|
From Facebook R-U106 group today!
--
Kevin Terry
|
|
|
They were only able to confirm it fell under U106. They used the 1240K assay rather than the more comprehensive (and more expensive) shotgun method.?
Ray
nice ! do you know the haplogroup!?
From Facebook R-U106 group today!
--
Kevin Terry
--
| ? KELL KOCH ???President
????Phone: 208-578-4806 ????
|
|
I was unable to trace the "news blip" back to refereed journal article.? ?
If such exists, might someone provide the link ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
They were only able to confirm it fell under U106. They used the 1240K assay rather than the more comprehensive (and more expensive) shotgun method.?
Ray
nice ! do you know the haplogroup!?
From Facebook R-U106 group today!
--
Kevin Terry
--
|
|
? KELL KOCH
???President
????Phone: 208-578-4806
????
|
|
I think it would be this one:
On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 8:49?AM Richard Smith via <cthokie67= [email protected]> wrote:
I was unable to trace the "news blip" back to refereed journal article.? ?
If such exists, might someone provide the link ?
|
Hi,
Only one aDNA in this study seems to belong to R-U106, named LEU007. This would be the 5th oldest R-U106+ aDNA recorded to date. Its fastq file has just been added to the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) :?
Cheers,
Ewenn
Le sam. 24 févr. 2024, 18:09, Chris Noble < avalea3@...> a écrit?: I think it would be this one:
On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 8:49?AM Richard Smith via <cthokie67= [email protected]> wrote:
I was unable to trace the "news blip" back to refereed journal article.? ?
If such exists, might someone provide the link ?
|
Thanks,
Found the sample at line 6 of excel table in the supplement.
Hope to now find mention of sample in the body of the text....?
I am not so practiced in the art of such things but I greatly?appreciate your guidance.
Richard
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Hi,
Only one aDNA in this study seems to belong to R-U106, named LEU007. This would be the 5th oldest R-U106+ aDNA recorded to date. Its fastq file has just been added to the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) :?
Cheers,
Ewenn
Le sam. 24 févr. 2024, 18:09, Chris Noble < avalea3@...> a écrit?:
I think it would be this one:
On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 8:49?AM Richard Smith via
<cthokie67= [email protected]> wrote:
I was unable to trace the "news blip" back to refereed journal article.? ?
If such exists, might someone provide the link ?
|
truly fascinating?
Based on combined lines of evidence, we observe that the kinship structure of the burial community was predominantly patrilineal/virilocal involving female exogamy.
Hi,
Only one aDNA in this study seems to belong to R-U106, named LEU007. This would be the 5th oldest R-U106+ aDNA recorded to date. Its fastq file has just been added to the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) :?
Cheers,
Ewenn
Le sam. 24 févr. 2024, 18:09, Chris Noble < avalea3@...> a écrit?: I think it would be this one:
On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 8:49?AM Richard Smith via <cthokie67= [email protected]> wrote:
I was unable to trace the "news blip" back to refereed journal article.? ?
If such exists, might someone provide the link ?
|
Hi all, I attempted an analysis of LEU007, to check if it can really belongs to R-U106, and if possible to refine its haplogroup. LEU007 consists of several fastq files. I only analyzed the "YC1" file: These results indicate that LEU007 appears effectively to be R-U106+:
- consistent path to R -L151, R-U106+ with 2 reads, R-P312- (6 reads).
LEU007 could apparently be pre-R-BY69794 (block made up of 13 SNPs, R-A2150 branch directly downstream of R-U106):
- No read for R-A2150 (A2150 and A2151 SNPs)
- Clade R-BY69794: 1 positive read for FT420436, 1 positive read for ZS1682, 3 negative reads for BY69794, 3 negative reads for BY74465, no read for the other SNPs of this clade (9/13).
Discover announces a TMRCA (R-BY69794) centered around 1900 BCE [3059 BCE; 980 BCE] 95% CI. The TMRCA of R-A2150: ~2660 BCE [3811 BCE; 1713 BCE] 95% CI. LEU007, an early adult man around 18-19 years old at his death, would be dated (C14) around 1840 BCE [1911 BCE; 1766 BCE]. According to isotopic analyses (), he would have lived in the region of the Leubingen site. More informations: (pages 5 & 52). He could possibly share the same matrilineal line as LEU038 (T2a1b1a / T2a1b1), dated around 2100 BCE, several generations before LEU007. This would reinforce the local origin of LEU007 (but does not indicate whether its agnatic lineage was already present in the surroundings of this site approximately 2 to 3 centuries before...). If confirmed (by FTDNA for example - determinations of aDNA Y-haplogroups, especially mine, should be taken with a pinch of salt.), this sample would provide us with interesting information on the origins of the tiny R-A2150 branch (would refine its TMRCA for example), (very) "little" sister of R-Z2265. The distribution of modern descendants identified to date, from this branch, seems consistent with the location of LEU007: The analysis file: Cheers, Ewenn
|
Just to remind everyone, the small R-A2150 branch that Ewenn is discussing in conjunction with the LEU007 sample, is immediately below R-U106, and notably retains the ancestral DYS492 STR result =12, whereas nearly everyone else in R-U106, below the much larger R-Z2265, shares the extra repeat count up to 492=13.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Feb 25, 2024, at 3:32?AM, Ewenn <gwenng008@...> wrote:
?Hi all, I attempted an analysis of LEU007, to check if it can really belongs to R-U106, and if possible to refine its haplogroup. LEU007 consists of several fastq files. I only analyzed the "YC1" file: These results indicate that LEU007 appears effectively to be R-U106+:
- consistent path to R -L151, R-U106+ with 2 reads, R-P312- (6 reads).
LEU007 could apparently be pre-R-BY69794 (block made up of 13 SNPs, R-A2150 etc.
_._,_._,_
|
Hi folks, This is an interesting result, especially since it breaks up the R-U106>A2150>BY69794 block. The connection to the Tumulus culture is important, as we have other R-U106 branches belonging to this culture (R-S1894). It's also important since it sets the minimum age for R-A2150, ruling out some of the younger end of its possible age range. This has some knock-on effects for the age of R-U106, since minor haplogroups like R-A2150 are a significant determinant of this age: this is probably a very minor effect, since we can be fairly certain (from a combination of lower limits from ancient DNA and upper limits from the Corded Ware culture expansion) that U106 formed at some point around 2950 BC, or maybe up to a century or two before. This cements R-U106 as one of the dominant haplogroups of the Unetice culture, and suggests that there may be more branches of R-U106 to become tied to this culture. My expectation is that all of R-Z156 and probably R-S1688 are associated with this culture, and possibly other sub-clades of R-U106 too. We know that the Unetice culture fed into many later cultures in Europe and that, for western Europe, the Tumulus culture is one of the important ones. This could give a potential but still highly speculative route for R-A2150 testers from the Corded Ware culture through either to the Celtic or Germanic cultures of central Europe during that time. Generalising, we should expect ancient DNA samples to fall into these minor branches more commonly than modern testers. This is simply because those branches weren't always as small a part of R-U106 as they are today. It's only through later founder effects and relative differences in population growth that these haplogroups are small now. We can also expect more cases like RISE98, where ancient burials belong to now-extinct branches of R-U106. Cheers, Iain.
|
Well, I'm still waiting for some ancient remains from a fellow situated below R-Z2265 and well into the ~800 year-long R-FGC396 block (give or take a couple of centuries), for actual evidence for or against FTDNA's suggested location of R-FGC396, which according to their Globetrekker tool, is currently shown within a 10 km (!??!) radius somewhere around Cologne, Germany.? How they arrived at that conclusion without any ancient DNA and with only a few dozen known extant R-FGC396 descendants scattered across Europe & the Americas, is completely beyond me.? Is there a linkage between R-FGC396 and a bronze-age perfume trade route I don't know about?
--
Best regards,
Vince T.
|
Kevin Terry
Ewenn