PDA

View Full Version : Dravidian Chenchus and R1aM17



ThrashRaghead
04-10-2015, 06:19 PM
There was a study done on Dravidian Chenchus and it was found that they have high rates of R1aM17.

How can you claim that pontic steppe "invaders", who were white, gave this gene to the Dravidian Chenchus? Dravidian Chenchus are an isolated population that walk around naked all day. They also are very dark skinned and are not admixed with whites.

The study said that the Dravidian Chenchus did NOT get this gene from the pontic steppe.

It seems to me that R1a has its origins in Asia/the Middle East and its descendant clades moved north to the pontic steppe.

The skin pigment of the R1a carriers in the pontic steppe shows this, since white skin evolved much later.

Megalophias
04-10-2015, 07:04 PM
What study was that?

Why can Chenchus not get R1a without turning white, but Icelanders and Han can have it without turning brown? A Y haplogroup can persist without much autosomal ancestry.

ThrashRaghead
04-10-2015, 07:14 PM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC379225/

"Haplogroup R1a, previously associated with the putative Indo-Aryan invasion, was found at its highest frequency in Punjab but also at a relatively high frequency (26%) in the Chenchu tribe. This finding, together with the higher R1a-associated short tandem repeat diversity in India and Iran compared with Europe and central Asia, suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup."

"Both Pakistanis and Iranians showed STR variances as high as those of Indians, when compared with the lower values in European and central Asian populations. Unexpectedly, both southern Indian tribal groups examined in this study carried M17. The presence of different STR haplotypes and the relatively high frequency of R1a in Dravidian-speaking Chenchus (26%) make M17 less likely to be the marker associated with male “Indo-Aryan” intruders in the area. Moreover, in two previous studies involving southern Indian tribal groups such as the Valmiki from Andhra Pradesh (Ramana et al. 2001) and the Kallar from Tamil and Nadu (Wells et al. 2001), the presence of M17 was also observed, suggesting that M17 is widespread in tribal southern Indians. Given the geographic spread and STR diversities of sister clades R1 and R2, the latter of which is restricted to India, Pakistan, Iran, and southern central Asia, it is possible that southern and western Asia were the source for R1 and R1a differentiation."


Yeah but we are talking origin.

If R1a1a really was brought from pontic steppe white people then how did it end up in completely non white Dravidians?

The bottom line is that it is more likely that R1a originated in dark people and the skin pigment lightened over time, and they moved into the region of the pontic steppe.

The reason why icelanders are not Brown is because they are the descendants of whites, not Browns.

And it is a fact that whites are the descendants of Brown people originating in the Iranian Plateau in the Middle East.

These Brown people had R1a and its descendant clades as their DNA.

R.Rocca
04-10-2015, 07:25 PM
Moderators. please move this to the R1a section.

Megalophias
04-11-2015, 12:27 AM
OK never mind, not going to feed the troll.

Roserover
04-11-2015, 11:10 AM
If Dravidian is the cource of R1a, why the ratio is lower than the other group. Xiaohoe has the Z93- and its very
old, and somebody said its likeness with Dravidian. The only explaination is that in 3000-4000 years ago, the centre
asia has brown skin, In chinese old book (1000-2000bc) a nation "Kunlun slave" (is said being R2) is said lived in centre asia, with black
skin and low body hight. of course you several indeed dont care how this all would.

Roserover
04-11-2015, 11:48 AM
in 3000-5000 bp eastern asian was brown skined, not only for centre asia.

ThrashRaghead
04-11-2015, 04:05 PM
but the pontic steppe people were at least partially white.

the white skin pigment mutation formed in the Iranian Plateau, SLC24A5.

the pontic steppe are descendants of these Brown Iranians.

Roserover
04-11-2015, 09:18 PM
The central asia is thought with mixed nations white and brown.

parasar
04-20-2015, 07:58 PM
If Dravidian is the cource of R1a, why the ratio is lower than the other group. Xiaohoe has the Z93- and its very
old, and somebody said its likeness with Dravidian. The only explaination is that in 3000-4000 years ago, the centre
asia has brown skin, In chinese old book (1000-2000bc) a nation "Kunlun slave" (is said being R2) is said lived in centre asia, with black
skin and low body hight. of course you several indeed dont care how this all would.

Could you perhaps shed more light on this Kunlun slave and R2 connection?
Thanks.


Re: That Xiaohe Z93- being potentially of Dravidian origin. It is utter nonsense (as it was based on a wrong premise), and was brought up as an issue by a questioner in the comments section of the paper. The questioner, who has published a number of papers (I hope not peer-reviewed!), often has no idea what he is talking about, and his query was responded to properly by the Xiaohe paper's author.

newtoboard
04-21-2015, 12:21 AM
Could you perhaps shed more light on this Kunlun slave and R2 connection?
Thanks.


Re: That Xiaohe Z93- being potentially of Dravidian origin. It is utter nonsense (as it was based on a wrong premise), and was brought up as an issue by a questioner in the comments section of the paper. The questioner, who has published a number of papers (I hope not peer-reviewed!), often has no idea what he is talking about, and his query was responded to properly by the Xiaohe paper's author.

Here is where I see things as they stand on Afanasievo, the Tarim Mummies, Tocharians and R1a/R1b.

People have pointed out there is some issue in associating the Tarim mummies with Tocharians and rightfully so. But as Mallory has said there are also some problems in associating Afanasievo with Tocharians (on the basis of the way things look based on cereal agriculture). And then correct me if I am wrong the Xiahoe cemetery is one of the oldest if not the oldest archeological site in NW China that human remains have been found in. It is dated to 2000 BC. And the R1a at Xiahhoe was from the oldest layer there. The second oldest cemetary is the Hami cemetary, which is a bit north, has been dated to about 2800-3000 BC. And I believe the Y-DNA there yielded Q (related to the Q found in Bronze Age Monoglia alongside R1a-Z93+?)

So taking the R1a-Z93- at Xiahoe and R1b-M269 at Afanasievo (and P25 at Okunevo- although this adds to the confusion as Okunevo was supposed to have been formed by the movement of forest zone dwellers southwards and has been associated with East Eurasians in the past) as true statements (and assuming no other lineages will be found with more testing- a big assumption) this would suggest

1. Tocharians were an R1b dominated population who only moved to the Tarim Basin during Silk Road times when they are first attested.

This would suggest a third branch of IE made it to the Asia and was found at the Tarim. Even before the Z93- result I had already disqualified the Tarim R1a as being Indo-Iranian. Andronovo is only dated to about 1800 BC and only 1700-1500 BC in the Minusinsk Basin so it is off by at least 300-500 years (plus the additional time it would take to travel to the Tarim). Plus Andronovo related artifacts have only been discovered at the edge of the Tarim which is consistent with the later distribution of Iranian speakers in the Tarim.

2. Tocharians made it to the Tarim by 2000 BC and the R1b at Afansievo was either local to the area or associated with the third branch of Asian IE.

Either way it looks like a third branch of IE was spoken in Asia unless R1a shows up in Afansievo AND R1b shows up in the oldest layer at Xiahoe. Both seem unlikely but then again so did the original findings.

Roserover
04-21-2015, 08:25 AM
Could you perhaps shed more light on this Kunlun slave and R2 connection?
Thanks.


Re: That Xiaohe Z93- being potentially of Dravidian origin. It is utter nonsense (as it was based on a wrong premise), and was brought up as an issue by a questioner in the comments section of the paper. The questioner, who has published a number of papers (I hope not peer-reviewed!), often has no idea what he is talking about, and his query was responded to properly by the Xiaohe paper's author.

Kunlun slave appeared in ancient Chinese book "Shanhai jing" (山海经) and was proven by later travlers in Han dynasty and later. and the R2 testing is heard by me from some Chinese experts.

tamilgangster
04-21-2015, 09:41 AM
If Dravidian is the cource of R1a, why the ratio is lower than the other group. Xiaohoe has the Z93- and its very
old, and somebody said its likeness with Dravidian. The only explaination is that in 3000-4000 years ago, the centre
asia has brown skin, In chinese old book (1000-2000bc) a nation "Kunlun slave" (is said being R2) is said lived in centre asia, with black
skin and low body hight. of course you several indeed dont care how this all would.

The R1a1 found in chenchu is most likely the result of an archaic ANE rich strain, which is different from the Yamnya type ANE. This ANE strain entered south asia before the light skin mutation occured. Haplogroup L-M20 is the most likely the haplogroup found in original dravidians.

Coldmountains
08-21-2015, 07:59 AM
The R1a1 found in chenchu is most likely the result of an archaic ANE rich strain, which is different from the Yamnya type ANE. This ANE strain entered south asia before the light skin mutation occured. Haplogroup L-M20 is the most likely the haplogroup found in original dravidians.

If I am honest I don't get what is so confusing about Chenchus having some R1a. 26% is not even that much compared to other South Asians and you just need some few Indo-Aryan folks being assimilated by them or getting children with Chenchu women to make after some generations with the help of bottle necks and founder effects a large number of Chenchu R1a carriers. We need ancient DNA from South Asia but it is certain that 90%+ of modern R1a in South Asia is from the Bronze Age steppe.