Saturday, December 14, 2019
Avalon vs Valhalla revisited
Pictured below is a new version of my Celtic vs Germanic genetic map. It's based on the same Principal Component Analysis (PCA) as the original (which can be seen here), but more focused on Northwestern Europe and produced with a different program.
To see the interactive online version, navigate to Vahaduo Custom PCA and copy paste the text from here into the empty space under the PCA DATA tab. Then press the PLOT PCA button under the PCA PLOT tab. For more guidance, refer to the screen caps here and here.
To include a wider range of populations in the key, just edit the data accordingly. For instance, to break up the ancient grouping into more specific populations, delete the Ancient: prefix in all of the relevant rows. This is what you should see:
Conversely, you can leave the ancient sample set intact and instead reorder the present-day linguistic groupings into, say, geographic groupings. To achieve this just delete all of the linguistic prefixes, such as Celtic:, Germanic:, and so on. You should end up with a datasheet like this and plot like this.
Of course, you can design your own plot by using any combination of the ancient and present-day individuals and populations that I've already run in this PCA. Their coordinates are listed here. Indeed, if you're in the possession of your own Celtic vs Germanic PCA coordinates, you can add yourself to the plot. And if you're not, see here.
It's also possible to re-process PCA data via the SOURCE tab. But I don't recommend doing this with the Celtic vs Germanic data, which are derived from a fine scale analysis and don't pack much variation. On the other hand, Global25 data are ideal for such re-processing. I made the plots below from subsets of Global25 coordinates available in a zip file here. To see how, refer to the screen caps here and here.
See also...
Modeling your ancestry has never been easier
Getting the most out of the Global25
Modeling genetic ancestry with Davidski: step by step
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
112 comments:
Thanks David.
As you most probably know I'm stocky North Dutch. The mix and the add of ancient and current populations doesn't deliver much extra formation for me.
Plotting only the ancients delivers this picture:
https://www.mupload.nl/img/1w0hgsu9cy.png
As such nothing wrong with that. But the Anglo-Saxons are quite on distance. I guess too much on distance.
This chances when I bring in the Sigtunian Vikings. IMO this is a better plot! The Anglo-Saxons come very close now. More accurate regarding my origins.
https://www.mupload.nl/img/5bf72ot3j5c0.png
But I miss the Sigtunians in your list.....(and how about the Iceland Vikings and Gaels?).
OK, I updated all of the Celtic vs Germanic plots and datasheets in the blog post. The links haven't changed.
The "full" datasheet has a lot of new samples...
Celto-Germanic_PCA_full
Vahaduo Custom PCA is a nice tool. A big thanks to Vahaduo.
And to Davidski for generating the data.
This is great! Thanks.
I noticed a lot more Lech samples are here than in the regular G25 spreadsheets. Is there a reason for that?
Lots of modern samples here, too. I especially like the way the Dutch are divided here.
@Michalis
I noticed a lot more Lech samples are here than in the regular G25 spreadsheets. Is there a reason for that?
I don't need to be as strict with the sample quality as in the Global25, because there's very little variation here after PC2.
Nice to have the whole list!!!
Major conclusion within the family in G25 my mother is most Germanic/Swedish like and dad Germanic/Isles like but in the GvsC is my father more early medieval Germanic like.
Any clues?
My basic thought is that Mom has a more proto-Germanic (SGC/TRB) genetic profile, Dad has more 'recent' North Sea Germanic kind of ancestry.
Also seen the fact that in G25 and in GvsC in my my mom's sample Lech Valley pops up, as David suggested this could be North Sea BB that went SE wards....
@All
Please note that I've just changed some of the population codes for the samples.
I'll be updating these spreadsheets regularly now, so I'll be changing population codes as the need arises to better represent the variation.
This is what I get (mom sample) when I take the whole bunch:
0.02582363 Norwegian:Norwegian:Norwegian3
0.02710978 England_MBA:I7570
0.02778921 Germany_Medieval:Germany_Medieval:STR_486
0.02815866 Germany_Lech_EBA:POST_6
0.02817463 Polish_West:Polish_West:Polish_West11
0.02822463 Germany_Medieval:Germany_Medieval:ALH_1
0.02840810 England_Roman:England_Roman:6DT22
0.02865205 French_Brittany:B_3
0.02918715 England_MBA:I2639
0.02921712 England_MBA:I7574
Looks a mess. Partly because the distances in NW Europe stay small G25 or GvC, but I guess the elephant in the room is BB North Dutch,
@ weure
Wonder if that French_Brittany is there because of migrations of same Britons to Brittany from England during the Middle Ages ?
@Ric, te distance doesn't tell us much about the direction ....unfortunately......but may be.
My Dad's sample is more migration ages Germanic (more recent shift). But the elephant (BB North Dutch) is neither far away, but less obvious than ^^^).
0.02247421 Italy_Medieval_Collegno:CL47
0.02304387 Sweden_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_grt035
0.02455626 Italy_Medieval_Collegno:CL53
0.02492027 Slovakia_Poprad:DA119
0.02505274 French_Brittany:B_78
0.02529387 Hungary_Medieval_Szolad:SZ13
0.02552430 Hungary_Medieval_Szolad:SZ18
0.02599712 Welsh:Welsh1
0.02602364 Scottish:Scottish:Scottish17
0.02631729 Italy_Medieval_Collegno:CL93
0.02651207 Italy_Medieval_Collegno:CL63
0.02678003 Norwegian:Norwegian:Norwegian3
0.02741897 England_IA:I0160
0.02745433 Spain_Visigothic:Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL:I12162
0.02751963 Iceland_Viking_Age_Norse:VDP-A5
@All
In my opinion, the best ways to use the Celtic vs Germanic PCA data for personal ancestry and genealogical purposes are these:
- put yourself on the plot and then check which populations you overlap with and how exactly, because this is likely to tell you how you fit into the genetic variation of Northwestern Europe and also your ethnic group, if you actually derive from a single ethnic group and know what it is
- model your ancestry using sensibly chosen and defined sets of ancient and modern populations, respectively, but never mix them up.
I'll get into this in more detail when many more Iron Age and Medieval samples from across Northern and Central Europe become available soon, because they're likely to make this analysis, as well as the Global25, much more interesting for many people for these sorts of things.
@David, but it's partly also interesting to take all the samples in on big pool and that see what drives to the surface...
But more 'in depth' I will try the iron age/ medieval age samples. Fine tool!
@ weure
Yes. That Viking, Norwegian, Visigoth also looks interesting. Wonder what that could tell us about the Visigoths origin ?
And I wonder if the Britons who migrated to Brittany had more Roman admixture than the ones who didn't migrate...?
@Ric
These English Roman samples actually lack ancestry from Southern Europe.
There's one that appears to be entirely of southern Levant or even Egyptian origin, but he's not in this analysis, for obvious reasons.
@Ric, Visigoths are Germanic rooted I guess....North Germany/South Scandic.
'There's one that appears to be entirely of southern Levant or even Egyptian origin, but he's not in this analysis, for obvious reasons.'
Damned David I have E-V22 so if there was in the Roman period such (Egyptian/Southern Levant, high in E-V22!!!) influx to England why not to Frisia? #sidekickremark
@ Davidski
Thanks very interesting.
@ weure
Frisian pirates catching some Romano-British ?
@ric, nope I guess the connection to the Roman world...can be slaves or gladiators you name it. The Frisians of Roman time were very integrated in the Roman world. So when there is an Egyptian/Southern Levant person pops up in Roman York....this could also be the case in Friesland.
@ weure
Apparently there were some Frisian Soldiers from Twente brought over to Britain (York) and significant trade between Frisia and Britain during Roman Times. So yes the E-V22 could have come from any direction...but mostly linked to Roman Activities. Maybe.
@weure
There is a story Annales of Tacitus that the Romans raided Germania and fought massive battles for revenge of the Teutoburger battle. Lots of Germanic deaths are reported but also that at some point the Romans retreated because of their losses. The Chauci were on the side of the Romans in those days.
At one point a Roman fleet sunk and survivers, among which Germanicus himself, found refuge among the Chauci.
Have a look at the map of J2 in this article in Dutch:
https://www.volkskrant.nl/wetenschap/in-uw-dna-gloeit-de-geschiedenis-nog-na~b7076c88/
The lingustic labels are partly questionable.
The Scots as Germanic? The highlands were traditionally Gaelic speaking, just like Ireland. But indeed the southern part of Scotland traditionally spoke Scots, a Germanic language which is often forgotten. So if these Scottish samples are not just from Argyll and include Lowland and Highland Scots Celto-Germanic could be an apt label, analogous to Germano-Romance for the Belgians.
At first sight I wondered what the latter is supposed to mean at all. After all, Germano-Romance is not an accepted linguistic variety of Romance. ;-) But as there is no info on which of these Belgians are Flemish and which ones Walloons, we can't avoid to put them into one mixed category.
The French samples are all put into the Romance category which is questionable in the case of Brittany and Alsace. The western half of Brittany was traditionally Breton speaking and thus Celtic. And although the Alsace region includes some old Romance speaking areas the large majority of it traditionally spoke German, or more precisely Alsatian, an Alemannic dialect. At present both in Alsace and Brittany French dominates, but these language shifts to French occured very recently and for sure no earlier than the shift from Gaelic to English in Ireland. So if the Irish are still classified as Celtic, even though English predominates in Ireland, then the Bretons must be classified as Celto-Romance (because eastern Brittany Always spoke Romance) and the Alsatians Germanic.
And if the Austrians are included among the Germanic samples, why not the German Swiss as well?
Breton and Alsatian are not completely dead, there are still native speakers around, as with Gaelic and Welsh.
Oh, and DEU_MA is erroneously put into the modern Germanic category. Well, no problem all of this, since we can change it ourselves on Vahaduo. But the users have to be aware of these points.
@Ric yes : DEO MARTI ET DVABVS ALAISIAGIS ET N AVG GER CIVES TVIHANTI >>> CVNEI FRISIORVM<<<< VER SER ALEXANDRIANI VOTVM SOLVERVNT LIBENTES M
Up until now there are only two NE Dutch E-V22 samples one from very small town Friesland the other from very small town in Tubantia/Twente......coincidence?
@Epoch thanks didn't know that, I only know that the 'terpen' In Friesland/Groningen are filled with Roman stuff, may be the after the fall of the Roman Friesland population dip has a connection with the Roman world and the changes of it, Germanics are an invention vis a vis the Roman world, see the influence of the Germanic foederati.
Did you also see the influence of E-V22 nephew E-V13? But getting of topic.....
@ weure
Yes you surely are onto something there. Very interesting potential history of your forefathers you got there...
Some observations on the Celto-Germanic PCA plot:
The Germanic corner is in the bottom left part where it's maxxed out in Vikings from Sigtuna and from Iceland.
The far right part of the plot is occupied by the French from the Auvergne, a relatively southern population.
There is an old British Isles corner in the upper left part of the plot maximised in England_MBA and some modern Irish.
The true Celts are rather central (Hallstatt_Bylany:DA112) to upper right corner (Hallstatt_Bylany:DA111, England_IA:M1489). Most Bretons plot there, but there is also a northern French (N_19) and an Alsatian (A_81) in this corner, so it's a continental corner.
The modern Germans occupy the broad belt between the old Germanic corner on the left and the Romance group on the right, but already the migration age Germanic individual from Poprad plots immediately near Hallstatt_Bylany:DA112. So that's where we have to draw the line between old Germanic and old Celtic.
It's also nicely apparent how England_Roman:6DT18 falls rather into the Germanic corner, in line with previous analyses.
Most (but not all) other England_Roman individuals have a pull towards the center, as do the other England_IA individuals. I see also a Welsh individual (BK58) quite far in the center, or even two, one seems to be covered by a German. And alongside some Englishmen there are also several South Dutch (but no North Dutch) quite far in the upper central part of the plot, the old Celtic corner.
I'm curious how my father and my grandmothers plot in this. I thought I already had their coordinates, but I confused it with the North European PCA which is no longer offered. Now I have to wait for the results.
Is Turkic on the pca Anatolian Turkish?
I added my co-ords to the plot and I was a bit surprised. All my recorded ancestry is from North West England, so I expected to plot slap bang in the middle of the Celtic-Germanic zone, but no, I plotted at the extreme left end of the Romance area.
@Palacista
Let me guess, you used your Global25 coords?
That's a different analysis.
Yes, I was about to ask about that..
I debased on some runs.
@Simon my father has a Germanic migration time signature he also has a close affinity to Poprad without a Hallstatt connection....
@David in my mother’s case and with different runs (pen=0 and pen=0,001) Lech EBA comes significant through, although I used mostly medieval and Iron Age samples that are presumably closer. I guess this underlines you’re supposed connection between the North Dutch BB and BB/EBA Lech Valley.
@Simon: Dont be so sure about Bylany being representative of Celts. Its too early and its in the borderzone to Eastern Hallstatt.
I'm not saying that Bylany will be completely different from the Celtic core, but whether they are the golden standard to compare with for later Celtic speakers cant be said for sure.
How many early La Tene warriors do we have right now?
@ Zardos
Bohemia is outright Eastern Hallstatt, no? So yes, they don't equal the early La Tene core. I would guess, from the Celtic vs. Germanic PCA plot, this may be rather around England_IA:M1489 and the Bretons. At least this would be a core, the two Bylany samples are so terribly disparate.
I've got the co-ords now. Maternal grandma (Swabian/Swiss) close to the Romance cluster, as I suspected. Makes sense. Paternal grandma (East Prussian) very Germanic. It's in line with other analyses, but I still find it remarkable because her physical type has been described as typical "Celtic Nordic". Father (half Swiss/South Baden) quite a bit shifted into a Breton direction. This is the most surprising result. Based on Global25 models I thought he had little Celtic ancestry, but yeah, maybe I just didn't use the right samples. A shift towards Northwestern France or Northeastern England is precisely what his Eurogenes K36 results had suggested. I found this strange, but the explanation may be strong western La Tene ancestry...
@Simon W
you're right for the most, I think.
The most of Ireland left the Gaelic language 300 years before W-Brittany and Alsace began to do. And Breton was spoken more eastwards (parts of East-Central brittany) until 14th Century).
Concerning Lowlands, as a lot of English regions, but even more, they remain more Celtic than Germanic, spite their diverse post-Anglo-Saxondialects and English language.
Concerning Belgians, they would be better classified Celto-Germanic than Romance-Germanic, more Germanic among Flemish, more Celtic among Walloons, I think, spite the Romance tongues of Walloonia.
Let's see what PCA's tell us about thses terms.
@Weure
I doubt we could compare Roman Britain with Frisia, whatever the time.
The footprint of Rome is surely very stronger and during longer in Britain than in Frisia. IMO at least.
@Yes of course the Frisians were beyond the limes and just a short time under direct Roman rule. But they were very integrated in the Roman world. They were important players around the North Sea and Rhine. They delivered foederati....And even the fall of the Roman Empire could have caused a depopulation in Friesland. The impact of the Roman world on the North Sea people was big Moesan!
re: Global25 models of my father, a mix of England_Roman:6DT23 and Hallstatt_Bylany:DA111 seems to work fine to represent his Celtic ancestry. Makes sense, thus far south the La Tene core people must have admixed with earlier Hallstatt locals.
Distance: 2.2368% / 0.02236753
DEU_MA 63.8
Baltic_LTU_BA 12.4
CZE_Hallstatt_Bylany:DA111 12.2
England_Roman:6DT23 11.6
But regarding this post and this full list of GvsC, what about this:
Davidski oktober:
'WEHR_1192SkA is very similar to Bell Beakers from the northern Netherlands with whom he shares the R1b-P312 Y-haplogroup, suggesting that he was part of a population that moved into the Lech Valley from potentially as far away as the North Sea coast'
In the vahaduo result of my mother this EBA Lech Valley is along the more recent iron age and early middle age samples the biggest chunck!!! 24% in vahaduo.
My mother has only North Dutch Drenthe ancestry, for me this gives a very clear indication that indeed BB form the North Sea Coast went as far as the Lech Valley!!!
Or not....?????
I'm no expert for the Bylany culture, but its a regional group with rather Eastern affiliations. Western Bohemia is different. In any case they are not representative of Western Hallstatt and rather unlikely to be part of the Celtic La Tene core, vital for the spread of Celtic tongue in the West.
Just not the right sample for a period in which nuances matter.
May be i am wrong, but let's wait to get some Gaulish samples before reaching any definitive conclusion about Celtic ancestry, especially for France.
https://lascarbx.labex.u-bordeaux.fr/files/LASCARBX/2019/Avis_soutenance_Fischer.pdf
"A total of 106 haplogroups and 87 mitochondrial haplotypes could be characterized, as well as 15 paternal lines. In addition, 12 low-coverage genomes were obtained."
(...)
"These results form a set of indices supporting a patrilocal type matrimonial system and a patrilineal type filiation, consistent with the data in the literature. On a regional scale, the results show that the sites located in the lower Seine valley share more affinities with the groups in the south of England while those in the upper Seine valley are closer to the populations of the he east of France and occupy an intermediate position between the north and the south of France, thus highlighting a genetic structure of these groups according to their location along this fluvial axis. Finally, on a continental scale, the results show that the Iron Age communities of Western Europe form a coherent genetic cluster and exhibit genetic continuity with the Bronze Age groups. The acquired data agree with the archaeological hypotheses favoring an economic, political and / or climatic transition to explain the transition between the Bronze Age and the Iron Age, in agreement with the local evolution of the groups perceived at the genetic level."
@Zardos @Simon:
Bylany Hallstatt is highly nowadays Central West Europe: Northern France, Belgium, South Dutch, Southwest Germany....
Distance to AncientCzechia_Hallstatt_BylanyDA112
0.03291383 French_AlsaceA_31
0.03519560 Dutch_SouthDutch_South6
0.03547859 Dutch_SouthDutch_South25
0.03588649 French_NordN_22
0.03623106 BelgianBelgian20
0.03691246 French_AlsaceA_56
0.03712950 OrcadianOrcadian3
0.03720363 Dutch_NorthDutch_North24
0.03722875 NorwegianNorwegian5
0.03723829 GermanGerman19
Distance to AncientCzechia_Hallstatt_BylanyDA111
0.02868554 GermanGerman21
0.02975769 French_AuvergneC_3
0.03016455 German_EastGerman_East11
0.03050590 BelgianBelgian7
0.03092604 French_AlsaceA_69
0.03173799 French_AlsaceA_56
0.03182326 BelgianBelgian19
0.03210421 AustrianAustrian4
0.03216535 GermanGerman43
0.03253982 French_BrittanyB_10
@weure: There might be a better proxy for original Celts, thats the issue. That Bylany was related and can be used as a reference until better fitting samples are available doesnt change that. We just don’t know yet how close early La Tene Celtic warriors are to the Bylany samples.
We have to deal with the samples we have but this comes at least very close to the classic Hallstatt and La Tene geographical spread.....so this fits already for for example the Belgae....
But if the reference is not save, how can the results be? New samples might prove that Bylany fits as good, but I doubt it.
Because as said there is an overlap a fit between the Hallstatt/La Tene cultural area and the area's in the distance ^^^.
So safe or unsafe IMO is this overlap no coincidence.....
OT, but I find it interesting. The oldest trousers in the world belonged to a steppe horseman who was buried in Turfan 3,200 years ago:
https://www.dainst.blog/190JahreDAI/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Landschaften-Hose-1024x682.jpg
https://www.dainst.blog/190JahreDAI/en/day-8-the-oldest-trousers-in-the-world/
Similar geometric pattern embroidery was used among northern Slavs not long ago:
https://borissoff.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/zharnikova3.png
https://borissoff.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/russian-and-indian-embroidery/
You can buy something in this style now:
https://www.etsy.com/no-en/listing/658295619/red-embroidery-print-old-embroidery
@ Davidski
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/851188v1.full
What are the Y-chromosome haplogroups of the 25 males? I can't see them listed anywhere in the manuscript.
BAM files are available since last week:
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB35327
Sardinian aDNA has been published too:
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB35094
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/583104v1
The Khazar preprint is also out...
Diverse genetic origins of medieval steppe nomad conquerors
The authors used the BAM Analysis Kit from www.y-str.org.
WTF?
@Davidski None of the authors seems to have previous experience in ancient DNA studies. May be that's why.
@Davidski, is it possible for you to add the Wartberg culture BAM files to G25 PCA?
uhm, the study on ancient Sardinia originally claimed 43 samples but the ENA page now claims 70, and the number of runs is 133(including mtDNA ones), I can't even find some of the IDs in the material of the original paper, interesting
David, are you planning on adding some of these to G25?
So is the long and short of this that Germanics are pretty Celtic-admixed?
@davidski "Conversely, you can leave the ancient sample set intact and instead reorder the present-day linguistic groupings into, say, geographic groupings. To achieve this just delete all of the linguistic prefixes, such as Celtic:, Germanic:, and so on. You should end up with a datasheet like this and plot like this."
Perhaps a stupid question: Is there a way to easily "chop off" the prefix or do I have to manually edit each line? The googledoc doesn't want to behave like a spreadsheet when I throw it into excel in an effort to just delete the first column.
@All, Hallstatt-DA112 is not Celtic. He is probably a Scythian from Central-East Europe buried with Celts. He only has minor actual Scythian ancestry. But, what sets him apart is that his European ancestry is not from Western Europe but is from Central-East Europe: It mostly comes from pops similar to Hungary Bronze age and Welzin Bronze age (Tollense valley warriors).
He is really similar to samples from Hungary Scythian samples. Which is why he is probably a "Scythian" from Central-East Europe buried in a Celtic burial.
@ Samuel Andrews and Dave
What do you think about the EBA Lech Valley samples? Are they pre-Celtic, as suggested by Tomenable of Anthrogenica/Apricity?
@Samuel - for all we know pre-Celtic came from the east though.
I can't seem to find the tables for the Khazar paper. Is there anything like R1a-Y2905 or ancestral to it there by any chance? That's my grandfather's haplogroup and its distribution seems Khazar/Tatar to my eye.
@JS Are Bell Beaker pre Celtic ok than yes, But I guess they are as pre Celtic as pre Germanic.....
'WEHR_1192SkA is very similar to Bell Beakers from the northern Netherlands with whom he shares the R1b-P312 Y-haplogroup, suggesting that he was part of a population that moved into the Lech Valley from potentially as far away as the North Sea coast'
Samuel Andrews
„Hallstatt-DA112 is not Celtic. He is probably a Scythian from Central-East Europe buried with Celts.”
Target: CZE_Hallstatt_Bylany:DA112
Distance: 1.9153% / 0.01915293
24.4 KAZ_Golden_Horde_Euro:DA29
15.2 England_MBA:I7575
8.4 Bell_Beaker_Iberia:I6584
8.4 BGR_MP_N:I1297
7.6 Bell_Beaker_NLD:I4076
7.0 UKR_Trypillia:I2110
5.6 DEU_Welzin_BA:WEZ58
Hallstatt_Bylany:DA112 is also interesting for me because of KAZ_Golden_Horde_Euro:
https://i.postimg.cc/KjSyMYFz/screenshot-32.png
https://i.postimg.cc/TPFzzPK9/screenshot-33.png
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/11/modeling-your-ancestry-has-never-been.html?showComment=1572985971698#c1098931006607313128
The Sardinian ancient DNA is mostly V88 with some I2-M223. Not representative of all of modern Sardinian Y.
New recreation of a WHG woman:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50809586
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13549-9
The Sardinian ancient DNA is mostly V88 with some I2-M223. Not representative of all of modern Sardinian Y.”
Probable implication that not even Sardinian is directly evolving from the local Neolithic in Sardinia, even though they still are predominantly ‘of Neolithic ancestry’,
what is wrong with it? it is a script that goes to all the standard tools?
What standard tools?
Ancient data used in papers should be processed with proper pipelines, not something slapped together for the online genetic genealogy community.
@David - maybe they should have sent the samples to 23andMe. Then we'd know what % Neanderthal the Khazars were ;)
@Vinitharya
Please don't cite any results from MyTrueAncestry in the comments here, or I'll remove your posts.
@Davidski
The tool uses the following toolkits
BOW (samtools) - GNU GPLv2
Genome Analysis Tool Kit - Non commercial License.
lobSTR - GNU GPL v3
telseq - GNU GPL v3
bamtoolsGenome Analysis Tool Kit - Non commercial License.
lobSTR - GNU GPL v3
telseq - GNU GPL v3
bamtools - MIT License
Cygwin - - MIT License
Cygwin - GNU GPL v3
The script just automatically routes the data through the various tools.
Assuming your using a Bam file that has been adjusted for Damaged DNA. The results should be fairly robust as the pipeline uses bonafide and published and accepted tools.
So again what is wrong with the tool?
@Lee
So again what is wrong with the tool?
It's not designed for ancient DNA and it produces biased calls.
pre- is "before"
I prefer speak of 'proto-' or 'proto-proto' when filiation is at play.
I think more and more that proto-Celtic, as well as proto-Italic and proto- other western branches of IEan formed during the BA between Northern and Central Europe, on a linguistic layer already present at BB ages. For proto-Celts and proto-Italics (and other maybe between IE langages) I see - as some old scholars - their origin among the tumuli culture of Central Europe.
I suppose Hallstatt is the product of close Ieans and IE-ized people from West with contacts with more eastern tribes,without a too big genetic input of these last newcomers spite a cultural input.
the Hallstatt (elites!) archeology appears as linked to more "barbarous" more freshly steppic people, based upon an economy of militar controle of wealth and products. Matrics shows a croadly said 25 % input of elite newcomers at Hallstatt. La Tène seems like a return to a more ancient situation, a bit less agitated.
Concerning the basis of Celts, I think the bulk of their basic autosomal mix was already made since BA.
Concerning proto-Germanics (later?), I am not so sure. They seems influenced by more eastern and northern pops. After at the margins they mixed with IE-ized pops of more central-western regions, but if BB’s had an input on them, it could be a filtred input, through Unetice stage rather than through direct contemporary contacts. Tumuli culture had contacts too with Unetice but stayed apart spite cultural loans. Problems of ethny and culture… Absence or findings of ancient Y-R1b-U106 and ancient specific clades of Y-R1a during Calcho-BA could help to separate/or not proto-Celts/Celts from proto-Germanics.
@Moesan,the proto Germanic were highly Bell beaker too, the Jastorf area was also a BB hotspot.
https://www.mupload.nl/img/d584osrzi5t.png
And the Jastorf area:
https://www.mupload.nl/img/0eic3e7i0wcek.55.05.png
They are mainly overlapping.....
Kristian Kristiansen says in new book:
“Anatolian, which split off during the early to mid 4th millennium BC from early Maykop groups in the northern Caucasus. After the middle of the 4th millennium steppe Maykop expanded north, leading to the formation of the Yamnaya Culture and Proto-Indo-European”
https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004416192/BP000008.xml
https://brill.com/view/title/56151
Interesting how PIE language was transferred since neither Mykop nor Yamnay had PIE Y-DNA markers. By women? Or cultural diffusion? They have to produce some new DNA data to make me interested in such theories.
Yeah, in another chapter in that book David Anthony makes some stupid claims as well.
@David
"Yeah, in another chapter in that book David Anthony makes some stupid claims as well."
Such as?
I've got a post coming tomorrow about that book.
"Kristian Kristiansen says in new book:
“Anatolian, which split off during the early to mid 4th millennium BC from early Maykop groups in the northern Caucasus. After the middle of the 4th millennium steppe Maykop expanded north, leading to the formation of the Yamnaya Culture and Proto-Indo-European”
https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004416192/BP000008.xml"
He speaks complete delusional nonsense that contradicts historical, archaeological, linguistical, genetic data.
hmmm. as long as the input bam file is edited for damage, the pipeline should generate. adequate nonbiased calls. I think 1 or two of the toolss are a little dated and one may wish to update the script to use the latest versions of the programs. but for those without access to a linux based system, it works.
PIE may have exerted influence do tech and cultural dominance.
@Davidski
“Yeah, in another chapter in that book David Anthony makes some stupid claims as well.”
He says:
“Mating networks were regional human populations with distinctive combinations of genetic traits. Because languages usually were learned from the same parental sources that provided genes, languages probably showed at least an equivalent level of regional patterning and diversity.”
It can be a typo. For IE it should be “from the same paternal sources” not “from the same parental sources”. If by parental sources he understands here mating networks i.e. autosomal components, as in previous publications, then I am lost. I cannot see how mating networks, i.e. autosomal components EHG, CHG, WHG and EEF, can be linked to languages. They spoke very different families of languages. Look at North American Indians for example.
But I don’t have access to his new article and maybe there are new arguments and new data there.
@EastPole “Interesting how PIE language was transferred since neither Mykop nor Yamnay had PIE Y-DNA markers. By women? Or cultural diffusion? They have to produce some new DNA data to make me interested in such theories.”
I get what you’re saying about Maykop but I thought that Yamnaya were R1b (mostly), R1a (minority) and some few I2a. How exactly AREN’T it PIE markets is beyond me
@Andrzejewski
”is beyond me”
Why beyond you? I think it is all not certain.
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/09/is-yamnaya-overrated.html
@Rob, nonsense... Explanation? BB NE Dutch and NW Germany are one and the same. They are part of the Germanic roots.
@ Weure
Proto-Germanic was a long duree development followed by a more rapid expansion. Not sure why the emphasis on Dutch Beaker about it
@Rob, of course I don't deny that. What I state is this: the Bell Beakers, as said in NE Dutch and NW Germany one and the same according to archeologists (Lanting, Fokkens), are a basic component, so fundamental for the proto and the actual Germanics! To start with the first Germanic culture the Jastorf culture. The SGC>BB evolution is something that went on in the North German Plain/ Southern Scandinavian room.
Or as David stated: 'The Dutch Beakers (= also NW Germany Beakers- weure) don't exactly sit between the Corded Ware and the other Beaker samples, but generally at the apex of their clusters, suggesting to me that they're not a mixture between Corded Ware and one or more of the other Beaker groups, but rather, as per my recent argumentation, a genetically homogeneous, relatively unique and thus long-standing Corded Ware-related population that may have contributed significant gene flow to the other Beaker groups.'
Looking at the gene pool of the North German Plain/ Southern Scandinavia is TRB (with regional very high HG) the first layer, the 'Steppe component' came in with Single Grave (2800 BC). Out of it grew (SGC mixed with some TRB) BB. They spread all over the place. This mixing is going until today. These are the essential components (with evolution and mutations) of the Germanic genetic profile. These are the grand leaps of course...not going into detail.
Or to put in other words nowadays Germanics (=the folks that come close to the Germanic tribes in the migration ages) resemble for>>> more than 90% the Bell Beakers<<<<, as the TRB is more prominent there the HG is even higher than along the Saxons of the migration ages (early middle ages).
@ weure
“so fundamental for the proto and the actual Germanics!”
P312 isn’t a proto-Germanic marker ; so not much support for your theory
@Rob, too narrow minded, ever heard of autosomal DNA?
And even through the narrow focus of R1b S116/P312 this is false, here the a map of the North Dutch R1bS116, it's quite present! (source: a recent publication of Maarten Larmuseau about the Dutch genetic landscape):
https://www.mupload.nl/img/hzbz7237q.png
@ weure
I thought Sephardis are intelligent people ?
Poor Rob is out of arguments and tries it ad hominem...
@ weure
You have no arguments. Youre misquoting Lanting et al
You’re just obsessed with Dutch BB because you’re suffering an identity crisis
@Rob your postings speak for themselves in this respect, no sense to prolong the debate with you....this makes no sense.
@ weure
tats right . E-V22 is from Frankish pirates & proto-Germanic directly evolved
From Dutch BB
Some free psychotherapy for you
@Rob stay on topic, no need for that kind of 'advice' or drunken man's flummery....
@ weure
If you think proto-Germanic evolved from Dutch BB; then you’re the drunk one
Take the holidays to find yourself
Proto-Germanic (= proto Jastorf): BB Dutch/NW Germany (SGC rooted) + TRB.
Santé and Merry Christmas.
The problem is you don’t fact check; but simply believe your own view or something you once read.
Dutch BB = P312; TRB= I2a1
C.f. Proto-Germanic :
U106; I1; I2a2; R1a-Z284
If you check the facts and see what Davidski states here ypu come to different conclusions.
Archeologists see the NE Dutch Bell Beakers and the NW German Bell Beakers as one and the same. Fact check as much as you like but this is sure. And in G25 these Beakerfolk comes incredibly close to the Germanics of migration time and now.....
Are you the guy that drinks cola in a Bell Beaker replica among Russian Orthodox icons tripping about your Steppe ancestors? Roflol speaking about an indentity crises.
Couple of interesting recent podcasts from the recent "New Light on Old Britons" conference:
https://geneticsunzipped.com/blog/2019/12/19/mini-series-new-light-on-old-britons-05-dr-lara-cassidy
https://geneticsunzipped.com/blog/2019/12/19/mini-series-new-light-on-old-britons-06-professor-sir-barry-cunliffe
-------
Happy Xmas guys.
@Matt
Thanks. I can't listen to those podcasts at the moment.
Anything unexpected in them?
@Davidski, more new for other folk, I don't reckon there'd be anything new in them for you, as Lara's bits are a very basic rundown of things I reckon you'd already have heard from previous reports of her ongoing work, and they're pretty entry-level.
@ Weure
''Archeologists see the NE Dutch Bell Beakers and the NW German Bell Beakers as one and the same''
Which is great. '' And in G25 these Beakerfolk comes incredibly close to the Germanics of migration time and now'' So its picking up shared & female-mediated ancestry; because BB is not directly relevant to Proto-Germanic. And I dont drink Cola rubbish
@ Matt
''https://geneticsunzipped.com/blog/2019/12/19/mini-series-new-light-on-old-britons-05-dr-lara-cassidy
https://geneticsunzipped.com/blog/2019/12/19/mini-series-new-light-on-old-britons-06-professor-sir-barry-cunliffe''
Celtic from LBA West :)
'because BB is not directly relevant to Proto-Germanic.'
Why it isn't? BB is a core component to it.
'And I dont drink Cola rubbish'
More the daily dosis alcohol? ;)
R1b U106 is indeed a (proto) Germanic marker. But it is still somewhat enigmatic.
The (proto) Germanic gene pool is to be found in the North German Plain and Southern Scandinavia (zenith is the Jastorf area). The R1b U106 spread in this area during BA. We have an early bird Rise98 2300-2000 BC in Scania. And than (very clear outside the proto-Germanic area) about 2000 BC a R1b U106 sample near Prague. The third early ancient R1b U106 sample is from Oostwoud North Holland 1800 BC, that is connected to the Elp culture.
What seems clear is that during the Bronze Age there must have bean fast spread of Y-DNA R1b U106 in the proto-Germanic area. This time is congruent with the so called Barbed Wire Beaker and the evolvements c.q derivatives /Sogel Wohlde/ Kummerkeramik summarized as Elp culture that effects the whole (proto) Germanic/ Jastorf area. On the one hand Barbed Wire Beaker (/Elp) seems to be a continuation of the Bell Beakers but on the other hand there were certain shifts like for example the grave position North-South in stead of East-West.
Regarding the fast spread of R1b U106 the Sogel Wohlde Warriors are a very potential candidate. In the proto-germanic Bronze Age area they are the most likely candidate for a rapid and dominant spread of their Y-DNA, they had a very high status seen by their iconic tumulus graves, you even can recognize in the nowadays landscape, about 3800 years later! They were very different from the man graves of the Bell Beaker period, other gear etc etc. Their origin is....???
Keep in mind: there is no single proof, no samples, so speculative and just educated guesses.
But I can't identify a group (like the Sogel Wohlde Warriors) that had such a position in the Elp culture and could potential (read well potential no proof) spread a Y-DNA type like R1b U106....So I bet they are the responsible ones for spreading R1b U106. But my view for a better one!
But one thing is clear: a map of the R1b U106 hotspot area is totally congruent with that of the Elp culture.
@ Weure
Only in moderation, the body is a temple.
Yes, I think understanding post-BB phenomena is the key
Be my guest that's your belief. For me only ashes to ashes....;)
-post is a label, the Barbed Wire Beakers and Elp people have direct ancestry in the Bell Beakers. They stand mainly in the 'same chain' even the border of BB area and Barbed Wire area is the same, see:
https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/19822
The Bronze Age in the proto-Germanic area (North Germain Plain/ Southern Scandinavia) has two major cultural zones: Valsømagle and Sögel-Wohlde. Roughly said: Sögel-Wohlde is the Elp area, so North Dutch NW Germany up to Jutland, and Valsømagle is NE of the Elbe (East Holstein, Mecklenburg) the Danish Isles and Scania. Both cultures shaped the Nordic Bronze Age.
Sögel-Wohlde seems to be connected to the 'habits' of the Single Grave Culture:
Local Societies in Bronze Age Northern Europe – Nils Anfinset, Melanie Wrigglesworth:
https://www.mupload.nl/img/mi2laa.50.55.png
See also Bergerbrant 2007:
https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:197017/FULLTEXT01.pdf
I did some little extra research. IMO the Sögel-Wohlde Warriors could well be from the Unetice room, so Bohemia, West Poland, along the Oder. From there they went NW wards, I guess the river Aller plus a part in it starting in nowadays Sachsen Anhalt and went via the Harz/ Luneburger heath area to the Weser.
The Sögel-Wohlde graves had swords Moravian modeled.....looks no coincidence to me. But I guess they were responsible for a R1b U106 kind of substrate. I guess it didn't not sweep away the Barbed Wire Beaker population in the Northern Lowlands.
And OK it somewhat outdated but this result in MDLP K11 of Rise98 is still insightful:
1 Unetice_EBA @ 2.956212
2 Nordic_IA @ 3.660923
3 Nordic_LBA @ 4.064436
4 Nordic_LN @ 4.459306
5 British_AngloSaxon @ 5.424667
6 Corded_Ware_Proto_Unetice_Poland @ 5.985060
7 Bell_Beaker_Czech @ 6.582753
8 Nordic_MN_B @ 6.956679
9 BenzigerodeHeimburg_LN @ 7.398148
10 Corded_Ware_Estonia @ 7.593958
On the road to Valhalla.....
For the debate here I will give a wrap up about the spread of R1b U106 in NW Europe.
I begin with two facts:
1. It is without discussion that the core zone of R1b U106 is the line North Dutch, NW Germany up to Jutland. This is congruent with the Sögel-Wohlde/ Elp culture in the Bronze Age. And also overlaps with the Ingveaonic/North Sea Germanic area.
2. The oldest sample from this core zone is from Elp/Bronze Age about 1800 BC and is located in Oostwoud, North Holland/West Frisia. So based on the samples we now have the spread of R1b U106 is to be dated in the Bronze Age.
But what is the source or R1b U106 in these core zon?. I wil examine two scenario's. Out of the many I choose two scenario's. One based on the oldest NW European sample from Lilla Beddinge Scania about 2300-2000 BC (LNBA). That's Rise 98. And one scenario from the other old sample (I7196): Jimonice/ Prague about 2000 BC, the Unetice period.
I. LNBA Scania (Rise 98). At first hand a likely scenario for a spread to the core zone. Isn't it (proto-)Germanic and didn't the (proto-)Germanics spread from Scania to other parts of NW Europe. So simple as it looks this is on second hand not plausible. First because the Jastorf culture/ area of Northern Germany has the better papers to be the first (proto-)Germanic. Sweden was not it's core.And mostly because there is no known EBA or MBA spread from Sweden to the Elp area. According to nowadays archeological like Vandkilde, Bergerbrant, Fokkens there were certainly in EBA and MBA two spheres in the Nordic Bronze Age: a Sögel-Wohlde/Elp sphere and a Valsømagle sphere.The Sögel-Wohlde/Elp sphere is from NE Dutch (bordered by the IJssel) to North Jutland (Aarhus-Lemvig line). The Valsømagle sphere is North Jutland, the Danish Isles and Southern Sweden. There is no evidence that there was a Bronze Age migration movement from Valsømagle that reached Oostwoud about 1800 BC. There was neither a massive movement from Sweden to Prague about 2000 BC. And last but not least the Valsømagle area was (and is) not a R1b U106 hotspot. So Rise98 is in that respect more an outlier.
II. Unetice (Prague I7196). On the first hand the less likely scenario because what could be the connection between BA Unetice and BA Elp? Ins't it very on distance. Yes it is. But when we look al Sögel-Wohlde/ Elp than we can see that certainly regarding Y-DNA (a male line!) there is a proven immigration of what archeologist called the Sögel-Wohlde warriors. We don't know much about them, but they left their footprint in the whole Elp area in the from of distinct man graves. And what is clear about their graves: they are 100% Unetice muster. Even the swords (that was new at that time in the Elp area!) are of Moravian muster. The biggest grave is found in Drouwen (North Dutch) and according to the Unetice rules this belonged (with golden ear rings) to the highest ranks of the Unetice graves. These warriors were not indigenous they were likely rooted in the Unetice area.
This makes scenario II very likely also because of the fact that in the period 2300-2000 BC according to recent finding in Scania in exactly the area of Lilla Beddinge (SW Scania) there was an influence of Central East Europe. That makes a migration influence from the Unetice area to Scania very likely.
So of course it stays a scenario (so possible, an educated guess, remember that!) but we have much reason to believe that the initial spread from R1b U106 is from Central-East Europe (Unetice area) to it's core zone and that the Sögel-Wohlde warriors are responsible for a R1b U106 footprint in this area.
Post a Comment