R1b-L51 in Yamnaya: Lazaridis 2024

[Dewsloth]

IMHO we're going to need Yamnaya stuff along the Dniester valley route, around the north side of the Carpathians, through Podolia in Ukraine on up into Małopolska, to include remains from the CWC-X Horizon.

 In terms of chronology, how are the oldest known L51 Corded Ware samples related to Maloposka, Serbia Yamnaya, Afanasievo?  Was there one main migration of L51, or multiple waves from different sources?

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-63138-w

• Anna Linderholm
  
  

The oldest R-L51 Corded Ware samples are really R-L151 and R-U106 and are from Bohemia and were published in Papac et al. 2021.

• Luka Papac et al.
  

,
Dynamic changes in genomic and social structures in third millennium BCE central Europe.Sci. Adv.7,eabi6941(2021).

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abi6941

Specimens are PNL001, VLI011, OBR003, STD002, VLI085, and VLI092.  PNL001 is the oldest at 2914-2879 BCE and is derived for R-U106.

He is in the Discover Classic Tree at https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-U106/classic

The Linderholm samples are several hundred years younger but ancestral for R-L151 so they are stuck at R-P310 or are R-FT377377 which is a sibling of R-L151.

There is a way to cross reference the names of the specimens with the Classic tree at FTDNA Discover to see their terminal SNP.

R-P310 is the common ancestor to all of the CWC R1b specimens. None are terminal for R-L51

Here is the IBD for PNL001.  This is sorted in chron order with total cM (when over 8cM) count on the left:
https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?...96#pid9496

Yamnaya above, CWC and later Beakers below.

[alanarchae]

Another thing kicking about in my head is the way quite a few CW samples have been modelled to fit Afanasievo slightly better than Yamnaya. This is interesting as Afansievo c. 3200BC does include P310 immediate ancestor of P310/L52 which is an SNP only 350 years upstream. Is this telling us something nuanced about the origin of the steppe element in CW compared to Z2103 dominant Yamnaya? Perhaps a Repin group on the middle Don who were only very subtlety different from Yamnaya and may have even shared a common territory only maybe a couple of centuries earlier in the Repin expansion phase c. 3600BC? I don’t think it’s been fully considered that CW, Yamnaya and Afanasievo might actually share a late Repin ancestor. And Repin kind of morphs into Yamnaya with early Yamnaya still using late Repin pottery.

The different may Radiocarbon is too imprecise to be sure but Repin may also slightly overlap the earliest Yamnaya dates in the 3300-3100BC range. Though the distinction is perhaps a little dubious. It nevertheless makes me wonder if the distinction between very heavy Z2103 groups like a lot of Yamnaya and a more mixed Z2103/L51-P310 group in Afanasievo and L51 domination in CW reflects nuances in the geography of the tribal territories of Z2103 and L51 around 3300-3100BC in early Yamnaya/late Repin. It’s a little odd that P310 seems to have been located both at the far east and west of the steppes c.3000BC. However my guess is that L51-P310 was perhaps in the forest steppe Don-Volga area with Z2203 perhaps more grass steppe and down river (with an area of overlap in the interface). The difference being more latitude/environment than longitude?

[rmstevens2]

We have L51 and L52 (P310) in Yamnaya, L52 (P310) in Afanasievo, L151 (and U106) in Corded Ware, and P312 in Bell Beaker. I want to see the L51 Yamnaya-to-Corded Ware progression laid out in ancient evidence.

Regardless of which specimen is the L51 in Yamnaya the TMRCA of L51 is 4050 BCE and Yamanaya didn't start until about 3300 BCE. So R-P310 should have fully developed by the time Yamnaya began. The Yamnaya from Kalmykia that show to be R-L51 but aren't R-Z2103 is mostly likely due to no-calls. Not because they wouldn't actually be R-Z2103. R-L51 would have developed in a pre-Yamnaya culture. We still need that figured out besides the route and method of R-L51>P310>L151>P312.

We don't have any R-L51 that is dated close to the TMRCA and proven to be ancestral for downstream SNPs. We need samples that fit this criteria.
We have a R-P310(xL151) sample that is dated to about 300 years after the TMRCA of R-P310 in SHT001. Not too bad but it would be nice to get some specimens that are dated closer to the TMRCA.
We have a sample that is R-L151 (xP312,U106) in OBR003 dated close to the TMRCA of R-L151. So we're good here.
We have a R-P312 sample that is dated almost 500 years after the TMRCA in RISE563. We need some R-P312 samples that are dated close to the TMRCA of 2850 BCE.

Of course, as far as I know, we don't have the BAM files for the five L51 Yamnayans (including the one from Serbia who is L52) from the Lazaridis preprint, so we don't know precisely what their terminal SNPs are. In the meantime, L51 is kind of a convenient rubric or placeholder while we wait for better resolution. Neither I nor anyone else I know was claiming that any of the L51 Yamnayans was L51* and nothing more. We can be sure that none of them was. 

When I referred to "the L51 Yamnaya-to-Corded Ware progression" I was using L51 that way - as a convenient rubric for the Yamnaya in our Y-DNA line as opposed to any other variety of Yamnaya (R1b-Z2103, I-L699, etc.). It's much easier and quicker to refer to ideas that way than to have to repeat all the known details each time one wants to refer to the Yamnaya that was instrumental in the formation of Corded Ware, i.e., the Yamnaya responsible for the Y-DNA lineages of most of the men of western and central European descent alive today.

I'm a little confused about your reference to the "Yamnaya from Kalmykia that show to be R-L51 but aren't R-Z2103." Are you referring to RISE550 from Peshany V in Kalmykia who had a single G>A read at PF6535 and thus may not have been L51, or are you also referring to sample I12893 from the Lazaridis preprint, which was recovered at Idzhil-2 near Idzhil in Kalmykia? Is there some reason to doubt the L51 status of I12893?

[rmstevens2]

I'm not familiar with L51 theoretical migrations as yourself and rms2. I'm interested in U106(my maternal grandfather)and how it is connected with Yamnaya.

Without going into great detail, citing all my sources, and basically writing a term paper, I'll tell you why I believe it likely that some variety of NW Yamnaya came up the Dniester valley (and probably the Prut valley, etc.) into SE Poland and there formed incipient Corded Ware. First off, as far as I know, the only known CWC-X Horizon sites (Hubinek and Srednia) are both in Małopolska in SE Poland, not too far north of the Carpathians and of the headwaters of the Dniester. Traveling up the Dniester leads one right to the doorstep of Małopolska. The CWC-X Horizon is the pre-Corded horizon. It marks a culture that appears to be a transition between Yamnaya and Corded Ware and is dated 3000-2900 BC. 

There are Yamnaya burials in Podolia in Ukraine, between the Dniester on the east and the eastern slopes of the Carpathians on the west, on the Dniester route northwest towards Poland. 

The Dniester valley seems a natural route to me and one that points like an arrow to Małopolska and the burial sites of the CWC-X Horizon. Is it the only possible route? No, obviously not, but it brings one up through Podolia, where there are quite a few Yamnaya burials. 

We know that the oldest known CWC Y-DNA results thus far were all R1b-L151, one of which was R1b-U106, and all of them were recovered in Bohemia in the Czech Republic, not all that far west of Małopolska, and dating not long after the CWC-X Horizon. 

I'm not alone in this view. It is the viewpoint of Polish archaeologist and CWC expert Piotr Włodarczak. Evidently archaeologist Volker Heyd also thinks the CWC was formed from Yamnaya in SE Poland, at least that is what Kristian Kristiansen told Razib Khan in a recent interview. Svitlana Ivanova has also mentioned the likelihood that Yamnaya took the Dniester valley route into central Europe.

I realize we could all be wrong. I also realize that it's likely that some of the steppe pastoralists came west from the Dnieper and then may have cut northwest up the Dniester, or something similar.

Oh, I almost forgot to mention that there was plenty of GAC along the Dniester valley route, and evidently GAC admixture was part of what made the CWC what it was autosomally (and in terms of pottery).

[Jafety]

This is also interesting:
https://www.academia.edu/50509032/Sergiu...he_burials

In the Nikitin paper there is a Moldova Cimislia sample in the Core Yamnaya. And in this paper they describe Eneolithic graves from 3800-3600 BCE that could hide some early L51 ancestors.
This could be a starting point for both the Dniester-SE Polish as well as the Danube route

[rmstevens2]

This is also interesting:
https://www.academia.edu/50509032/Sergiu...he_burials

In the Nikitin paper there is a Moldova Cimislia sample in the Core Yamnaya. And in this paper they describe Eneolithic graves from 3800-3600 BCE that could hide some early L51 ancestors.
This could be a starting point for both the Dniester-SE Polish as well as the Danube route

Yep. Moldova is right there next door to Podolia and along the route northwest from the PC steppe to SE Poland.

[ArmandoR1b]

I'm a little confused about your reference to the "Yamnaya from Kalmykia that show to be R-L51 but aren't R-Z2103." Are you referring to RISE550 from Peshany V in Kalmykia who had a single G>A read at PF6535 and thus may not have been L51, or are you also referring to sample I12893 from the Lazaridis preprint, which was recovered at Idzhil-2 near Idzhil in Kalmykia? Is there some reason to doubt the L51 status of I12893?

Since RISE550 is ancestral for R-L51 itself but was considered to possibly be R-L51 based on a single phylogenetic equivalent SNP then it is possible that the same thing happened with I12893. However, if there are two specimens ancestral for R-L51 but derived for PF6535 then it's more likely that the PF6535 result is real especially if there are no contradictory derived reads for I12893.

So I think it's best to be cautious about the R-L51 assignment for I12893 until the BAM is uploaded or FTDNA analyzes it and reports what they think is the derived result.

[rmstevens2]

I'm a little confused about your reference to the "Yamnaya from Kalmykia that show to be R-L51 but aren't R-Z2103." Are you referring to RISE550 from Peshany V in Kalmykia who had a single G>A read at PF6535 and thus may not have been L51, or are you also referring to sample I12893 from the Lazaridis preprint, which was recovered at Idzhil-2 near Idzhil in Kalmykia? Is there some reason to doubt the L51 status of I12893?

Since RISE550 is ancestral for R-L51 itself but was considered to possibly be R-L51 based on a single phylogenetic equivalent SNP then it is possible that the same thing happened with I12893. However, if there are two specimens ancestral for R-L51 but derived for PF6535 then it's more likely that the PF6535 result is real especially if there are no contradictory derived reads for I12893.

So I think it's best to be cautious about the R-L51 assignment for I12893 until the BAM is uploaded or FTDNA analyzes it and reports what they think is the derived result.

What about the three other Yamnaya L51 assignments? Same thing?

One Yamnayan is L52. I think that is a good indication that the others that are L51 really are L51 plus something downstream of it. 

As you implied, RISE550 might still be legitimately R-PF6535.

I hope we get those BAM files soon.

[Konieczny]

I'm not familiar with L51 theoretical migrations as yourself and rms2. I'm interested in U106(my maternal grandfather)and how it is connected with Yamnaya.

Without going into great detail, citing all my sources, and basically writing a term paper, I'll tell you why I believe it likely that some variety of NW Yamnaya came up the Dniester valley (and probably the Prut valley, etc.) into SE Poland and there formed incipient Corded Ware. First off, as far as I know, the only known CWC-X Horizon sites (Hubinek and Srednia) are both in Małopolska in SE Poland, not too far north of the Carpathians and of the headwaters of the Dniester. Traveling up the Dniester leads one right to the doorstep of Małopolska. The CWC-X Horizon is the pre-Corded horizon. It marks a culture that appears to be a transition between Yamnaya and Corded Ware and is dated 3000-2900 BC. 

There are Yamnaya burials in Podolia in Ukraine, between the Dniester on the east and the eastern slopes of the Carpathians on the west, on the Dniester route northwest towards Poland. 

The Dniester valley seems a natural route to me and one that points like an arrow to Małopolska and the burial sites of the CWC-X Horizon. Is it the only possible route? No, obviously not, but it brings one up through Podolia, where there are quite a few Yamnaya burials. 

We know that the oldest known CWC Y-DNA results thus far were all R1b-L151, one of which was R1b-U106, and all of them were recovered in Bohemia in the Czech Republic, not all that far west of Małopolska, and dating not long after the CWC-X Horizon. 

I'm not alone in this view. It is the viewpoint of Polish archaeologist and CWC expert Piotr Włodarczak. Evidently archaeologist Volker Heyd also thinks the CWC was formed from Yamnaya in SE Poland, at least that is what Kristian Kristiansen told Razib Khan in a recent interview. Svitlana Ivanova has also mentioned the likelihood that Yamnaya took the Dniester valley route into central Europe.

I realize we could all be wrong. I also realize that it's likely that some of the steppe pastoralists came west from the Dnieper and then may have cut northwest up the Dniester, or something similar.

Oh, I almost forgot to mention that there was plenty of GAC along the Dniester valley route, and evidently GAC admixture was part of what made the CWC what it was autosomally (and in terms of pottery).

Since no one gave me a "like" for that post, which I thought was better than about nine tenths of my posts, I'm wondering what everyone else thinks. So, how did Corded Ware come to be? How do you account for the IBD between CWC and Yamnaya? Imaginary?

I  really appreciate your input showing the IBD connection. I just don't have the depth of knowledge to connect time frame of  Yamnaya L51 main migration path or multiple paths and multiple time frames (for example are there older Yamnaya burials beneath the Polish Corded Ware burials? As you pointed out Eastern Afanasievo migration is pretty clear cut, in terms of age and location L 51 is clearly connected with Yamnaya. What is the oldest archeological Corded Ware site?  Does  L51 Corded Ware predate R1a Corded Ware. Do Corded Ware R1a and L51 share any metallurgy techniques?

[Jafety]

Does anyone have access to sample I3141 from Mathieson 2018? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6091220/
This is the only Don Yamnaya sample (apart from female I2105) I know of which was published earlier, i.e. we could check before Lazaridis data is out.
It is low coverage and Mathieson did not report any Y-DNA for it but somewhere I saw R1b-L23 classification, would be worth checking if it is L51

[Pribislav]

Does anyone have access to sample I3141 from Mathieson 2018? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6091220/
This is the only Don Yamnaya sample (apart from female I2105) I know of which was published earlier, i.e. we could check before Lazaridis data is out.
It is low coverage and Mathieson did not report any Y-DNA for it but somewhere I saw R1b-L23 classification, would be worth checking if it is L51

I3141 is a female. Even if it was a male, we could hardly get anything meaningful with its 0,04 depth of coverage.

[rmstevens2]

Without going into great detail, citing all my sources, and basically writing a term paper, I'll tell you why I believe it likely that some variety of NW Yamnaya came up the Dniester valley (and probably the Prut valley, etc.) into SE Poland and there formed incipient Corded Ware. First off, as far as I know, the only known CWC-X Horizon sites (Hubinek and Srednia) are both in Małopolska in SE Poland, not too far north of the Carpathians and of the headwaters of the Dniester. Traveling up the Dniester leads one right to the doorstep of Małopolska. The CWC-X Horizon is the pre-Corded horizon. It marks a culture that appears to be a transition between Yamnaya and Corded Ware and is dated 3000-2900 BC. 

There are Yamnaya burials in Podolia in Ukraine, between the Dniester on the east and the eastern slopes of the Carpathians on the west, on the Dniester route northwest towards Poland. 

The Dniester valley seems a natural route to me and one that points like an arrow to Małopolska and the burial sites of the CWC-X Horizon. Is it the only possible route? No, obviously not, but it brings one up through Podolia, where there are quite a few Yamnaya burials. 

We know that the oldest known CWC Y-DNA results thus far were all R1b-L151, one of which was R1b-U106, and all of them were recovered in Bohemia in the Czech Republic, not all that far west of Małopolska, and dating not long after the CWC-X Horizon. 

I'm not alone in this view. It is the viewpoint of Polish archaeologist and CWC expert Piotr Włodarczak. Evidently archaeologist Volker Heyd also thinks the CWC was formed from Yamnaya in SE Poland, at least that is what Kristian Kristiansen told Razib Khan in a recent interview. Svitlana Ivanova has also mentioned the likelihood that Yamnaya took the Dniester valley route into central Europe.

I realize we could all be wrong. I also realize that it's likely that some of the steppe pastoralists came west from the Dnieper and then may have cut northwest up the Dniester, or something similar.

Oh, I almost forgot to mention that there was plenty of GAC along the Dniester valley route, and evidently GAC admixture was part of what made the CWC what it was autosomally (and in terms of pottery).

Since no one gave me a "like" for that post, which I thought was better than about nine tenths of my posts, I'm wondering what everyone else thinks. So, how did Corded Ware come to be? How do you account for the IBD between CWC and Yamnaya? Imaginary?

I  really appreciate your input showing the IBD connection. I just don't have the depth of knowledge to connect time frame of  Yamnaya L51 main migration path or multiple paths and multiple time frames (for example are there older Yamnaya burials beneath the Polish Corded Ware burials? As you pointed out Eastern Afanasievo migration is pretty clear cut, in terms of age and location L 51 is clearly connected with Yamnaya. What is the oldest archeological Corded Ware site?  Does  L51 Corded Ware predate R1a Corded Ware. Do Corded Ware R1a and L51 share any metallurgy techniques?

The following is from pages 468-469 of “Corded Ware from East to West", by Janusz Czebreszuk, pages 467-475 in the book, Ancient Europe 8000 B.C.–A.D. 1000: Encyclopedia of the Barbarian World (edited by Peter Bogucki and Pam Crabtree; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 2004).

The earliest-known carbon-14 dates for Corded Ware come from Kujavia and Małopolska in central and southern Poland. These include a grave at Krusza Zamkowa in Kujavia [date revised to 2800-2600 BC – Włodarczak] and a barrow at S’rednia in Małopolska dating to the transition from the fourth to the third millennium B.C. Carbon-14 dating of the remaining central European regions shows that Corded Ware appeared after 2880 B.C. Around that time, in 2725 B.C., the first pile settlements (dwellings built on pilings at the edge of lakes) appeared in the Alpine foothills. Such sites have yielded materials characteristic of Corded Ware. The latest dates, about the middle of the third millennium B.C., are from the Russian Plain. The most likely hypothesis, then, is that Corded Ware first appeared (on the transition between the fourth and third millennia B.C.) in the central part of its domain and spread from east to west. In 2725 B.C. it reached its southwestern edge. About 2500 B.C., Corded Ware spread in another direction, to the northeast, and it is eventually found on the upper Volga.

It does not mention the site at Hubinek, which probably had not been discovered when Czebreszuk wrote that article. Both Hubinek and Srednia are dated 3000-2900 BC but belong to the CWC-X Horizon, which is pre-Corded. The first fully CW horizon is CWC-A.

[ArmandoR1b]

I'm a little confused about your reference to the "Yamnaya from Kalmykia that show to be R-L51 but aren't R-Z2103." Are you referring to RISE550 from Peshany V in Kalmykia who had a single G>A read at PF6535 and thus may not have been L51, or are you also referring to sample I12893 from the Lazaridis preprint, which was recovered at Idzhil-2 near Idzhil in Kalmykia? Is there some reason to doubt the L51 status of I12893?

Since RISE550 is ancestral for R-L51 itself but was considered to possibly be R-L51 based on a single phylogenetic equivalent SNP then it is possible that the same thing happened with I12893. However, if there are two specimens ancestral for R-L51 but derived for PF6535 then it's more likely that the PF6535 result is real especially if there are no contradictory derived reads for I12893.

So I think it's best to be cautious about the R-L51 assignment for I12893 until the BAM is uploaded or FTDNA analyzes it and reports what they think is the derived result.

What about the three other Yamnaya L51 assignments? Same thing?

One Yamnayan is L52. I think that is a good indication that the others that are L51 really are L51 plus something downstream of it. 

As you implied, RISE550 might still be legitimately R-PF6535.

I hope we get those BAM files soon.

I don't think the same of the others. I might have forgotten about those in a previous post. Trying to do too many things over the past several days has me forgetting some details.

R-L52 is definitely real. It's not susceptible to deamination so that can't be a cause and it's not highly recurrent.

Even though I implied it is possible that RISE550 might still be legitimately R-PF6535 I still don't think that it is likely and there probably won't ever be a way to prove it.

I updated my database to include the Lazaridis 2024 samples since I think that the separate databases caused me to not consider them in a previous post.

I think that I6884 and I11838 are too young to matter for now as far as the source of R-L151 in western Europe. That leaves I12823 and I20499 as likely accurate results and old enough to have importance as evidence of the source of R-L151 in western Europe.

I still haven't had time to read your latest hypothesis on the path it took. It will take me a while since I'll need to read up on a few things you mentioned in a post.

In the mean time I have been trying to get a layered map together based on each century between 3000 BC-2200 BC. It has taken more of my time than I thought it would.

[rmstevens2]

Since RISE550 is ancestral for R-L51 itself but was considered to possibly be R-L51 based on a single phylogenetic equivalent SNP then it is possible that the same thing happened with I12893. However, if there are two specimens ancestral for R-L51 but derived for PF6535 then it's more likely that the PF6535 result is real especially if there are no contradictory derived reads for I12893.

So I think it's best to be cautious about the R-L51 assignment for I12893 until the BAM is uploaded or FTDNA analyzes it and reports what they think is the derived result.

What about the three other Yamnaya L51 assignments? Same thing?

One Yamnayan is L52. I think that is a good indication that the others that are L51 really are L51 plus something downstream of it. 

As you implied, RISE550 might still be legitimately R-PF6535.

I hope we get those BAM files soon.

I don't think the same of the others. I might have forgotten about those in a previous post. Trying to do too many things over the past several days has me forgetting some details.

R-L52 is definitely real. It's not susceptible to deamination so that can't be a cause and it's not highly recurrent.

Even though I implied it is possible that RISE550 might still be legitimately R-PF6535 I still don't think that it is likely and there probably won't ever be a way to prove it.

I updated my database to include the Lazaridis 2024 samples since I think that the separate databases caused me to not consider them in a previous post.

I think that I6884 and I11838 are too young to matter for now as far as the source of R-L151 in western Europe. That leaves I12823 and I20499 as likely accurate results and old enough to have importance as evidence of the source of R-L151 in western Europe.

I still haven't had time to read your latest hypothesis on the path it took. It will take me a while since I'll need to read up on a few things you mentioned in a post.

In the mean time I have been trying to get a layered map together based on each century between 3000 BC-2200 BC. It has taken more of my time than I thought it would.

I think they're all too young to matter with regard to L151. To me what they show is the presence of L51 in Yamnaya (obviously), which is important. Because of their wide distribution they show that it's likely L51 was much more common in Yamnaya than some folks think.

Of course, I could be wrong, but it seems to me the Yamnaya L51>L52>L151 progression was a product of a NW variety of Yamnaya, the one that led to the formation of Corded Ware.

[ArmandoR1b]

I think they're all too young to matter with regard to L151. To me what they show is the presence of L51 in Yamnaya (obviously), which is important. Because of their wide distribution they show that it's likely L51 was much more common in Yamnaya than some folks think.

Of course, I could be wrong, but it seems to me the Yamnaya L51>L52>L151 progression was a product of a NW variety of Yamnaya, the one that led to the formation of Corded Ware.

I just wish there were enough ancient samples with enough coverage that we could see the progression of the mutations and the movements of the people.

I don't think I am repeating myself, but not sure, about the following. The TMRCA of fully fledged R-L52 is 3350 BCE. Yamnaya began about 3300 BC. It would be really nice to see some of those R-L52 specimens from about 3300-3000 BC. So far there aren't any at all, not even reportedly so in Lazaridis 2024. If they are found in a Yamnaya burial in NW Yamnaya territory then you'll have your proof. The nice thing about the R-L52 subclade is that the P310 and P311 equivalents have a good rate of a read and neither are susceptible to deamination. They just need to find those specimens and get good quality DNA from the remains. As you have stated once before. it's a very slow process.