PDA

View Full Version : [Split] ASI outside of the Indus: How and When?



thejkhan
11-13-2018, 06:15 AM
Yes Indians and even most Pakistanis should not be considered Caucasian, considering how much AASI they have.

Afghans and Iranian Baloch have AASI that is in no way insignificant. I wouldn't be surprised if many Iranians and Tajiks also have a little AASI, just not enough to affect their phenotype.

DMXX
11-13-2018, 07:41 AM
Afghans and Iranian Baloch have AASI that is in no way insignificant. I wouldn't be surprised if many Iranians and Tajiks also have a little AASI, just not enough to affect their phenotype.

Big post looking into this with member and average-representative samples inbound.

Narasimhan et al. found that ASI-related ancestry began to appear across South-Central Asia during the Bronze Age (Gonur, Shahr-i-Sokhta etc.). It wasn't in the region during the Eneolithic (Sarazm, Parkhai etc.). Nor was it in Iran during the Chalcolithic (Seh Gabi, Hajji Firuz).

DMXX
11-13-2018, 07:58 AM
Ordered per increasing ASI.

It's clearly residual across most of Iran (0-2%). There is a higher percentage range (6-9%) in a diagonally-shaped swathe of territory from the south Iranian coastline (Bandar) through to the Suleiman mts (Balochis), on the Afghan side of the Durand line through to the southern Pamirs.

If we arbitrarily use 5% as a cut-off for what constitutes as "significant", then I'd agree that ASI makes up a significant (but small minority of) the heritage of southern Iranians, Afghans, Balochis and some Pamiris. The majority of Iranians and Kurds have insignificant ASI going by that arbitrary standard.

One thing to mention - South Iranians seem to have an ancestral component that isn't well-characterised by our current samples. Bandaris and the user "jesus" seem to produce subpar fits in standardised pan-Iranian/regional models. Things only improve if you throw the Paniya in, which ends up consuming a lot of their agriculturalist Iranian ancient scores (up to 9% for "jesus").

I'd guess it's a secondary marker of the Iranian waves in Iran, given we know AASI was present in SC Asia by the Bronze Age.



Sample Details Fit HrzChL Han SrzEn SGChL ASI Sint
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Azeri_Iran:azerE70 2.5245 68.33 4.17 0.83 10 0 16.67
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Jew:IranianJew1143 3.1799 94.17 0 0 0 0 5.83
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Persian:SHII25 3.6383 26.67 3.33 4.17 52.5 0 13.33
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Kurdish:kurd1101 1.4812 50.83 1.67 2.5 25.83 0 19.17
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Tajik_Yagnobi:TJ1176_tadjik_yag 2.0662 8.33 5 25 15.83 0 45.83
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Custom:AGUser_Mori_yek 1.7478 47.5 0 6.67 26.67 0.83 18.33
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Custom:AGUser_StarDS9 2.4713 54.17 2.5 4.17 18.33 0.83 20
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Lor:LORII50 2.4082 62.5 2.5 4.17 16.67 0.83 13.33
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Mazandarani:GMII18 2.6129 15 0.83 13.33 50 0.83 20
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Zoroastrian:YZ039 2.5013 20 0.83 3.33 53.33 0.83 21.67
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Tajik_Shugnan:tdj979_shugnan 2.6593 0.83 6.67 35 11.67 1.67 44.17
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Custom:AGUser_DMXX 2.3135 30.83 3.33 2.5 37.5 2.5 23.33
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Hazara_Afghan:Hazara6_6Af 6.5253 1.67 50 17.5 2.5 2.5 25.83
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Fars:IREJ-T101 2.4136 47.5 4.17 3.33 25 2.5 17.5
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Tajik_Rushan:tdj277_rushan 2.3325 2.5 9.17 30.83 8.33 3.33 45.83
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Tajik_Ishkashim:tdj255_ishkash 2.4309 5 5.83 30.83 15 6.67 36.67
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Bandari:BanII90 5.002 0 2.5 27.5 51.67 6.67 11.67
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Custom:AGUser_surbakhun 2.5258 3.33 5 35.83 25 8.33 22.5
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00062 3.6337 1.67 0.83 38.33 41.67 9.17 8.33
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Custom:AGUser_Kaido 2.4131 1.67 2.5 42.5 17.5 16.67 19.17
Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +S_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Pashtun:HGDP00248 3.7772 0.83 1.67 41.67 15 20 20.83


(In case anyone notices, the Hazara fit is subpar because Han Chinese aren't an adequate stand-in for Mongola)

Censored
11-13-2018, 08:02 AM
Big post looking into this with member and average-representative samples inbound.

Narasimhan et al. found that ASI-related ancestry began to appear across South-Central Asia during the Bronze Age (Gonur, Shahr-i-Sokhta etc.). It wasn't in the region during the Eneolithic (Sarazm, Parkhai etc.). Nor was it in Iran during the Chalcolithic (Seh Gabi, Hajji Firuz).

I'm guessing there was a northern and western expansion of IVC types. It couldn't come from another source, since the rest of South Asia was hunter gathers according to that paper.

DMXX
11-13-2018, 08:13 AM
I'm guessing there was a northern and western expansion of IVC types. It couldn't come from another source, since the rest of South Asia was hunter gathers according to that paper.

Agreed.

There were a handful of technological innovations among those agriculturalist communities, in addition to established trade between Elam, the BMAC and the IVC (not to mention the Dilmun-mediated sea route).

One innovation that would fit reasonably with the introduction of ASI-related ancestry into SC Asia is the rotating pottery table. That originated near Mergarh from memory just prior to the Bronze Age. IVC-type pottery began to appear in several places around SC Asia (including Shahr-i-Sokhta) afterwards.

My hunch is that IVC-derived artisans spread to other communities through those established trade routes, where their new technique gave them some form of higher social standing in those communities through several mechanisms (e.g. per market principles, increased efficiency = higher product output = more prosperity = higher standing).

Right place, right time, anthropologically sensible vector for demic diffusion. Works for me. But someone would have to dig through the archaeology books about the region to co-sign that (I'm going off of 2014-15 memories).

Censored
11-13-2018, 08:24 AM
Agreed.

There were a handful of technological innovations among those agriculturalist communities, in addition to established trade between Elam, the BMAC and the IVC (not to mention the Dilmun-mediated sea route).

One innovation that would fit reasonably with the introduction of ASI-related ancestry into SC Asia is the rotating pottery table. That originated near Mergarh from memory just prior to the Bronze Age. IVC-type pottery began to appear in several places around SC Asia (including Shahr-i-Sokhta) afterwards.

My hunch is that IVC-derived artisans spread to other communities through those established trade routes, where their new technique gave them some form of higher social standing in those communities through several mechanisms (e.g. per market principles, increased efficiency = higher product output = more prosperity = higher standing).

Right place, right time, anthropologically sensible vector for demic diffusion. Works for me. But someone would have to dig through the archaeology books about the region to co-sign that (I'm going off of 2014-15 memories).

If there is that much ASI in SC Asia during the Bronze Age whereas it was absent before, then it may have even been from another source. Large scale immigration is possible but there could have also been some sort of calamity or natural disaster that pushed some people out of IVC, much like how the later collapse of the civilization resulted in the so called Indus diaspora.

DMXX
11-13-2018, 08:37 AM
If there is that much ASI in SC Asia during the Bronze Age whereas it was absent before, then it may have even been from another source. Large scale immigration is possible but there could have also been some sort of calamity or natural disaster that pushed some people out of IVC, much like how the later collapse of the civilization resulted in the so called Indus diaspora.

There actually wasn't much ASI in SC Asia during the Bronze Age. We went from 0% during the Eneolithic to 3-7% across the region during the Bronze Age. The presence of LNBA steppe ancestry after the 2nd millennium BC was far more pronounced than this (e.g. ~14% LNBA steppe for SPGT, ~17% for South_Asia_H).

I'm also no expert on the IVC's development, but from what I understand, the IVC was still undergoing a "boon" up until the late 2nd millennium BC. All the Bronze Age samples from SC Asia sampled in Narasimhan et al. are older than this (the Gonur sites by over a millennia).

Based on the figures I produced from poi's tool, however, it does look like SC Asia received some more admixture from the Indus region after the Bronze Age. Note that, despite additional admixtures since the BA (LNBA steppe, East Eurasian ancestry), groups like the Balochi and Pashtuns are more ASI-related than their BA predecessors.

DMXX
11-13-2018, 09:19 AM
Ran the same model for all individual Balochi, Pashtun (Afghan), Hazara (Afghan) and Iranian (Bandari) samples. The (rounded) ranges:

Balochi (HGDP): 6-16%
Hazara: 3-10%
Pashtun: 8-9%
Bandari: 3-10%




Model Sample Details Fit Hajji Firuz ChL Han Sarazm Eneolithic Seh Gabi ChL Simulated AASI Sintashta MLBA
1 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00054 3.6917 2.5 0 38.33 33.33 8.33 17.5
2 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00062 3.5888 0.83 0.83 36.67 44.17 9.17 8.33
3 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00066 4.4974 0 0 44.17 30.83 10 15
4 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00072 3.9497 2.5 0 43.33 26.67 12.5 15
5 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00074 5.7568 0 2.5 32.5 46.67 7.5 10.83
6 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00078 4.9063 0 3.33 39.17 34.17 5.83 17.5
7 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00080 4.3085 1.67 1.67 40.83 37.5 8.33 10
8 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00086 5.7504 0 0.83 48.33 32.5 7.5 10.83
9 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00088 3.5914 0 0.83 39.17 36.67 9.17 14.17
10 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00090 3.1587 4.17 0.83 50.83 20 15.83 8.33
11 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00096 3.4318 3.33 0.83 51.67 23.33 10.83 10
12 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:HGDP00098 3.4108 7.5 0.83 45.83 23.33 13.33 9.17
13 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Balochi:S_Balochi-1 3.1611 3.33 0 49.17 22.5 16.67 8.33
14 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Hazara_Afghanistan:Hazara6_27Af 4.2244 5.83 23.33 30 5.83 10 25
15 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Hazara_Afghanistan:Hazara6_2Af 5.6078 4.17 47.5 15.83 3.33 5 24.17
16 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Hazara_Afghanistan:Hazara6_6Af 6.5229 2.5 49.17 18.33 1.67 3.33 25
17 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Bandari:BanII38 3.2961 5.83 2.5 15.83 58.33 3.33 14.17
18 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Bandari:BanII4 4.2061 10 3.33 23.33 47.5 5 10.83
19 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Bandari:BanII40 3.8897 0 0.83 22.5 52.5 8.33 15.83
20 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Bandari:BanII47 3.7322 5.83 1.67 25.83 45 5.83 15.83
21 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Bandari:BanII80 3.6212 8.33 2.5 17.5 45 7.5 19.17
22 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Iranian_Bandari:BanII90 4.7167 0 0.83 25 53.33 10 10.83
23 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Pashtun:Pashtun2_20Af 2.343 4.17 8.33 32.5 19.17 9.17 26.67
24 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Pashtun:Pashtun2_22Af 2.3579 1.67 6.67 28.33 26.67 7.5 29.17
25 Hajji_Firuz_ChL +Han +Sarazm_Eneolithic +Seh_Gabi_ChL +Simulated_AASI +Sintashta_MLBA Pashtun:Pashtun2_8Af 2.0519 2.5 4.17 35.83 17.5 8.33 31.67

jortita
11-13-2018, 09:27 AM
Not much AASI if you run pegasus v2_k7 calculator on Poi's platform

Model Sample Details Fit BMAC K7 East Asian K7 Excess WestEurasian K7 SouthAsian Agriculturalist K7 SouthAsian Tribal K7 Steppe MLBA Pontic K7 Steppe Siberia K7
1 BMAC_K7 +East_Asian_K7 +Excess_WestEurasian_K7 +SouthAsian_Agriculturalist_K7 +SouthAsian_Tribal_K7 +Steppe_MLBA_Pontic_K7 +Steppe_Siberia_K7 Balochi:Average 2.6948 63.33 0 7.5 15 2.5 8.33 3.33

Model Sample Details Fit BMAC K7 East Asian K7 Excess WestEurasian K7 SouthAsian Agriculturalist K7 SouthAsian Tribal K7 Steppe MLBA Pontic K7 Steppe Siberia K7
1 BMAC_K7 +East_Asian_K7 +Excess_WestEurasian_K7 +SouthAsian_Agriculturalist_K7 +SouthAsian_Tribal_K7 +Steppe_MLBA_Pontic_K7 +Steppe_Siberia_K7 Hazara:Average 4.963 19.17 42.5 10 5 0 5.83 17.5
Model Sample Details Fit BMAC K7 East Asian K7 Excess WestEurasian K7 SouthAsian Agriculturalist K7 SouthAsian Tribal K7 Steppe MLBA Pontic K7 Steppe Siberia K7
1 BMAC_K7 +East_Asian_K7 +Excess_WestEurasian_K7 +SouthAsian_Agriculturalist_K7 +SouthAsian_Tribal_K7 +Steppe_MLBA_Pontic_K7 +Steppe_Siberia_K7 Pashtun:Average 1.4278 41.67 2.5 5 21.67 6.67 15.83 6.67
Model Sample Details Fit BMAC K7 East Asian K7 Excess WestEurasian K7 SouthAsian Agriculturalist K7 SouthAsian Tribal K7 Steppe MLBA Pontic K7 Steppe Siberia K7
1 BMAC_K7 +East_Asian_K7 +Excess_WestEurasian_K7 +SouthAsian_Agriculturalist_K7 +SouthAsian_Tribal_K7 +Steppe_MLBA_Pontic_K7 +Steppe_Siberia_K7 Iranian_Bandari:Average 2.6571 61.67 0 18.33 7.5 1.67 8.33 2.5

Censored
11-13-2018, 11:06 PM
There actually wasn't much ASI in SC Asia during the Bronze Age. We went from 0% during the Eneolithic to 3-7% across the region during the Bronze Age. The presence of LNBA steppe ancestry after the 2nd millennium BC was far more pronounced than this (e.g. ~14% LNBA steppe for SPGT, ~17% for South_Asia_H).

I'm also no expert on the IVC's development, but from what I understand, the IVC was still undergoing a "boon" up until the late 2nd millennium BC. All the Bronze Age samples from SC Asia sampled in Narasimhan et al. are older than this (the Gonur sites by over a millennia).

Based on the figures I produced from poi's tool, however, it does look like SC Asia received some more admixture from the Indus region after the Bronze Age. Note that, despite additional admixtures since the BA (LNBA steppe, East Eurasian ancestry), groups like the Balochi and Pashtuns are more ASI-related than their BA predecessors.

Yes, despite the additional steppe ancestry to water down whatever bronze age AASI might have existed in SC Asia at the time, they still have more than what existed at the time. In addition to additional influxes from the Indus region, it could also be possible that these groups had their ethnogenesis somewhere other than the area which they currently occupy. This is a very common thing in the region it seems like-one group starts off in one obscure corner and the next thing you know, they're all across a wide swath of land. Thoughts?

What's interesting is that despite the Indus being a cultural and linguistic barrier, it seems that there is something of a genetic cline in NW South Asia from east and west(excluding certain high AASI outlier groups) and in that respect, the border between South Asia and west/central Asia is actually further west/north.

bmoney
11-14-2018, 02:08 AM
Yes, despite the additional steppe ancestry to water down whatever bronze age AASI might have existed in SC Asia at the time, they still have more than what existed at the time. In addition to additional influxes from the Indus region, it could also be possible that these groups had their ethnogenesis somewhere other than the area which they currently occupy. This is a very common thing in the region it seems like-one group starts off in one obscure corner and the next thing you know, they're all across a wide swath of land. Thoughts?

What's interesting is that despite the Indus being a cultural and linguistic barrier, it seems that there is something of a genetic cline in NW South Asia from east and west(excluding certain high AASI outlier groups) and in that respect, the border between South Asia and west/central Asia is actually further west/north.

I agree. The components and major y-DNA groups are similar east of the Indus, from Punjabis to Sinhalese. All the differences are entirely due to ratios of IVC+Steppe+AASI tribal and %ages of haplogroups. There is also the chance that there was more than one wave of Sintashta-like steppe in the North (Scythian related)

Off cline populations in South Asia are probably Bangladeshis, low caste South Indians, South Indian or Munda tribals, and North East Indians + non-Brahmin Nepalese.

Censored
11-14-2018, 03:32 AM
I agree. The components and major y-DNA groups are similar east of the Indus, from Punjabis to Sinhalese. All the differences are entirely due to ratios of IVC+Steppe+AASI tribal and %ages of haplogroups. There is also the chance that there was more than one wave of Sintashta-like steppe in the North (Scythian related)

Off cline populations in South Asia are probably Bangladeshis, low caste South Indians, South Indian or Munda tribals, and North East Indians + non-Brahmin Nepalese.

In this case I was talking specifically about northwest South Asia, basically the area around Pakistan. It took me a while to understand what the Pegasus guy was saying about continuum patterns of this region. How some groups west of the Indus have a cline with those on the east side.

Sapporo
11-14-2018, 06:29 AM
In this case I was talking specifically about northwest South Asia, basically the area around Pakistan. It took me a while to understand what the Pegasus guy was saying about continuum patterns of this region. How some groups west of the Indus have a cline with those on the east side.

Yes, basically, Northern/Northeast Pashtuns, Kalash, Burusho, Kohistani, etc. form a smooth genetic continuum with NW South Asians of non chamar and non Dalit backgrounds. These are all groups living at the border of Dardic and East Iranic languages.

passion
11-14-2018, 06:51 AM
In this case I was talking specifically about northwest South Asia, basically the area around Pakistan. It took me a while to understand what the Pegasus guy was saying about continuum patterns of this region. How some groups west of the Indus have a cline with those on the east side.

yes there is a cline among many groups East and West of Indus , and many time both regions have been united under same civilizations and empires but three major differences occur west of Indus

1) Caucasus increases
2) ASI decreases
3) low castes disappears and imo this causes the most significant difference holistically speaking as a group, otherwise on individual level you will find many people on both sides who show fluent transitions , you can find Punjabi/Sindhis that can pass further west and you can find Pashtun/Balochs/dards that can pass eastwards.

pegasus
11-14-2018, 07:26 AM
Afghans and Iranian Baloch have AASI that is in no way insignificant. I wouldn't be surprised if many Iranians and Tajiks also have a little AASI, just not enough to affect their phenotype.

Tajiks have both a combination of AASI and Han related streams of ancestry , its not ipso facto your phenotype is going to be determined by one ancient ancestral component. Those Sintashta/Andronovo look type people you find in the Western Himalayan/Hindu Kush areas have more AASI than those Baloch/Brahui and even less MLBA Steppe than Haryana Jatts. A combination of natural selection, climate adaption play a huge role/

DMXX
11-14-2018, 02:15 PM
Yes, despite the additional steppe ancestry to water down whatever bronze age AASI might have existed in SC Asia at the time, they still have more than what existed at the time. In addition to additional influxes from the Indus region, it could also be possible that these groups had their ethnogenesis somewhere other than the area which they currently occupy. This is a very common thing in the region it seems like-one group starts off in one obscure corner and the next thing you know, they're all across a wide swath of land. Thoughts?


There probably are examples of this around the world. I don't think it applies to groups like the Pashtun or Baloch, though. We see clear continuity in ancestry from the Bronze Age onwards. It's also quite clear that everyone in the region derives from a predominant base of Iranian agriculturalist and ASI (even Pamiris are slightly more of this than they are steppe-derived). That "common base" also technically extends westwards (Iranian plateau) and southeast (Indus valley).

An actual example of the phenomenon you've described that I've just remembered is the Kumyk (a Mongolic-speaking minority living in the North Caucasus) - From memory, they are still predominantly East Eurasian.



What's interesting is that despite the Indus being a cultural and linguistic barrier, it seems that there is something of a genetic cline in NW South Asia from east and west(excluding certain high AASI outlier groups) and in that respect, the border between South Asia and west/central Asia is actually further west/north.

Yes, several of us have inferred that in the past based on the uniparentals (the Indus has served as a semi-permeable natural barrier). We can see that based on the auDNA of select populations, as others have chimed in with.

DMXX
11-15-2018, 05:28 PM
It's pretty clear that ASI-related admixture is in the Arabian Peninsula, yes.

I haven't studied this in depth, but there's apparent Subcontinental admixture in places like Oman, the UAE and Qatar. This is obvious through the uniparentals. The speculation is most of this is historical and tied to the Arab slave trade followed by introgression. In my opinion, that's probably a large part of the story, but other sources (the Mesopotamian-Dilmun-IVC trade route, a proxy signal from the Persian empires) shouldn't be ignored or ruled out either. Odds are each country has its' own unique story (e.g. Qatari ASI may be largely prehistoric in origin, Omani ASI largely derived from the slave trade).

'jesus' is a good person to invoke for a quantitatively-backed perspective on this, as he's studied the the genetic variation across the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula in great depth.

As a reminder WRT "classifying" or "guessing origins":



3.11 Further to the above, threads or posts forwarding requests for ethnicity guessing or 'classifications' based on the pseudoscientific precepts of 'racial taxonomy' are automatically considered as both devoid of substance and trivial. Such content will be deleted without prior notice. Please note members who persistently defy this aspect of content moderation will be sanctioned as deemed appropriate by the administration.


I've just deleted two posts about how "Indian" Omanis might look (this isn't the venue for that type of discussion).

MonkeyDLuffy
11-15-2018, 05:38 PM
My mtdna has been found in arab peninsula as well. M is not uncommon there, so it's clearly possible it brought some aasi with it too. Not to mention the R1a clades shared by gulf arabs and South asians.

deuterium_1
11-24-2018, 05:18 PM
It's pretty clear that ASI-related admixture is in the Arabian Peninsula, yes.

I haven't studied this in depth, but there's apparent Subcontinental admixture in places like Oman, the UAE and Qatar. This is obvious through the uniparentals. The speculation is most of this is historical and tied to the Arab slave trade followed by introgression. In my opinion, that's probably a large part of the story, but other sources (the Mesopotamian-Dilmun-IVC trade route, a proxy signal from the Persian empires) shouldn't be ignored or ruled out either. Odds are each country has its' own unique story (e.g. Qatari ASI may be largely prehistoric in origin, Omani ASI largely derived from the slave trade).

'jesus' is a good person to invoke for a quantitatively-backed perspective on this, as he's studied the the genetic variation across the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula in great depth.

As a reminder WRT "classifying" or "guessing origins":



I've just deleted two posts about how "Indian" Omanis might look (this isn't the venue for that type of discussion).

Also bear in mind that historically Oman has been composed of three populations:

The local Arabs, migrants from Zanzibar (which used to be ruled by the Omanis) and the Baloch (Oman used to control Gwadar until the 1950s).

deuterium_1
11-24-2018, 05:18 PM
It's pretty clear that ASI-related admixture is in the Arabian Peninsula, yes.

I haven't studied this in depth, but there's apparent Subcontinental admixture in places like Oman, the UAE and Qatar. This is obvious through the uniparentals. The speculation is most of this is historical and tied to the Arab slave trade followed by introgression. In my opinion, that's probably a large part of the story, but other sources (the Mesopotamian-Dilmun-IVC trade route, a proxy signal from the Persian empires) shouldn't be ignored or ruled out either. Odds are each country has its' own unique story (e.g. Qatari ASI may be largely prehistoric in origin, Omani ASI largely derived from the slave trade).

'jesus' is a good person to invoke for a quantitatively-backed perspective on this, as he's studied the the genetic variation across the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula in great depth.

As a reminder WRT "classifying" or "guessing origins":



I've just deleted two posts about how "Indian" Omanis might look (this isn't the venue for that type of discussion).

Also bear in mind that historically Oman has been composed of three populations:

The local Arabs, migrants from Zanzibar (which used to be ruled by the Omanis) and the Baloch (Oman used to control Gwadar until the 1950s).