- This topic has 5 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by .
- November 18, 2020 at 4:35 pm #34215BulkParticipant
- Topics: 1
- Replies: 2
Hello,I was wondering if you have any explanation/idea to the dispersal of this subclade because the european side doesnt seem to make much sense to me given its an eastern variant of R1b but the Indian/Uyghur side is pretty interesting too.Any idea about the origins of this R1b variant would be much appreciated because so far I wasnt able to find a single morsel of information about its possible origins.
Thank you!November 21, 2020 at 11:22 am #34293Carlos QuilesKeymaster
- Topics: 51
- Replies: 82
R-14415/14416 is a very interesting subclade, and it is a pity FTDNA does not have information on the Uighur/Indian side, or SNP Tracker would have got the path correctly (more centered on the Pontic-Caspian steppes). Same lack of information – due to the lack of many other samples in other Asian Z2108 and Z2103 branches – affects older path nodes and TMRCA estimations. I think a big correction is expected soon to the SNP age estimations with help of FTDNA R&D team, but I don’t know exactly when; and that won’t solve the geographical problem, unless the nodes are manually pegged based on external information like YFull’s or from ancient DNA.
Anyway, I don’t think that the TMRCA estimates of Z2103 branches (currently ca. 3400 BC) are going to be much older than the formation dates estimated by YFull for Z2103 (ca. 4100 BC), although some branches might get a more reliable starting point for their migration. Based on YTree estimations with Iain McDonald’s method, maybe a little older for all of them.
Its distribution to the east and west of the steppes (starting ca. 3400 BC) appears to reflect the Late Repin (→ Early Yamnaya / Afanasievo) expansion, and the distribution later in Europe with R-Y14512 starting ca. 2600 BC reminds of the Bell Beaker expansion.
In fact, it has been found in ancient DNA (as a basal R-14415*/14416* subclade) in MOK19A and MOK22, from the Mokrin Necropolis, which confirms its spread with West Yamnaya/East Bell Beakers.
Nevertheless, the lack of a proper modern sampling makes it impossible to infer where the R-Y14414 subclade might have come from. It looks like a single late bottleneck event (ca. 1800 BC), possibly from Northern Europe (Germanic peoples??) due to (1) its modern presence in Sweden, Germany, or Scotland and (2) the more frequent BA-IA north→south European expansions; but these regions are clearly over-tested relative to SE Europe.
In short, I’d say this is one of the lineages whose modern distribution shows a paradigmatic Yamanaya-Afanasievo expansion, and in this case it has been now proven for the western part in ancient DNA. Maybe some of those Old Uyghurs from Mongolia published by Jeong et al. (2020) will show the subclade, too, but I think one is already within the R-CTS7763 branch, so that is probably more likely for the rest of them.November 22, 2020 at 11:56 am #34305BulkParticipant
- Topics: 1
- Replies: 2
Thank you,this was really helpful,I wasnt even aware of the Mokrin necropolis samples,it changes a lot.I’m not on yfull but i belong to R-Y14422 and I’m a Hungarian from Slovakia,just like the other sample with the more downstream R-Y16005.One last thing I’m not sure about because of the dating.Could my line have remained in the region since the bronze age invasion of yamnaya or because its a more downstream mutation,the most basal so far being from Sweden,it probably arrived later from the north with a germanic expansion back to the Carpathian Basin?January 14, 2021 at 12:53 pm #34872Carlos QuilesKeymaster
- Topics: 51
- Replies: 82
Sorry, I didn’t see the post. I have been tweaking the forum a little bit more, to see if I can make it work.
It’s impossible to know, but I don’t think you can describe the Swedish sample R-Y14422* as as “the most basal”, since it is just “basal”; in other words, it forms another parallel branch to yours, for which no modern relatives have yet been found. In fact, it separated so far back that only Late Repin would connect your line to his, with likely parallel migrations in different Yamnaya clans.
If anything, based on TMRCA, the Russian individual (also basal, but this to R-Y14422), as well as the approximately sister clades in a Swede and German (and later Scottish) might be quite relevant: it reminded me of the pattern of some ‘eastern’ haplogroups that have been recently found to be part of expanding Viking lineages.
The TMRCA changes are so radically different, though, that no particular migration can be easily described for the whole group. Also, there are many more testers from Western and Northern Europe, so my guess is that a similar testing level in Central-Eastern Europe might give a lot more samples (throughout the tree) and maybe change this first impression.
For example, it wouldn’t be surprising that R-Y14422 belonged to eastern Urnfield groups, and as such formed eventually part of Celtic migrations, hence its current distribution. Or that it remained a local lineage that formed eventually part of Slavic lines later migrating to the northwest. I wouldn’t bet for these alternatives right now, but they are certainly possible.
January 20, 2021 at 9:11 pm #35269lukovkinParticipant
- This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by .
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 1
I suppose that’s me a Russian individual under R-Y14422* (namely id:YF67304) in the YFull chart and your post)
That’s a very interesting topic for me, though I’m definitely not an expert.
I was quite lonesome for some time in this subclade but recently another guy has his BigY test completed, found himself in the same haplogroup, and we’ve got in touch.
What is interesting, FTDNA initially put me in R-Y14513 haplogroup and then, after he finished his testing, they’ve put us in a new subclade – R-FT156653. I guess the trees are bit different on YFull and FTDNA, and another guy is not on YFull yet.
Our ancestors lived in the same region (Tambov region of Russia) at least in XIX century, but we failed to find the common ancestor yet, and our surnames are different. We have a distance of 8 at BigY, so the common ancestor could be deeper than we could find.
I’ll be happy to dig deeper on that.January 21, 2021 at 1:36 pm #35306BulkParticipant
- Topics: 1
- Replies: 2
So basically more testing is needed. I’ve seen some Rusyns and Eastern Slovaks with R1b-Z2103 however none of them did a deep-clade test so its impossible to know whether they share our subclade or not or whether they are locals or just some back-migration. I’d guess locals that got slavicized and some of them somehow moved north as Z2103+ clades seem to be rather uncommon that west but who knows.
Hello Lukovkin,I’ve only done yseq so I’m not on yfull but I belong to R-Y14422(negative for all known downstream snps) and I’m from Slovakia(my surname traces to a town in south-central Slovakia).There is also another guy from Slovakia(more eastern part) with a common Hungarian surname Szabó but he has a more downstream https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Y16005/ so as I understand it right now, my subclade seems to be closer to yours. As far as I know,that is until the beginning of the 18th century,all my paternal ancestors lived in Northern-Hungary/Modern Slovakia and there probably wasnt any migration in the last 500 years as my autosomal dna is pretty boring(Eastern European from Slovakia/Hungary/Czech Rep. and German from the Saxons in Northern-Slovakia,literally nothing else,not even trace amounts) so I’d guess it would be impossible to find a common ancestor.I tried to contact the other guy from Slovakia but as I said I’m not on yfull and half of Hungary has the surname Szabó so it would be impossible to find him by only this info. Anyways, if you find anything interesting/new,let me know,I will do the same,I’m hoping for some not-so-distant ancient dna that could clarify the situation.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.