U5b1 in ancients

[Dewsloth]

From the "Continental influx and pervasive matrilocality in Iron Age Britain" paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-0...09-6#Sec22

^^The supplement column says the dates (the last number on each, here, sorted) are YBP, but that's impossible.  I think they are CE/BCE:

WBK103 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -153
WBK101 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -149
WBK195 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -109
WBK34 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK40 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK42 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK105 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -81
WBK22 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK31 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK29 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -43
WBK108 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -27
WBK14 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -12
WBK107 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -9
WBK12 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1i U5b1+16189+@16192 -8
WBK30 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -7
WBK17 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a U5b1+16189+@16192 -3
WBK102 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R(*1b1a1b) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK191 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK192 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a(*1) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK193 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK23 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK16 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 2
WBK33 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2b3 U5b1+16189+@16192 9
WBK15 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK19 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK21 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 35
WBK05 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1a U5b1+16189+@16192 102
WBK08 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1e U5b1+16189+@16192 129

[Dewsloth]

From "Ancient DNA reveals reproductive barrier despite shared Avar-period culture"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-0...18-5#Sec16

MGS231 650CE? Moedling, Austria; Avar Period; P312>DF19>Z302>FT11655>Z8193 (xFT11655,Z39292) U5b1e1
MGS232 650CE? Moedling, Austria; Avar Period; Female U5b1e1

Mödling notes:
MGS231 and MGS232 are both in reused graves, but not with each other:

There are 14 reused graves in Mödling (24+23, 231+239, 233+232, 291+290, 197+180, 258+263, 352+345, 404+403, 417+408, 450+452+459, 227 had only few remains), and three with four individuals (81, 363+365+366+367 and 389). Almost half of them are in the group unrelated or distantly related.

Many of the inhabitants of Roman Pannonia had left the region in the fifth and sixth centuries, but others stayed behind, especially in southern Pannonia and around Lake Balaton, while most seem to have deserted the Vienna Basin and the adjacent regions to the west. Suebi, Heruls, Longobards and others had all left the region after a few decades. Some groups of this mixed migration-age population remained (or even arrived) after 568 in the southern parts of Pannonia. Still, the descendants of the late-Roman provincials played some part in the ancestry of the inhabitants of the Mödling site, while the late/post-Roman ‘barbarians’ had less of a persistent impact (Extended Data Fig.1). Most of them probably had come to Mödling from the central parts of the Avar realm in the 7th century; but the IBD connection between the small 5th- and 6th-century cemeteries in Mödling and the Avar-period population at Mödling-An der Goldenen Stiege indicates some loose local continuity.
***
In Mödling, the development of the cemetery, more than three times the size of Leobersdorf, was roughly similar. The deceased are of mostly European ancestry, with only a few individuals with minor Eastern Asian elements (see Section 6). In this respect, their genetic background is more homogeneous than in cemeteries with a higher percentage of Asian ancestry. Still, within this basically similar European ancestry, they are far from homogeneous (see Section 6). It needs to be stressed that roughly contemporary reference samples still are missing from many regions, so we have to work with proxies that do not allow more precise localisation. About half of MGS ancestry points to the region roughly between the Baltic Sea and the Carpathian Arc. This most likely is a trace of an earlier migratory movement by what the written sources usually call Slavs. Smaller components can be linked with Western Asia (probably descendants of a population of Eastern Mediterranean origin that had lived in late-antique South-Eastern Europe), and with the Western European continent (that is, the Frankish kingdoms). Both of the latter groups may go back to earlier populations in the wider area, but hardly in the Vienna Basin itself, given that we have only faint indications of population continuity there. These populations had mixed for some time, so the migrants from the northeast had already been in contact with them by the 6th century. It is striking that in this case, we do not have a sex bias in admixture (see Section 6). This means that about as many of the ‘northeastern’ men married women from other parts of Europe as vice versa. This was not an admixture between high-status men and lower-status women, but among groups of equal status. Most likely, their ancestors had all been subaltern groups in the early Avar Empire, whose offspring acquired full liberty and perhaps also Avar identity, and proudly displayed the same markers of status as the ones used by the community of mainly Eastern Asian origin in Leobersdorf.

[Capsian20]

From the "Continental influx and pervasive matrilocality in Iron Age Britain" paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-0...09-6#Sec22

^^The supplement column says the dates (the last number on each, here, sorted) are YBP, but that's impossible.  I think they are CE/BCE:

WBK103 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -153
WBK101 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -149
WBK195 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -109
WBK34 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK40 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK42 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK105 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -81
WBK22 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK31 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK29 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -43
WBK108 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -27
WBK14 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -12
WBK107 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -9
WBK12 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1i U5b1+16189+@16192 -8
WBK30 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -7
WBK17 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a U5b1+16189+@16192 -3
WBK102 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R(*1b1a1b) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK191 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK192 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a(*1) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK193 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK23 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK16 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 2
WBK33 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2b3 U5b1+16189+@16192 9
WBK15 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK19 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK21 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 35
WBK05 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1a U5b1+16189+@16192 102
WBK08 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1e U5b1+16189+@16192 129

Interesting is seems to me this samples has same subclade (U5b1+16189+@16192) maybe this back a Founder effect or same family via generations ?

[Rufus191]

From the "Continental influx and pervasive matrilocality in Iron Age Britain" paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-0...09-6#Sec22

^^The supplement column says the dates (the last number on each, here, sorted) are YBP, but that's impossible.  I think they are CE/BCE:

WBK103 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -153
WBK101 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -149
WBK195 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -109
WBK34 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK40 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK42 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK105 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -81
WBK22 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK31 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK29 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -43
WBK108 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -27
WBK14 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -12
WBK107 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -9
WBK12 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1i U5b1+16189+@16192 -8
WBK30 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -7
WBK17 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a U5b1+16189+@16192 -3
WBK102 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R(*1b1a1b) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK191 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK192 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a(*1) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK193 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK23 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK16 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 2
WBK33 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2b3 U5b1+16189+@16192 9
WBK15 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK19 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK21 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 35
WBK05 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1a U5b1+16189+@16192 102
WBK08 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1e U5b1+16189+@16192 129

Interesting is seems to me this samples has same subclade (U5b1+16189+@16192) maybe this back a Founder effect or same family via generations ?

Yeah, it postulates one female founder I think in the paper. This is very interesting to me as I am U5b1d, and my maternal line can be traced to the south west coastal area of England about 20 miles from this site ! But could I be a direct descendant being U5b1d, or would this be impossible?
(WBK - Winterborne Kingston)

"Strikingly, more than two thirds (24/34) of the genetically identified kin belong to a rare lineage of mitochondrial haplogroup U5b1 (Fig. 1d) that has not been observed previously in ancient sampling and that has a frequency of only 3 × 10−5 in modern data22 (Supplementary Table 7 and Supplementary Note 2.4). The predominance of this single matriline is not skewed by an abundance of siblings, with only two pairs of sisters (all adults) observed (Fig. 1a). Additional downstream mutations distinguish four subclades in this haplogroup that are unique to WBK. Using one of the faster estimates of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutation rate23 (4.72 × 10−7 mutations per site per generation), we estimate that at least 420 female births to lineage mothers would be required to result in this level of within-clade diversity (Supplementary Note 2.6), implying a long-term association between this haplotype and WBK. By contrast, we find that Y chromosome diversity is high (Fig. 1d and Supplementary Note 2.8), and runs of homozygosity (ROH) indicate that this was an outbreeding community (Supplementary Note 5.5). Theory, modelling and surveys of modern populations24,25 have demonstrated that such patterns are generated by matrilocal customs (that is, male-biased dispersal)."

[Capsian20]

From the "Continental influx and pervasive matrilocality in Iron Age Britain" paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-0...09-6#Sec22

^^The supplement column says the dates (the last number on each, here, sorted) are YBP, but that's impossible.  I think they are CE/BCE:

WBK103 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -153
WBK101 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -149
WBK195 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -109
WBK34 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK40 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK42 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK105 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -81
WBK22 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK31 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK29 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -43
WBK108 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -27
WBK14 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -12
WBK107 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -9
WBK12 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1i U5b1+16189+@16192 -8
WBK30 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -7
WBK17 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a U5b1+16189+@16192 -3
WBK102 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R(*1b1a1b) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK191 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK192 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a(*1) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK193 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK23 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK16 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 2
WBK33 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2b3 U5b1+16189+@16192 9
WBK15 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK19 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK21 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 35
WBK05 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1a U5b1+16189+@16192 102
WBK08 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1e U5b1+16189+@16192 129

Interesting is seems to me this samples has same subclade (U5b1+16189+@16192) maybe this back a Founder effect or same family via generations ?

Yeah, it postulates one female founder I think in the paper. This is very interesting to me as I am U5b1d, and my maternal line can be traced to the south west coastal area of England about 20 miles from this site ! But could I be a direct descendant being U5b1d, or would this be impossible?
(WBK - Winterborne Kingston)

"Strikingly, more than two thirds (24/34) of the genetically identified kin belong to a rare lineage of mitochondrial haplogroup U5b1 (Fig. 1d) that has not been observed previously in ancient sampling and that has a frequency of only 3 × 10−5 in modern data22 (Supplementary Table 7 and Supplementary Note 2.4). The predominance of this single matriline is not skewed by an abundance of siblings, with only two pairs of sisters (all adults) observed (Fig. 1a). Additional downstream mutations distinguish four subclades in this haplogroup that are unique to WBK. Using one of the faster estimates of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutation rate23 (4.72 × 10−7 mutations per site per generation), we estimate that at least 420 female births to lineage mothers would be required to result in this level of within-clade diversity (Supplementary Note 2.6), implying a long-term association between this haplotype and WBK. By contrast, we find that Y chromosome diversity is high (Fig. 1d and Supplementary Note 2.8), and runs of homozygosity (ROH) indicate that this was an outbreeding community (Supplementary Note 5.5). Theory, modelling and surveys of modern populations24,25 have demonstrated that such patterns are generated by matrilocal customs (that is, male-biased dispersal)."

Wow interesting maybe you are local in Winterborne Kingston a long time ( over 2000 years ) , do you did mtfull sequence maybe MitoDiscover its will add this samples
But as far i know mutations in mtDNA randon and slowly (im not sure)

[Rufus191]

Interesting is seems to me this samples has same subclade (U5b1+16189+@16192) maybe this back a Founder effect or same family via generations ?

Yeah, it postulates one female founder I think in the paper. This is very interesting to me as I am U5b1d, and my maternal line can be traced to the south west coastal area of England about 20 miles from this site ! But could I be a direct descendant being U5b1d, or would this be impossible?
(WBK - Winterborne Kingston)

"Strikingly, more than two thirds (24/34) of the genetically identified kin belong to a rare lineage of mitochondrial haplogroup U5b1 (Fig. 1d) that has not been observed previously in ancient sampling and that has a frequency of only 3 × 10−5 in modern data22 (Supplementary Table 7 and Supplementary Note 2.4). The predominance of this single matriline is not skewed by an abundance of siblings, with only two pairs of sisters (all adults) observed (Fig. 1a). Additional downstream mutations distinguish four subclades in this haplogroup that are unique to WBK. Using one of the faster estimates of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutation rate23 (4.72 × 10−7 mutations per site per generation), we estimate that at least 420 female births to lineage mothers would be required to result in this level of within-clade diversity (Supplementary Note 2.6), implying a long-term association between this haplotype and WBK. By contrast, we find that Y chromosome diversity is high (Fig. 1d and Supplementary Note 2.8), and runs of homozygosity (ROH) indicate that this was an outbreeding community (Supplementary Note 5.5). Theory, modelling and surveys of modern populations24,25 have demonstrated that such patterns are generated by matrilocal customs (that is, male-biased dispersal)."

Wow interesting maybe you are local in Winterborne Kingston a long time ( over 2000 years ) , do you did mtfull sequence maybe MitoDiscover its will add this samples
But as far i know mutations in mtDNA randon and slowly (im not sure)

My maternal line ancestry can be traced to the early 18th century to Ringwood, which is just 20 miles east of WBK. I have done a full sequence on FTDNA and joined the U5 project there in which my sample is listed. Should I look for these 16189 +16192 mutations? Is it possible if I am U5b1d? The research also is reported on the Bournemouth University website:

https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/news/2025-...tred-women

"Dr Lara Cassidy, Assistant Professor in Trinity’s Department of Genetics, led the study that has been published in leading international journal Nature today. She said: “This was the cemetery of a large kin group. We reconstructed a family tree with many different branches and found most members traced their maternal lineage back to a single woman, who would have lived centuries before. In contrast, relationships through the father’s line were almost absent.
“This tells us that husbands moved to join their wives’ communities upon marriage, with land potentially passed down through the female line. This is the first time this type of system has been documented in European prehistory and it predicts female social and political empowerment. "

[Dewsloth]

Brand new abstract has one U5b1d1a in BA Austria :
"Tracing social mechanisms and interregional connections in Early Bronze Age Societies in Lower Austria"
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...y-material

Culture:  Unterwölbinger
PEB006.A0101.TF1.1 XY  U5b1d1a  R1b1a1b
PEB006 Pottenbrunn  Grab 189 Male 40-60

we present the results of archaeogenetic investigations of Early Bronze Age individuals from Lower Austria, specifically associated with the Unetice and Unterwoelbling cultural groups. Through analysing newly generated genome-wide data of 138 individuals, we explore the social structure and genetic relationships within and between these communities. Our results reveal a predominantly patrilocal society with non-strict female exogamic practices.

[Rufus191]

From the "Continental influx and pervasive matrilocality in Iron Age Britain" paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-0...09-6#Sec22

^^The supplement column says the dates (the last number on each, here, sorted) are YBP, but that's impossible.  I think they are CE/BCE:

WBK103 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -153
WBK101 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -149
WBK195 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -109
WBK34 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK40 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK42 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK105 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -81
WBK22 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK31 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK29 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -43
WBK108 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -27
WBK14 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -12
WBK107 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -9
WBK12 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1i U5b1+16189+@16192 -8
WBK30 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -7
WBK17 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a U5b1+16189+@16192 -3
WBK102 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R(*1b1a1b) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK191 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK192 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a(*1) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK193 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK23 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK16 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 2
WBK33 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2b3 U5b1+16189+@16192 9
WBK15 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK19 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK21 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 35
WBK05 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1a U5b1+16189+@16192 102
WBK08 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1e U5b1+16189+@16192 129

Interesting is seems to me this samples has same subclade (U5b1+16189+@16192) maybe this back a Founder effect or same family via generations ?

So on my FTDNA account, amongst many other mutations, I have C16189T and C16192T under 'HVR1 DIFFERENCES FROM RSRS' but I am grouped U5b1d1. So maybe it is possible this is ancestral to me ?? Could age of samples cause some mutations to be undetectable? Has anyone ever definitively proven descent from an sample of this age? Is it even possible to prove!?

[Capsian20]

From the "Continental influx and pervasive matrilocality in Iron Age Britain" paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-0...09-6#Sec22

^^The supplement column says the dates (the last number on each, here, sorted) are YBP, but that's impossible.  I think they are CE/BCE:

WBK103 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -153
WBK101 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -149
WBK195 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -109
WBK34 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK40 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK42 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -96
WBK105 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 -81
WBK22 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK31 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -72
WBK29 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -43
WBK108 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -27
WBK14 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 -12
WBK107 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -9
WBK12 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1i U5b1+16189+@16192 -8
WBK30 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 -7
WBK17 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a U5b1+16189+@16192 -3
WBK102 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R(*1b1a1b) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK191 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b1 U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK192 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a(*1) U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK193 England Iron Age (Middle-Late) IA XY R1b1a1b U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK23 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2a2a U5b1+16189+@16192 0
WBK16 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 2
WBK33 England Iron Age (Late) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2b3 U5b1+16189+@16192 9
WBK15 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK19 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 34
WBK21 England Iron Age (Late) IA XX .. U5b1+16189+@16192 35
WBK05 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4b2c1a U5b1+16189+@16192 102
WBK08 England Iron Age (Latest) IA XY R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1e U5b1+16189+@16192 129

Interesting is seems to me this samples has same subclade (U5b1+16189+@16192) maybe this back a Founder effect or same family via generations ?

So on my FTDNA account, amongst many other mutations, I have C16189T and C16192T under 'HVR1 DIFFERENCES FROM RSRS' but I am grouped U5b1d1. So maybe it is possible this is ancestral to me ?? Could age of samples cause some mutations to be undetectable? Has anyone ever definitively proven descent from an sample of this age? Is it even possible to prove!?

im so sorry i dont know about if some mutations to be undetectable cause samples ancient for date that samples i think its back between 800 BCE to 40 CE

Dates: c. 800 BC—43 AD
Followed by: Roman Empire, Roman Britain
Period: Iron Age, Hallstatt culture, La Tène culture