R1b-L51 in Yamnaya: Lazaridis 2024

[rmstevens2]

It may be a good idea to post a list of the R1b-L51 Yamnaya samples in this new Lazaridis paper we know about thus far.

I11838 -  Krasnosamarskoe-4 site (Middle Volga steppe). R1b-L51, mtDNA U5a1a1.  2851-2498 calBCE.

I12823 -  Smeeni (Romania, just west of the Black Sea). R1b-L51, mtDNA K1b2b. 3300-2500 BCE (estimate from archaeological context).

I6884 -  Krestovyi kurgan (Rostov region, Aksay District, near Alitub village). R1b-L51, mtDNA T1a1. 2852-2500 calBCE.

I12893 -  Idzhil-2 (Republic of Kalmykia, Oktyabrsky District, Idzhil Village). R1b-L51, mtDNA  H13a1a. 3300-2600 BCE (estimate from archaeological context). 

I20499 -  Zabalj-Medisova-humka, Serbia. R1b-L52 (P310), mtDNA U4b1b1. 2880-2633 calBCE.

Anyone see any others I've missed? 

In the main paper

Crihana Veche, Moldova
7.4.3.3 Grave 12:19 (individual ID I10208),  attributed to a sub-adult. Age at death: about 12- 14 months (infant). Anthropological sex: indeterminate. Molecular sex: male, Y-haplogroup R1b (R-L51). The burial is attributed to Yamnaya culture.

The supplemental has him as Z2108 so not L51, so some confusion on this one.

I'll hold off on including that one, but thanks for pointing it out.

[old europe]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

Sorry I do not get it. the R1b samples in Romania and Serbia are precisely on the danubian route.

[Mitchell-Atkins]

This one is older if you go by the ybp date of 4900


I12893 Idzhil-2, 1981, kurgan 1, burial 1, IDZH-II-1981-1-1) Russia_Kalmykia 4900 ybp = 2950 BCE (3300-2600 BCE)

[old europe]

My take is that R1b L151 expanded from the Yamnaya Don cluster
The cezch CWC autosomal with the enriched UNHG component it is the key
We will see

[rmstevens2]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

Sorry I do not get it. the R1b samples in Romania and Serbia are precisely on the danubian route.

I think he was talking about finding L151 on the Danube route, but I wonder what a look at the BAM files of these samples might reveal. Might they have been L151? Or maybe they were something else south of L51, like PF7589, or something else downstream of P310 other than L151, some sibling of L151?

[targaryen]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

We have R1a though. 1 in Usatove, 1 in Bulgaria. The one in Bulgaria is literally in a kurgan.

[rmstevens2]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

We have R1a though. 1 in Usatove, 1 in Bulgaria. The one in Bulgaria is literally in a kurgan.

These L51s are from kurgans, as well - at least the first three are for sure. I can't find any notes on the last two in the Supplementary Info, but Kalmykia is loaded with Yamnaya kurgans, and probably the one from Serbia came from a Yamnaya kurgan, as well.

[Desdonas]

The chronology of Afanasievo split is before 3,300BC, and L52 is in it. It seems that L51 and L52 had diversified earlier on the PC steppe, and the Yamnaya samples may indeed not the direct ancestor of L151.

However, in this thread, R1a is about 73 years (3 generations) later than R1b on average in Czech CW, which may indicate that they are from difference clans/migration waves. This is also logical in linguistics, Italo-Celtic retains some archaism which losts in the eastern part of the IE world. The border of east CW and Balkan IE may be a hotspot for various linguistic innovations/areal features.

https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?tid=22&page=4

[rmstevens2]

The chronology of Afanasievo split is before 3,300BC, and L52 is in it. It seems that L51 and L52 had diversified earlier on the PC steppe, and the Yamnaya samples may indeed not the direct ancestor of L151.

However, in this thread, R1a is about 73 years (3 generations) later than R1b on average in Czech CW, which may indicate that they are from difference clans/migration waves. This is also logical in linguistics, Italo-Celtic retains some archaism which losts in East CW languages and nearby Balkan IE/Armenian.

https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?tid=22&page=4

I wondered where this post was! Thanks for reminding me.

[alanarchae]

That’s great.I was never as much a fanboy of Yamnaya as many seem to be, but I did think it was quite likely L51 came from it. I started to think this more when you look at the FTDNA little uptick of branching around 3300-3000BC in that lineage after a good many centuries since the previous little burst 4200-4000BC. It fits the archaeology of a quote period on the steppes between 4000BC or shortly after to 3300BC. The 2nd burst closely corresponds to the Yamnaya expansion. My guess is L51 started in the Don-Volga area in the pre Yamnaya 4th miloeniun and spread west through Ukraine 3300-3000BC (though outliers can happen).

[alanarchae]

The earliest RC dates for Afanasiebo culture you see in David Anthony’s well known book have been overturned and it’s been redated back to c.3300BC, same as Yamnaya. TBH I think Afanasievo is just a Yamnaya group and i’d be inclined to add the L51’s from that culture to the Yamnaya list.

[Southpaw]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

One sample from Durankulak labeled as Proto-Yamnaya in Bulgaria is R1a

Proto-Yamna, Bulgaria (Eneolithic) 56 I1456 DUR1 Durankulak, Kurgan F, burial 15 (main burial)25 n/a 3500-3000 BCE M U5a2a R1a1a1 (R-M417)

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...y-material

[R.Rocca]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

Sorry I do not get it. the R1b samples in Romania and Serbia are precisely on the danubian route.

Please read my post again... L51 is upstream of L151 and I mention both there.

[R.Rocca]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

One sample from Durankulak labeled as Proto-Yamnaya in Bulgaria is R1a

Proto-Yamna, Bulgaria (Eneolithic) 56 I1456 DUR1 Durankulak, Kurgan F, burial 15 (main burial)25 n/a 3500-3000 BCE M U5a2a R1a1a1 (R-M417)

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...y-material

Thanks Southpaw. I'm a little hesitant on some of these samples that do not have radiocarbon dating, but given its location, this one seems legitimate.

[Southpaw]

I'm not going to go out on that big of a limb here but, I that it is highly unlikely we will ever find R-L151 along the Danube route. The biggest tip is the lack of R1a in any of these Yamnaya samples. Based on the Czech Corded Ware study, it is much more likely that both R-L151 and R1a traveled together from the forest steppe and then founder effects took over from there. It is noteworthy that none of the three radiocarbon tested Yamnaya R-L51 samples are older than the Czech R-L151 samples.

One sample from Durankulak labeled as Proto-Yamnaya in Bulgaria is R1a

Proto-Yamna, Bulgaria (Eneolithic) 56 I1456 DUR1 Durankulak, Kurgan F, burial 15 (main burial)25 n/a 3500-3000 BCE M U5a2a R1a1a1 (R-M417)

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...y-material

Thanks Southpaw. I'm a little hesitant on some of these samples that do not have radiocarbon dating, but given its location, this one seems legitimate.

You might be right, because couple of minutes ago after i wrote the post i came across this archaeological paper putting a debate whether Durankulak Kurgans should be attributed to Proto-Yamnaya or some earlier Steppe spinoffs.

I have no idea if the authors are 100% certain it is Proto-Yamnaya.

Some later burials at Durankulak cannot be identified very pre-
cisely. They can belong either to the final Copper Age or to the Early
Bronze Age or even to the Late Bronze Age. For instance graves 119
and 190 according to traits of the burial rite can be dated to the
Cernavoda III culture. However their real chronological position could
be determined by radiocarbon dates. At the same time any discussed
grave at Durankulak cannot be attributed to so-called Proto-Yamnaya
culture according to I. Vajsov. There are graves which precede the
Yamnaya culture proper and those which related to it. The term proto-
Yamnaya seems to be inappropriate because it would suggest his-
torical connection between final Copper Age and Yamnaya sites in
the Northeast Balkans and consequently could show this region as a
core area of the Yamnaya culture. Nevertheless, at present there is no
confident evidence for such suggestion

https://www.academia.edu/28541114/THE_PR...M_THE_EAST