenki
S_Mbuti-3.DG
A_Papuan-16.DG
A_Han-4.DG
Andaman.SG
left pops:
finndad_NL
Denmark_IA
Ansarve_Megalithic (I wanted to have a "farmer" source. The choice of Ansarve can be disputed, but anyway, according to the results the question has no real importance ...)
best coefficients: 1.025 -0.025
totmean: 1.025 -0.025
boot mean: 1.027 -0.027
std. errors: 0.100 0.100
fixed pat wt dof chisq tail prob
00 0 11 5.192 0.921515 1.025 -0.025 infeasible
01 1 12 5.260 0.948719 1.000 0.000
10 1 12 113.107 1.45072e-18 0.000 1.000
best pat: 00 0.921515 - -
best pat: 01 0.948719 chi(nested): 0.068 p-value for nested model: 0.793938
left pops:
finnmum_NL
Denmark_IA
Ansarve_Megalithic
best coefficients: 0.984 0.016
totmean: 0.984 0.016
boot mean: 0.986 0.014
std. errors: 0.097 0.097
fixed pat wt dof chisq tail prob
00 0 11 6.040 0.870674 0.984 0.016
01 1 12 6.066 0.912698 1.000 0.000
10 1 12 122.121 2.33258e-20 0.000 1.000
best pat: 00 0.870674 - -
best pat: 01 0.912698 chi(nested): 0.026 p-value for nested model: 0.871204

The p-values of the nested models are astronomic. According to this analysis Finn's (=Rodoorn) parents are "pure" Danish from the Iron Age. Btw Denmark_IA is for the three individuals from Margaryan. Of course I used imputed genomes for Finn's parents (947035 SNPs). For the experts, I've taken the risk to keep the transitions."

finnmum
Denmark_IA.imputed_Allentoft_VK213
Alt-Inden-S1 = IND003


Transversions only:

finnmum  hetrate:    0.166 valid snps:    173046 samples:    1
Denmark_IA.imputed_Allentoft_VK213  hetrate:    0.163 valid snps:    174687 samples:    1
Alt-Inden-S1  hetrate:    0.000 valid snps:    122593 samples:    1

best coefficients:    0.649    0.351 
totmean:      0.649    0.351 
boot mean:    0.673    0.327 
std. errors:    0.783    0.783 


fixed pat  wt  dof    chisq      tail prob
          00  0    13    3.878        0.992417    0.649    0.351 
          01  1    14    9.231        0.815988    1.000    0.000 
          10  1    14    17.818          0.2152    0.000    1.000 
best pat:          00        0.992417              -  -
best pat:          01        0.815988  chi(nested):    5.352 p-value for nested model:      0.0206946


Transitions included:

finnmum  hetrate:    0.164 valid snps:    882798 samples:    1
Denmark_IA.imputed_Allentoft_VK213  hetrate:    0.162 valid snps:    890277 samples:    1
Alt-Inden-S1  hetrate:    0.000 valid snps:    643676 samples:    1


best coefficients:    0.706    0.294 
totmean:      0.706    0.294 
boot mean:    0.713    0.287 
std. errors:    0.352    0.352 


fixed pat  wt  dof    chisq      tail prob
          00  0    13    9.443        0.738691    0.706    0.294 
          01  1    14    13.236        0.508052    1.000    0.000 
          10  1    14    28.727      0.0113765    0.000    1.000 
best pat:          00        0.738691              -  -
best pat:          01        0.508052  chi(nested):    3.792 p-value for nested model:      0.051488


I rarely achieve such good adjustments when I model modern ones with old ones, which unfortunately I often do because the people in my family who have been tested are insatiable for these things.

[alanarchae]

GBVPK Bell Beaker, Narbonne, South-France, 3890 C14 BP
from Seguin-Orlando's Heterogeneous Hunter-Gatherer and Steppe-Related Ancestries in Late Neolithic and Bell Beaker Genomes from Present-Day France formely known as the oldest DF27 relabelled R-L21.

S2 clustered ancient samples row 1613

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/...nload=true

I went back to the original study and looked at the Supplementary Tables, and it looks like the original determination of  R1b1a1b1a1a2a1, or DF27>Z195 was done using Yleaf.  Yleaf can give false reads, so I would would be interested in seeing what software was used in determining the sample is L21 instead of DF27.

that would be big if true

[poilus]

GBVPK Bell Beaker, Narbonne, South-France, 3890 C14 BP
from Seguin-Orlando's Heterogeneous Hunter-Gatherer and Steppe-Related Ancestries in Late Neolithic and Bell Beaker Genomes from Present-Day France formely known as the oldest DF27 relabelled R-L21.
S2 clustered ancient samples row 1613
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/...nload=true

I went back to the original study and looked at the Supplementary Tables, and it looks like the original determination of  R1b1a1b1a1a2a1, or DF27>Z195 was done using Yleaf.  Yleaf can give false reads, so I would would be interested in seeing what software was used in determining the sample is L21 instead of DF27.

that would be big if true

There are two South French Bronze Age samples (+/- 1500 BC), on the way which are, respectively, supposed to be R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a5b1a1c and R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a5c3b1a1.


* Y-chromosome haplogroups were called using Yleaf software as well as PathPhynder

[alanarchae]

GBVPK Bell Beaker, Narbonne, South-France, 3890 C14 BP
from Seguin-Orlando's Heterogeneous Hunter-Gatherer and Steppe-Related Ancestries in Late Neolithic and Bell Beaker Genomes from Present-Day France formely known as the oldest DF27 relabelled R-L21.
S2 clustered ancient samples row 1613
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/...nload=true

I went back to the original study and looked at the Supplementary Tables, and it looks like the original determination of  R1b1a1b1a1a2a1, or DF27>Z195 was done using Yleaf.  Yleaf can give false reads, so I would would be interested in seeing what software was used in determining the sample is L21 instead of DF27.

that would be big if true

There are two South French Bronze Age samples (+/- 1500 BC), on the way which are, respectively, supposed to be R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a5b1a1c and R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a5c3b1a1.


* Y-chromosome haplogroups were called using Yleaf software as well as PathPhynder

what are those very long clade names in layman’s terms?

[Rozenfeld]

This newly posted preprint may be of interest for this discussion:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...5.585102v1

High-resolution genomic ancestry reveals mobility in early medieval Europe

Leo Speidel, Marina Silva, Thomas Booth, Ben Raffield, Kyriaki Anastasiadou, Christopher Barrington, Anders Gotherstrom, Peter Heather, Pontus Skoglund

doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.15.585102

This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?].

Abstract

Ancient DNA has unlocked new genetic histories and shed light on archaeological and historical questions, but many known and unknown historical events have remained below detection thresholds because subtle ancestry changes are challenging to reconstruct. Methods based on sharing of haplotypes and rare variants can improve power, but are not explicitly temporal and have not been adopted in unbiased ancestry models. Here, we develop Twigstats, a new approach of time-stratified ancestry analysis that can improve statistical power by an order of magnitude by focusing on coalescences in recent times, while remaining unbiased by population-specific drift. We apply this framework to 1,151 available ancient genomes, focussing on northern and central Europe in the historical period, and show that it allows modelling of individual-level ancestry using preceding genomes and provides previously unavailable resolution to detect broader ancestry transformations. In the first half of the first millennium ~1-500 CE (Common Era), we observe an expansion of Scandinavian-related ancestry across western, central, and southern Europe. However, in the second half of the millennium ~500-1000 CE, ancestry patterns suggest the regional disappearance or substantial admixture of these ancestries in multiple regions. Within Scandinavia itself, we document a major ancestry influx by ~800 CE, when a large proportion of Viking Age individuals carried ancestry from groups related to continental Europe. This primarily affected southern Scandinavia, and was differentially represented in the western and eastern directions of the wider Viking world. We infer detailed ancestry portraits integrated with historical, archaeological, and stable isotope evidence, documenting mobility at an individual level. Overall, our results are consistent with substantial mobility in Europe in the early historical period, and suggest that time-stratified ancestry analysis can provide a new lens for genetic history.

Note: this preprint does not have new data, this is analysis, with a new tool of already published data.

[NewEnglander]

Excited to see so much R-Z18 in this study. I wonder when they will release the data. It's particularly interesting to see a good amount of R-Z18 in the far north of Norway, especially since prior to this study the oldest R-Z372 sample was up there as well.

I hope future studies have far more Swedish samples. R-Z18 seems particularly oriented towards Sweden in modern times, so I'm wondering how early they had a significant presence there.

Looks like it spread there with the East Scandinavian and/or South Scandinavian ancestry. R-U106, R-L11, and maybe R-L238.  The paper indicates the West Scandinavian ancestry didn't really move much once it arrived in Norway, and that is most strongly linked with R1a.

The P312+ branches are most likely more modern or related to ESE movements from Jutland.

The initial entry and spread of R-Z18 is definitely associated with the South Scandinavian BA-cluster, but it changes over time. By the Iron Age all bar one R-Z18-samples in Denmark are grouped in either the East Scandinavian or West Scandinavian IA-clusters. Although by that time, what's called the West Scandinavian cluster is on average basically 75% or more of East Scandinavian BA-ancestry and very little actual West Scandinavian BA-ancestry.

Very interesting. I wonder if this is a result of R-Z18 lineages already present on Zealand getting enriched with East Scandinavian admixture over time, or if it is a back migration of R-Z18ers whose ancestors had migrated into Sweden earlier and mixed with the nascent East Scandinavians.

[Webb]

GBVPK Bell Beaker, Narbonne, South-France, 3890 C14 BP
from Seguin-Orlando's Heterogeneous Hunter-Gatherer and Steppe-Related Ancestries in Late Neolithic and Bell Beaker Genomes from Present-Day France formely known as the oldest DF27 relabelled R-L21.
S2 clustered ancient samples row 1613
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/...nload=true

I went back to the original study and looked at the Supplementary Tables, and it looks like the original determination of  R1b1a1b1a1a2a1, or DF27>Z195 was done using Yleaf.  Yleaf can give false reads, so I would would be interested in seeing what software was used in determining the sample is L21 instead of DF27.

that would be big if true

There are two South French Bronze Age samples (+/- 1500 BC), on the way which are, respectively, supposed to be R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a5b1a1c and R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a5c3b1a1.


* Y-chromosome haplogroups were called using Yleaf software as well as PathPhynder

I noticed on the same spreadsheet that two of the Covesea samples, I2858 and I2860 are listed as DF27, but FTDNA and Alex Williamson confirmed that one is L21 and the other is ZZ37/ZZ38.  I remember a year ago or so the Reich Lab released the exact same calls as this spreadsheet and there were a number of erroneous calls.  So I’m questioning the change of calls for GBVPK.

[Dewsloth]

Table S2.
I26830 Noord-Holland, Wervershoof-Zwaagdijk Netherlands WesternEurope Netherlands_MBA H3v+16093 R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e1 NA 0_2_1_2_2_2_2_1_2_1 0_2_1_2_WEuMl
Klosterneuburg missing
CGG107761 Valkenburg Marktveld Netherlands WesternEurope Netherlands_IronAge K1a3a1 R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e1 NA 0_2_1_2_2_1_1_1_3_1_1 0_2_1_2_WEuMl
CGG107763 Valkenburg Marktveld Netherlands WesternEurope Netherlands_IronAge U5a2c1 R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e1 NA 0_2_1_2_2_1_2_3_2_1 0_2_1_2_WEuMl
CGG019200 Illerup_weapon_sacrifice_site Denmark_Jutland NorthernEurope Denmark_IronAge_EarlyRomanBogWar T2b R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e2~ NA 0_1_2_1_4_2_2_2_1_1_1 0_1_2_SouthScan
6DT23 Driffield Terrace, York England WesternEurope Britain_Roman H6a1b2 R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e1 R1b-DF19 0_2_1_1_4_1_1_1_1 0_2_1_1_WEuIs
R31 Mausoleo di Augusto Italy SouthernEurope Italy_LateAntiquity K1c1 R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e2 R1b-DF19 0_1_2_2_1_1_2_4_1_1 0_1_2_SouthScan
Hiddestorf missing
I17277 Hartlepool, Olive Street_Durham England WesternEurope England_Medieval.1240k K2a6 R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e1 R1b-DF19 0_1_2_5_2_1_1_3_2_1 0_1_2_SouthScan
IND002 Alt-Inden_North Rhine-Westphalia Germany WesternEurope Germany_Medieval.1240k T2b R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e2 NA 0_1_2_2_5_1_2_1 0_1_2_SouthScan
VK333 Oland Sweden_Baltic NorthernEurope Sweden_VikingAge H2a2a1 R1b R1b1a1b1a1a2e1 R1b-DF19 0_1_2_5_2_1_2_2_2_1 0_1_2_SouthScan

It would have been nice if they'd also tested Klosterneuburg and the two from Hiddestorf...  They are more relevant chronologically, and if Hartlepool and IND002 get SouthScan, I'm wondering what the missing ones would have had - all three plot more north/east.

Edit:  I redid them in approx chron order.