PDA

View Full Version : Is Y-haplogroup R non-Caucasoid and Beringian/Siberian in origin?



bmoney
10-09-2017, 09:07 AM
Sorry if this has been discussed before in another thread or is obvious knowledge. I'm relatively new here, and using Gedrosia Eurasia K9 ASI averages to theorise.

The Ma'lta boy was basal haplogroup R and is autosomally 75% EHG with no WHG.

According to wiki: MA-1 belonged to a population related to the genetic ancestors of Siberians, American Indians, and Bronze Age Yamnaya people of the Eurasian steppe.[1][2] In particular MA-1 was found to be genetically close to modern-day Native Americans, Kets, Mansi, Nganasans and Yukaghirs.[3]. While the skeletal remains of MA-1 have been described as phenotypially East Asian ("Mongolid"), subsequent research has questioned this description. Alexeev (1998, p. 323) in his later publication was more cautious, stating that this area was "inhabited by a population of Mongolid appearance". [6] Genomic study Raghavan et al. (2014) and Fu et al. (2016) found Mal'ta Buret had brown eyes, dark hair and dark skin.[1][7]. According to a 2016 study, it was found that the global maximum of ANE ancestry occurs in modern-day Kets, Mansi, Native Americans, Nganasans and Yukaghirs.[3] Additionally it has been reported in ancient Bronze-age-steppe Yamnaya and Afanasevo cultures.[2] Between 14 and 38 percent of Native American ancestry may originate from gene flow from the Mal'ta Buret people, while the other geneflow in Native Americans appears to have an Eastern Eurasian origin. [1] Sequencing of another south-central Siberian (Afontova Gora-2) dating to approximately 17,000 years ago, revealed similar autosomal genetic signatures as Mal'ta boy-1, suggesting that the region was continuously occupied by humans throughout the Last Glacial Maximum. [1]

Genomic studies also indicates that ANE was introduced to Europe by way of the Yamna culture.[2][3] "Ancient North Eurasian" genetic component is visible in tests of the Yamnaya people, which makes up 50% of their ancestry.[2][3] It is also reported in modern-day Europeans (5%-18% ANE admixture), but not of Europeans predating the Bronze Age.[2][3]

European R1b is defined by much higher WHG autosomal ancestry than EHG (3.25x for the English), and the WHG ancestral component peaks in Uralic peoples (originally not Haplogroup R) around the Baltic coast.

Indian R1a peoples have higher EHG than WHG (2x on average).

This leads me to believe that when R1a/R1b people split, R1b collected a lot more conventionally European Uralic genes moving westward, whereas Indian R1a peoples are missing this huge component (usually 5% max WHG possibly due to R1a/R1b mingling in the steppe) but has comparable levels of EHG (10% in Punjabis vs 14% in English).

This then implies that the common ancestral component in Haplogroup R is EHG ancestry, which according to the Ma'lta boy, is Siberian/Beringian phenotypically. This also links R with Siberian Q, the sister haplogroup common among Indigenous Americans

Thoughts?

Observer
10-09-2017, 10:35 AM
Ma'lta is ANE, not EHG.

EHG is 75% ANE and rest something similar to WHG.

bmoney
10-09-2017, 01:58 PM
Yep you're right, so basal R is ANE

ADW_1981
10-09-2017, 02:49 PM
Sorry if this has been discussed before in another thread or is obvious knowledge. I'm relatively new here, and using Gedrosia Eurasia K9 ASI averages to theorise.

The Ma'lta boy was basal haplogroup R and is autosomally 75% EHG with no WHG.

According to wiki: MA-1 belonged to a population related to the genetic ancestors of Siberians, American Indians, and Bronze Age Yamnaya people of the Eurasian steppe.[1][2] In particular MA-1 was found to be genetically close to modern-day Native Americans, Kets, Mansi, Nganasans and Yukaghirs.[3]. While the skeletal remains of MA-1 have been described as phenotypially East Asian ("Mongolid"), subsequent research has questioned this description. Alexeev (1998, p. 323) in his later publication was more cautious, stating that this area was "inhabited by a population of Mongolid appearance". [6] Genomic study Raghavan et al. (2014) and Fu et al. (2016) found Mal'ta Buret had brown eyes, dark hair and dark skin.[1][7]. According to a 2016 study, it was found that the global maximum of ANE ancestry occurs in modern-day Kets, Mansi, Native Americans, Nganasans and Yukaghirs.[3] Additionally it has been reported in ancient Bronze-age-steppe Yamnaya and Afanasevo cultures.[2] Between 14 and 38 percent of Native American ancestry may originate from gene flow from the Mal'ta Buret people, while the other geneflow in Native Americans appears to have an Eastern Eurasian origin. [1] Sequencing of another south-central Siberian (Afontova Gora-2) dating to approximately 17,000 years ago, revealed similar autosomal genetic signatures as Mal'ta boy-1, suggesting that the region was continuously occupied by humans throughout the Last Glacial Maximum. [1]

Genomic studies also indicates that ANE was introduced to Europe by way of the Yamna culture.[2][3] "Ancient North Eurasian" genetic component is visible in tests of the Yamnaya people, which makes up 50% of their ancestry.[2][3] It is also reported in modern-day Europeans (5%-18% ANE admixture), but not of Europeans predating the Bronze Age.[2][3]

European R1b is defined by much higher WHG autosomal ancestry than EHG (3.25x for the English), and the WHG ancestral component peaks in Uralic peoples (originally not Haplogroup R) around the Baltic coast.

Indian R1a peoples have higher EHG than WHG (2x on average).

This leads me to believe that when R1a/R1b people split, R1b collected a lot more conventionally European Uralic genes moving westward, whereas Indian R1a peoples are missing this huge component (usually 5% max WHG possibly due to R1a/R1b mingling in the steppe) but has comparable levels of EHG (10% in Punjabis vs 14% in English).

This then implies that the common ancestral component in Haplogroup R is EHG ancestry, which according to the Ma'lta boy, is Siberian/Beringian phenotypically. This also links R with Siberian Q, the sister haplogroup common among Indigenous Americans

Thoughts?

This is a bit outdated. EHG has turned up in Ukranian Mesolithic, so it looks like WHG and ANE met in the northern Balkans or Ukraine and merged near the end of the upper Paleolithic.

WHG is an early wave of Middle Easterners between 20-30 ybp. EHG is derived 75% from ANE (yDNA R) which is a descendant of the presumably SE Asian MP, and is shifted towards Han and Native American populations, the rest from WHG. So while Kostenki/Vestonice/Sunghir met those early Middle Easterners venturing into Europe 25,000 years ago, all of the R ancestors were still far to the east.

Jean M
10-09-2017, 04:42 PM
ANE (yDNA R) which is shifted towards Han and Native American populations...

Really? Nobody told me. ANE is essentially Mal'ta Boy. The Raghavan 2013 paper on him said that he was unrelated to East Asians, whereas Native Americans are related to East Asians, as well as carrying ANE. Thus it appears that the group which populated the Americas was composed of a mixture of ANE and an East Asian population.


Similarly, we find autosomal evidence that MA-1 is basal to modern-day western Eurasians and genetically closely related to modern-day Native Americans, with no close affinity to east Asians.

vettor
10-09-2017, 04:59 PM
Since R ydna is SE Asian does that make "his Father" P as well?

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n3/full/ejhg2014106a.html

Observer
10-09-2017, 05:09 PM
Really? Nobody told me. ANE is essentially Mal'ta Boy. The Raghavan 2013 paper on him said that he was unrelated to East Asians, whereas Native Americans are related to East Asians, as well as carrying ANE. Thus it appears that the group which populated the Americas was composed of a mixture of ANE and an East Asian population.

Recent studies differ from that model since Reich et al 2017 models ANE as mix of ENA and UP. There is also some on-going discussion about ANE in this thread (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?12221-Sunghir-social-and-reproductive-behavior-of-early-Upper-Paleolithic-foragers&p=295008&viewfull=1#post295008) for example.

Jean M
10-09-2017, 06:05 PM
Recent studies differ from that model since Reich et al 2017 models ANE as mix of ENA and UP.

Reich et al 2017?

Observer
10-09-2017, 06:09 PM
Reich et al 2017?

Lipson and Reich 2017, A Working Model of the Deep Relationships of Diverse Modern Human Genetic Lineages Outside of Africa.

and on as well http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/07/working-topology-for-eurasian.html

parasar
10-09-2017, 07:41 PM
Recent studies differ from that model since Reich et al 2017 models ANE as mix of ENA and UP. There is also some on-going discussion about ANE in this thread (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?12221-Sunghir-social-and-reproductive-behavior-of-early-Upper-Paleolithic-foragers&p=295008&viewfull=1#post295008) for example.

I think Reich removed Basal which would put Ust on the West Eurasian side.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5400393/bin/msw293f1.jpg

Even then this not consistent with the language in the text.
"present-day European and East Asian populations to infer dates of initial separation of 40–45 kya (adjusted for a mutation rate of 0.5 × 10−9 per year; Scally 2016). Interestingly, two early modern Eurasians (Ust’-Ishim (Fu et al. 2014), from ∼45 kya in western Siberia, and Oase 1 (Fu et al. 2015), from ∼40 kya in Romania) have been found that share little or no ancestry with either clade"
Also I see 3 Neanderthal inputs.

"our most powerful temporal constraint comes from Ust’-Ishim, whose date of ∼45 kya places the eastern/western Eurasian split no later than this time"

bmoney
10-09-2017, 10:56 PM
Really? Nobody told me. ANE is essentially Mal'ta Boy. The Raghavan 2013 paper on him said that he was unrelated to East Asians, whereas Native Americans are related to East Asians, as well as carrying ANE. Thus it appears that the group which populated the Americas was composed of a mixture of ANE and an East Asian population.

Yep, essentially the ANE (y-dna R) with maximal autosomal ancestry found in modern-day Native Americans, Kets, Mansi, Nganasans and Yukaghirs form a distinct population from E Asians, though phenotypically share similarities, and the above populations also have E Asian mix

It's amazing that the paternal line of this population is one of the most successful Eurasian/South Asian haplogroups ever.. some technological advantage must have played a part

alan
10-09-2017, 11:15 PM
Yep, essentially the ANE (y-dna R) with maximal autosomal ancestry found in modern-day Native Americans, Kets, Mansi, Nganasans and Yukaghirs form a distinct population from E Asians, though phenotypically share similarities, and the above populations also have E Asian mix

It's amazing that the paternal line of this population is one of the most successful Eurasian/South Asian haplogroups ever.. some technological advantage must have played a part

As far as I understand, all populations today that have a substantial ANE component are always ANE plus a huge chunk (or chunks) of something else. That something else varies so its very hard to infer any phenotypical aspects of ANE from modern peoples.

Govan
10-09-2017, 11:26 PM
As far as I understand, all populations today that have a substantial ANE component are always ANE plus a huge chunk (or chunks) of something else. That something else varies so its very hard to infer any phenotypical aspects of ANE from modern peoples.

Indeed. Likeliness is that the further back in time the more distinct groups existed.

Awale
10-10-2017, 01:47 AM
Really? Nobody told me. ANE is essentially Mal'ta Boy. The Raghavan 2013 paper on him said that he was unrelated to East Asians, whereas Native Americans are related to East Asians, as well as carrying ANE. Thus it appears that the group which populated the Americas was composed of a mixture of ANE and an East Asian population.

From what I've noticed, the academic take (Lipson and Reich 2017 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28074030)) seems to be that ANE = A population that cut-off from UP Europeans like Kostenki-14 + ENA-related admixture:


https://i.imgur.com/5zSSqqg.png

.
.

https://i.imgur.com/9rhiJqC.png

So their finding is basically that there was a sibling-clade to UP-Europeans that cut-off from UP-Europeans around or a little before Kostenki-14's time (37,000ybp) from a common ancestral node (the node right below "West1" above) and stopped sharing ancestry with them from then on while eventually acquiring notable ENA-related admixture to create the "ANE" we currently know.

Chad Rohlfsen, however, seems to be arguing (see here (https://eurogenes.blogspot.ae/2017/10/upper-paleolithic-genomes-from-sunghir.html)) that ANE cut-off right between the split between Kostenki-14 and Sunghir-3:


https://i.imgur.com/isavNUl.png

And while we have yet to see this backed up by academics like Reich or even other laymen, I don't think this makes a very meaningful difference at the end of the day. Still a group that would've split from UP-Europeans around 35,000-40,000ybp and differentiated from them, as far as I can see, to a degree that isn't simply explained by ENA-related admixture.

Observer
10-10-2017, 03:28 AM
From what I've noticed, the academic take (Lipson and Reich 2017 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28074030)) seems to be that ANE = A population that cut-off from UP Europeans like Kostenki-14 + ENA-related admixture:

So their finding is basically that there was a sibling-clade to UP-Europeans that cut-off from UP-Europeans around or a little before Kostenki-14's time (37,000ybp) from a common ancestral node (the node right below "West1" above) and stopped sharing ancestry with them from then on while eventually acquiring notable ENA-related admixture to create the "ANE" we currently know.

Chad Rohlfsen, however, seems to be arguing (see here (https://eurogenes.blogspot.ae/2017/10/upper-paleolithic-genomes-from-sunghir.html)) that ANE cut-off right between the split between Kostenki-14 and Sunghir-3:

And while we have yet to see this backed up by academics like Reich or even other laymen, I don't think this makes a very meaningful difference at the end of the day. Still a group that would've split from UP-Europeans around 35,000-40,000ybp and differentiated from them, as far as I can see, to a degree that isn't simply explained by ENA-related admixture.

Yeah, UP + ENA makes sense simply based on MA1's Y-DNA and mtDNA as well, his Y-DNA R from ENA and his mtDNA U from UP.

Jean M
10-10-2017, 12:37 PM
Thanks to everyone for the explanations. The models keep changing, but I think all I need to do is remove a snippet of text from the book I'm currently working on, which had stuck to the Raghavan 2013 story. I only really need to talk about ANE and not what it might be composed of.

Radboud
10-10-2017, 01:12 PM
Yeah, UP + ENA makes sense simply based on MA1's Y-DNA and mtDNA as well, his Y-DNA R from ENA and his mtDNA U from UP.

Is there sufficient evidence that Y-DNA R is originally ENA?

parasar
10-10-2017, 04:26 PM
...
Chad Rohlfsen, however, seems to be arguing (see here (https://eurogenes.blogspot.ae/2017/10/upper-paleolithic-genomes-from-sunghir.html)) that ANE cut-off right between the split between Kostenki-14 and Sunghir-3:
...

"Chad Rohlfsen said...
ANE is these guys, plus East Asian. ANE is a hybrid and not some uniform pop. ENA admixture will vary by date and location."


Even if it did (which I doubt as K14 and Sunghir form a clade so a separation after Ust and before K14 looks likelier to me), Chad IMO is confusing Ancient North Eurasian with MA1-ANE. This latter is the one (significantly drifted from the Ust type Ancient North Eurasian) that shows up in EHG along with Y-R.

parasar
10-10-2017, 04:50 PM
Is there sufficient evidence that Y-DNA R is originally ENA?
No it is not positively known to be ENA.

All we can say for now is that:
It first appears on the Baikal/Angara 24000ybp.
We do not see R in Europe and Iran until 10000 years after that.
Its closest sister line Q is in populations chock full of ENA.
Its predecessor Ps (P295 to P27) are found in conjunction with M and S in South East Asia, and the latter have common ancestry with P (at P331).

Chad Rohlfsen
10-10-2017, 05:40 PM
"Chad Rohlfsen said...
ANE is these guys, plus East Asian. ANE is a hybrid and not some uniform pop. ENA admixture will vary by date and location."


Even if it did (which I doubt as K14 and Sunghir form a clade so a separation after Ust and before K14 looks likelier to me), Chad IMO is confusing Ancient North Eurasian with MA1-ANE. This latter is the one (significantly drifted from the Ust type Ancient North Eurasian) that shows up in EHG along with Y-R.

I don't think you understand. I'm saying the West Eurasian side of ANE is split around Kostenki and Vestonice. My graph made that clear. No major errors in it. I'm plugging in Sunghir tonight.

parasar
10-10-2017, 06:03 PM
I don't think you understand. I'm saying the West Eurasian side of ANE is split around Kostenki and Vestonice. My graph made that clear. No major errors in it. I'm plugging in Sunghir tonight.

You got to be a little clearer so that I could fully understand.

Are you saying that there are two sides of ANE - West Eurasian and East Eurasian, and the former is in present day Europeans, while the latter admixed with ENA and is in Inner Asia and the Americas?
That there is no common circa 24000 year old input from a MA1 like population to Amerindians, South Asians, and Europeans, and the ANE we are seeing across these populations is shared pre-40000ybp common ancestry?

bmoney
10-11-2017, 03:29 AM
Can anyone theorize on the origins of R1 (R-M173) in indigenous Americans?

Observer
10-11-2017, 03:48 AM
Is there sufficient evidence that Y-DNA R is originally ENA?

My guess was simply based on this study. http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n3/full/ejhg2014106a.html

"Estimates of the interval times for the branching events between M9 and P295 point to an initial rapid diversification process of K-M526 that likely occurred in Southeast Asia, with subsequent westward expansions of the ancestors of haplogroups R and Q."

Ancestor clads of R & Q are in Southeast Asia and far East. In Southeast Asia there is basal P*, P1* and P2* all together, so there is quite a lot of P diversity in that region, along with P's ancestors clads.

Generalissimo
10-11-2017, 05:51 AM
Can anyone theorize on the origins of R1 (R-M173) in indigenous Americans?

Indigenous Americans don't carry any R1 that didn't come from Europe recently, so there's no point theorizing as such.

Ebizur
10-11-2017, 08:27 AM
My guess was simply based on this study. http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n3/full/ejhg2014106a.html

"Estimates of the interval times for the branching events between M9 and P295 point to an initial rapid diversification process of K-M526 that likely occurred in Southeast Asia, with subsequent westward expansions of the ancestors of haplogroups R and Q."

Ancestor clads of R & Q are in Southeast Asia and far East. In Southeast Asia there is basal P*, P1* and P2* all together, so there is quite a lot of P diversity in that region, along with P's ancestors clads.However, K2a* has been found in Ust'-Ishim (deceased ca. 45,000 ybp in western Siberia) and Oase 1 (deceased sometime between 42,000 and 37,000 ybp in southwestern Romania), which partially obviates the significance of the diversity of K2 derivatives in Southeast Asia and Oceania when pondering the geographical origin of Y-DNA haplogroup K2. If an ancient representative of K2b (which includes P/K2b2 as well as MS/K2b1, the latter being very diverse in Oceania) is discovered in an ancient specimen from Siberia or eastern Europe like the K2a* of Ust'-Ishim or Oase 1, then there will be no reason to favor the hypothesis of an origin of K2 in Southeast Asia over a hypothesis of an origin of K2 in eastern Europe or western Siberia.

Note that the other major Y-DNA haplogroup of Oceanians, C1b2-B477, belongs to the same clade as the Y-DNA of one of the specimens from the Kostenki site, while C1a1-M8, which is found among modern Japanese people, is related to the Y-DNA of many other specimens from Palaeolithic Europe. It appears that both C1 and K2 may have expanded their ranges over most of Eurasia (or at least Europe, East Asia, and Southeast Asia) and Oceania at some time between 50,000 and 45,000 ybp.

Gravetto-Danubian
10-11-2017, 08:46 AM
However, K2a* has been found in Ust'-Ishim (deceased ca. 45,000 ybp in western Siberia) and Oase 1 (deceased sometime between 42,000 and 37,000 ybp in southwestern Romania), which partially obviates the significance of the diversity of K2 derivatives in Southeast Asia and Oceania when pondering the geographical origin of Y-DNA haplogroup K2. If an ancient representative of K2b (which includes P/K2b2 as well as MS/K2b1, the latter being very diverse in Oceania) is discovered in an ancient specimen from Siberia or eastern Europe like the K2a* of Ust'-Ishim or Oase 1, then there will be no reason to favor the hypothesis of an origin of K2 in Southeast Asia over a hypothesis of an origin of K2 in eastern Europe or western Siberia.

Note that the other major Y-DNA haplogroup of Oceanians, C1b2-B477, belongs to the same clade as the Y-DNA of one of the specimens from the Kostenki site, while C1a1-M8, which is found among modern Japanese people, is related to the Y-DNA of many other specimens from Palaeolithic Europe. It appears that both C1 and K2 may have expanded their ranges over most of Eurasia (or at least Europe, East Asia, and Southeast Asia) and Oceania at some time between 50,000 and 45,000 ybp.

These haplogroups must still have been sitting around central- western Asia until ~ 35 ky BP.
Interesting that the Sunghir are closest to modern Japanese, and then Australo-PNG groups; whilst the major branch leading to Chine & central Asians is distinct.

Ebizur
10-11-2017, 08:55 AM
These haplogroups must still have been sitting around central- western Asia until ~ 35 ky BP.
Interesting that the Sunghir are closest to modern Japanese, and then Australo-PNG groups; whilst the major branch leading to Chine & central Asians is distinct.Why do you say until approximately 35,000 ybp?

Gravetto-Danubian
10-11-2017, 10:02 AM
Why do you say until approximately 35,000 ybp?

Because that is when C1a and C1b appear in Europe, no ?
They appear to have 'arrived' after the C.I. (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?12221-Sunghir-social-and-reproductive-behavior-of-early-Upper-Paleolithic-foragers&p=295686#post295686).

kinman
11-12-2017, 10:10 PM
However, that study also said that an alternative scenario was haplogroup P originating outside of southeast Asia with extinction of most of the P* populations in mainland Asia. And it turns out that there is more P* in Asia than previously thought. It has even recently been discovered as far west as Croatia in Europe.

It's becoming increasingly clear to me that haplogroup P originated in the area of Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan or eastern Kazakhstan. From there haplogroup Q went mainly north and east, while haplogroup R went mainly south and west. This morning I started a new thread on the haplogroup R subforum on this very subject.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My guess was simply based on this study. http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n3/full/ejhg2014106a.html

"Estimates of the interval times for the branching events between M9 and P295 point to an initial rapid diversification process of K-M526 that likely occurred in Southeast Asia, with subsequent westward expansions of the ancestors of haplogroups R and Q."

Ancestor clads of R & Q are in Southeast Asia and far East. In Southeast Asia there is basal P*, P1* and P2* all together, so there is quite a lot of P diversity in that region, along with P's ancestors clads.

Jean M
11-13-2017, 09:04 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear to me that haplogroup P originated in the area of Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan or eastern Kazakhstan. From there haplogroup Q went mainly north and east, while haplogroup R went mainly south and west.

I'm relieved to know that I'm not the only one! Here is a slide I created for a lecture in 2014:

19784

Geneticist Mike Hammer was there and asked why I had chosen that route, rather than the one from SE Asia that he was keen on at the time. I explained that I had co-ordinated it with my proposed route for mtDNA U, which I showed in the same lecture:

19785

kinman
11-13-2017, 01:51 PM
I really like that map (attachment 19784), and I posted a link to it on the thread I started yesterday in the R1b General subforum:
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?12648-Did-haplogroup-R1b-originate-in-or-near-Tajikistan&p=310274#post310274


I'm relieved to know that I'm not the only one! Here is a slide I created for a lecture in 2014:

19784

Geneticist Mike Hammer was there and asked why I had chosen that route, rather than the one from SE Asia that he was keen on at the time. I explained that I had co-ordinated it with my proposed route for mtDNA U, which I showed in the same lecture:

19785

Rethel
11-19-2017, 04:35 PM
Yep you're right, so basal R is ANE

R is EHG.
ANE is a fictional castizo au.

bmoney
11-20-2017, 09:28 AM
R is EHG.
ANE is a fictional castizo au.

You are correct

Running Mal'ta kit through Gedmatch - What is the closest modern population to ancient EHG?

# Population Percent
1 Eastern_Hunter_Gatherer 73.62
2 Ancestral_South_Indian 15.92
3 Siberian_E_Asian 7.67

parasar
01-24-2018, 03:28 PM
"we detected Y chromosomal haplogroup K in the Maniq, which occurs elsewhere in populations of Papua New Guinea40,41, the Philippines30 and Australia42. Haplogroup K is an ancient lineages that is dated here to ~41.10 kya, which is younger than previous estimates in Aboriginal Australians (~48.40 kya)42. Overall, the Maniq display basal genetic lineages and closest genetic affinities with indigenous groups in Malaysia or ISEA, supporting a common ancestry of the Maniq with other SEA negrito communities.

The NRY sequence of the four unrelated Maniq males belongs to haplogroup K, and when compared to the two haplogroup K2b1 sequences32, the estimated coalescent age is ~41.10 kya (Figure S5). The Maniq sequence thus adds to a small set of basal Y chromosomes sequences."
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-20020-0

bmoney
01-25-2018, 01:07 AM
"we detected Y chromosomal haplogroup K in the Maniq, which occurs elsewhere in populations of Papua New Guinea40,41, the Philippines30 and Australia42. Haplogroup K is an ancient lineages that is dated here to ~41.10 kya, which is younger than previous estimates in Aboriginal Australians (~48.40 kya)42. Overall, the Maniq display basal genetic lineages and closest genetic affinities with indigenous groups in Malaysia or ISEA, supporting a common ancestry of the Maniq with other SEA negrito communities.

The NRY sequence of the four unrelated Maniq males belongs to haplogroup K, and when compared to the two haplogroup K2b1 sequences32, the estimated coalescent age is ~41.10 kya (Figure S5). The Maniq sequence thus adds to a small set of basal Y chromosomes sequences."
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-20020-0

Is this basal K or basal K2b?