PDA

View Full Version : Where did M And N originate?



newtoboard
02-09-2014, 12:52 PM
And how/from where did they spread early on? I have no idea if the OOA migration was of L3, M and N or if it was of L3 and M and N arose in situ in Eurasia. I guess N looks unlikely to be African given its close to complete absence there(just talking about N and not derived clades like H, J and T which obviously exist in Africa). And the only clade of M in Africa is M1 which likely was a back migration with U6 (and ydna E?). And I think M1 also shares a more recent ancestor with M51 which has a South Eurasian distribution. But I have also read Eurasia doesn't have the L3 varieties that look like they could have given rise to M and N.

alan
02-09-2014, 03:13 PM
lol I thought this was about y dna - post deleted.

BMG
02-09-2014, 03:23 PM
North Africa does have N1a ,N1b and X1 but it is the result of back migration probably from middle east .
I believe OOA migrants would have had some kind of L3 but the origin of M and N is difficult to pinpoint . M does have a high basal diversity and it peaks in north east of india (may be just artificial since the south asian ,east asian and southeast asian lineages converge around there) . N doesnt show that much basal diversity as M but basal clades are more far widespread from neareast to oceania . So we could assume N is older and originated somewhere in west asia and was part of coastal(?) migration to oceania and somewhere along the journey M was born .
I am also curious about Y haplogroup D and its relationship with M and N. I think it was once more widespread than present areas ,it seems restricted to isolated and somewhat inaccessible places .It is baffling that south asia has almost 0% D

palamede
02-09-2014, 04:31 PM
North Africa does have N1a ,N1b and X1 but it is the result of back migration probably from middle east .
I believe OOA migrants would have had some kind of L3 but the origin of M and N is difficult to pinpoint . M does have a high basal diversity and it peaks in north east of india (may be just artificial since the south asian ,east asian and southeast asian lineages converge around there) . N doesnt show that much basal diversity as M but basal clades are more far widespread from neareast to oceania . So we could assume N is older and originated somewhere in west asia and was part of coastal(?) migration to oceania and somewhere along the journey M was born .
I am also curious about Y haplogroup D and its relationship with M and N. I think it was once more widespread than present areas ,it seems restricted to isolated and somewhat inaccessible places .It is baffling that south asia has almost 0% D

I think L3 was born after in "Out of Africa' in Arabia/Near Eastl. Probably 'out of Africa' was done by Y-hg CT and Mt-hg L3'4'6 during first phase of favourable conditions of the Eemian (130-120,000BP).
Y-haplogroup E and Mt L3 (xM, N) returned to Africa when the climatic conditions begin to deteriorate in Arabia/Near East.

About 95-85,000 "Out of Arabia/near East" was done by the Y haplogroups C, D and F) and several L3 lineages. 3 mutations later one L3 lineage gave birth to M and 5 mutations later another L3 lineage gave birth to N, certainly in South India. From the basal M in the next 10,000 years probably more than one hundred deriving lineages and less lineages deriving from N, from India Peninsula to Indonesia and South China.

newtoboard
02-09-2014, 04:32 PM
North Africa does have N1a ,N1b and X1 but it is the result of back migration probably from middle east .
I believe OOA migrants would have had some kind of L3 but the origin of M and N is difficult to pinpoint . M does have a high basal diversity and it peaks in north east of india (may be just artificial since the south asian ,east asian and southeast asian lineages converge around there) . N doesnt show that much basal diversity as M but basal clades are more far widespread from neareast to oceania . So we could assume N is older and originated somewhere in west asia and was part of coastal(?) migration to oceania and somewhere along the journey M was born .
I am also curious about Y haplogroup D and its relationship with M and N. I think it was once more widespread than present areas ,it seems restricted to isolated and somewhat inaccessible places .It is baffling that south asia has almost 0% D

There is some D in the North isn't there?

BMG
02-09-2014, 05:00 PM
I think L3 was born after in "Out of Africa' in Arabia/Near Eastl. Probably 'out of Africa' was done by Y-hg CT and Mt-hg L3'4'6 during first phase of favourable conditions of the Eemian (130-120,000BP).
Y-haplogroup E and Mt L3 (xM, N) returned to Africa when the climatic conditions begin to deteriorate in Arabia/Near East.

About 95-85,000 "Out of Arabia/near East" was done by the Y haplogroups C, D and F) and several L3 lineages. 3 mutations later one L3 lineage gave birth to M and 5 mutations later another L3 lineage gave birth to N, certainly in South India. From the basal M in the next 10,000 years probably more than one hundred deriving lineages and less lineages deriving from N, from India Peninsula to Indonesia and South China.
But isnt L3 more diverse in east africa than in arabia .Apart from M and N which other L3 subclades could have originated from arabia ?

palamede
02-09-2014, 05:56 PM
But isnt L3 more diverse in east africa than in arabia .Apart from M and N which other L3 subclades could have originated from arabia ?

Arabia knew frequent very great droughts which make large areas desertic except some very rare surviving L3, L4 and L6 lineages in the mountains of Arabia (Asir, Yemen, Dhofar), it is enough to explain a weaker diversity.

If I said "several L3 lineages" because there were probably more than 2 L3 lineages which left Arabia/Near East to South India, but only M and N survived.

In a lot of old branches of Y and Mt haplogroups, there were a lot of sub-branches after each mutation , but altogether, only often an unique lineage has survived until nowadays. There were a lot of frequent bottlenecks which left 0 or 1 surviving lineages.

parasar
02-09-2014, 06:15 PM
I think L3 was born after in "Out of Africa' in Arabia/Near Eastl. Probably 'out of Africa' was done by Y-hg CT and Mt-hg L3'4'6 during first phase of favourable conditions of the Eemian (130-120,000BP).
Y-haplogroup E and Mt L3 (xM, N) returned to Africa when the climatic conditions begin to deteriorate in Arabia/Near East.

About 95-85,000 "Out of Arabia/near East" was done by the Y haplogroups C, D and F) and several L3 lineages. 3 mutations later one L3 lineage gave birth to M and 5 mutations later another L3 lineage gave birth to N, certainly in South India. From the basal M in the next 10,000 years probably more than one hundred deriving lineages and less lineages deriving from N, from India Peninsula to Indonesia and South China.

That is possible, and my overall line of thinking on this is similar to yours, but the likelihood is low at least for M, N and R (but not U). The coalescence times for M, N and R are much older than any known modern human presence in South India. Plus we already have verified N-R lineage descendant B 40000ybp in Tianyuan who had already diverged to a small extent from west Eurasians.

GailT
02-09-2014, 10:28 PM
I see two main movements of humans going west after the first 100000ybp OoA going east. First is N coming from SE Asia-Oceania followed by M from East Asia.


http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/7/32/

As yet, I have seen nothing from current dna or ancient DNA that goes against my line of thinking as near eastern current and ancient DNA does include L(x M, N) lines.

If there was a 100 kya OoA expansion, it is possible that this population did not leave any trace in modern yDNA or mtDNA. The paper on Saudi-Arab mtDNA that you linked to suggests that the current population is a mix of recent influences from West Asia (85%), Africa (12%) and India (3%), and they did not find "archaic N and/or M autochthonous lineages in the Arabian Peninsula." It probably is not possible to determine the mtDNA signature of the 100 to 50 kya population of Arabia. But there is strong evidence of L3 originating in Africa, and based on mtDNA age estimates, evidence of L3 arriving in Arabia and perhaps SW Asia between 70 to 60 kya. I don't see the evidence for East Asian or Oceanic origins of M and N. It seems simpler to think of M and N originating and with its earliest expansion in Arabia, southwest Asia and the Indian subcontinent, and then N expanding westward into Europe, the Near East and northern Asia around 50 to 40 kya.

Current age estimates for mtDNA would have to be biased significantly low to be consistent with 100 ky as the major OoA expansion.

GailT
02-09-2014, 10:44 PM
I think L3 was born after in "Out of Africa' in Arabia/Near Eastl. Probably 'out of Africa' was done by Y-hg CT and Mt-hg L3'4'6 during first phase of favourable conditions of the Eemian (130-120,000BP). Y-haplogroup E and Mt L3 (xM, N) returned to Africa when the climatic conditions begin to deteriorate in Arabia/Near East.


If L3 originated outside of Africa, we would expect to find more L3 subclades outside of Africa, but the greatest diversity of L3 is within Africa. The same is true of L3'4'6. L4 has an age estimate of about 80 kya and is found widely distributed in Africa and Arabia. The most likely explanation for the Arabian L4 is relatively recent migration from Africa.

This is from the Soares et al. 2011 paper on L3 (http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/11/16/molbev.msr245.short?rss=1):


An analysis of 369 complete African L3 sequences places this maximum at ~70 ka, virtually ruling out a successful exit before 74 ka, the date of the Toba volcanic super-eruption in Sumatra. The similarity of the age of L3 to its two non-African daughter haplogroups, M and N,
suggests that the same process was likely responsible for both the L3 expansion in Eastern Africa and the dispersal of a small group of modern humans out of Africa to settle the rest of the world. The timing of the expansion of L3 suggests a link to improved climatic conditions after ~70 ka in Eastern and Central Africa, rather than to symbolically mediated behavior, which evidently arose considerably earlier.


I agree it may be possible that modern human exited Africa earlier than 100 kya, but if they did, there is no trace of that migration in modern mtDNA.

newtoboard
02-09-2014, 10:51 PM
If L3 originated outside of Africa, we would expect to find more L3 subclades outside of Africa, but the greatest diversity of L3 is within Africa. The same is true of L3'4'6. L4 has an age estimate of about 80 kya and is found widely distributed in Africa and Arabia. The most likely explanation for the Arabian L4 is relatively recent migration from Africa.

This is from the Soares et al. 2011 paper on L3 (http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/11/16/molbev.msr245.short?rss=1):


I agree it may be possible that modern human exited Africa earlier than 100 kya, but if they did, there is no trace of that migration in modern mtDNA.

On a related note what is the Y lineage that OOA was associated with? CT or CF? If it was CT I guess that would make E a back migration.

parasar
02-09-2014, 11:06 PM
If there was a 100 kya OoA expansion, it is possible that this population did not leave any trace in modern yDNA or mtDNA. The paper on Saudi-Arab mtDNA that you linked to suggests that the current population is a mix of recent influences from West Asia (85%), Africa (12%) and India (3%), and they did not find "archaic N and/or M autochthonous lineages in the Arabian Peninsula." It probably is not possible to determine the mtDNA signature of the 100 to 50 kya population of Arabia. But there is strong evidence of L3 originating in Africa, and based on mtDNA age estimates, evidence of L3 arriving in Arabia and perhaps SW Asia between 70 to 60 kya. I don't see the evidence for East Asian or Oceanic origins of M and N. It seems simpler to think of M and N originating and with its earliest expansion in Arabia, southwest Asia and the Indian subcontinent, and then N expanding westward into Europe, the Near East and northern Asia around 50 to 40 kya.

Current age estimates for mtDNA would have to be biased significantly low to be consistent with 100 ky as the major OoA expansion.

Yes that is possible that modern DNA has no trace of those early migrants. Perhaps the coastal areas on the migration path are under water.

M & N developed, or least had the most common ancestor, abt 70000ybp, with the other OoA lineages dying out.

palamede
02-10-2014, 09:28 AM
For me, It is obvious the basal Eurasian haplogroups C, D and F (for Y), M, N and R (for Mt) bifurked in branches before the Eeurasian raciations. If we think these Eurasian raciations took place during cold phases, there are 3 possibilities

1) First Pleniglacial (74-59,000BP) Middle Paleolithic technologies

2) Cold and relatively short phases of the interpleniglacial (59-30,000BP) with development of the Upper paleolithic : Near East with the Emirian (53,000-48,000). Transitional industries between MP and UP In Europe 48,000-40,000BP, in Russia and South Siberia (50,000-40,000). I don't know the other parts of the world.

3) Second Pleniglacial (30,000-15,000BP) Upper Paleolithic with Gravettian, Solutrean, Magdalenian in Westren Europe and other developped UP cultures in other world regions.

If in the northern regions for the second Pleniglacial and also in Interpleniglacial, there were peaks of very harsh colds with decreasing populations, a large part of time was bearable for adapted populations by their physiology and technics.


On the other hand, in the First Pleniglacial, maybe the Modern Man didn't live so northern, but it should supported a considerable selection pressure which explains raciations better.

For the archeological and genetic dates of "Out Of Africa " and "Out of Arabia", there are different schools in the scholar world and the people who considered the problem is solved for their preferable theory, are wrong. I prefer high dates (after 130,000BP) a lot, but the future settled between high, middle and low dates.

PS: The difference of raciations for Y-haplogroups like E is probably due to the maternal lineages. Same thing for N in Europe and R1b in Africa.

BMG
02-10-2014, 03:37 PM
The New study of myanmar ethnic groups mentioned in maju's blog is interesting .
http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.in/2014/02/mitochondrial-lineages-from-myanmar.html
The Major ethnic group in myanmar is the Bamar people who shows high diversity of M subgroups .This makes me think the origin of haplogroup M and its initial diversification happened in northeastern regions of india

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/14/17

yxc
07-07-2014, 09:55 PM
maju placed origin of N in the middle of Burma, from what I had read and seen at his older blog. I think he was very wrong on that.

Gisele H
07-08-2014, 01:50 AM
There are some events which simply happened too long ago for mtDNA comparisons to be very helpful about. It is the Australian aborigine 'N' haplogroups which suggest to me to look in the neighbourhood of SE Asia/Oceania.