PDA

View Full Version : R1 Native American dispersion hypothesis into Western Europe



Pages : [1] 2

McCown
05-23-2016, 12:47 PM
R1 dispersion has been a bit of an enigma, however all of the pieces start to fall into place with my hypothesis that R1 entered Western Europe from the Americas. Everyone has been ignoring the the obvious dispersion of R1 branching. From strictly a population dispersion point of view, you can see the obvious. Anyone looking at this map without preconceived notions can see that R1 split into R1a and R1b along the Rhine or in Denmark.

9445

Anybody looking at the Global dispersion of R1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1#Americas) and mt-haplogroup X (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_X_(mtDNA)) can see how they may have come from the Americas and pushed East.

9446

Despite what seems obvious and it's brother, haplogroup Q's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242), migration into the Americas, it was always argued that there has been no ancient YDNA for R1 found in Western Europe that would match an Ice Age migration from the Americas. Now there is! In a study published in nature, there was 14,000 YBP YDNA for R1b1( L278 ) found in Northern Italy. This is well into the Ice Age. Prior to this, the oldest R1* was found in Mal’ta Siberia and dated as 24,000 years ago. For years, people have tried to figure out how did R1b get dispersed West of R1a. It’s seems everyone has been scratching their brain on the bizarre dispersement of R1. You’ll find that everything falls into place if you conclude that R1 migrated into the Americas and then into Western Europe. This even explains the 40 SNP equivalents bottleneck. Here I’ve labeled the arrival into Europe as 21,000 YBP, however it could be closer to 14,000 YBP. I chose 21,000 YPB to line it up with Solutrean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean) culture which used arrow head technology similar to American Clovis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_culture). So far there haven’t been any pre-clovis sites with this technology found. But just like with R1b1 ancient YDNA in Europe, I say keep looking. Another interesting fact is that both peoples became mound builders, however I’m not sure the dates line up for burial mounds that old. However drastic landscapes changes occur over 14,000 years.

This hypothesis can easily be proven out by NGS testing R1* Native Americans. If they break up the 40 R1* equivalents then the evidence is irrefutable.

9447

One of the major arguments in opposition is that R1 people are related to Yamnaya (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamna_culture) people so they must have come from the East. I counter argue, that Yamnaya people descend from Western Europeans, not the other way around. Let’s take the bellow tree which helps illustrate a possible stemming out of Europe. The Yamnaya people appear to have migrated from Europe to the Steppes in the bronze age.

9448

This may be circumstantial evidence, but it’s worth noting that Algonquin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algonquian_peoples) and Gaelic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goidelic_languages) have some similarities.

9449

Other useful links connecting North American DNA to European DNA:

http://sciencenordic.com/dna-links-native-americans-europeans

http://www.nature.com/news/americas-natives-have-european-roots-1.14213

https://www.academia.edu/9494507/Anomalous_Mitochondrial_DNA_Lineages_in_the_Cherok ee

http://www.spiegel.de/international/dna-analysis-shows-native-americans-had-european-roots-a-954675.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Ameri cas#Haplogroup_R1

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nature17993-s1.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4105016/

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v505/n7481/full/nature12736.html

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v505/n7481/extref/nature12736-s1.pdf

TigerMW
05-23-2016, 09:23 PM
R1 dispersion has been a bit of an enigma, however all of the pieces start to fall into place with my hypothesis that R1 entered Western Europe from the Americas. ....

.... You’ll find that everything falls into place if you conclude that R1 migrated into the Americas and then into Western Europe. This even explains the 40 SNP equivalents bottleneck. Here I’ve labeled the arrival into Europe as 21,000 YBP, however it could be closer to 14,000 YBP. I chose 21,000 YPB to line it up with Solutrean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean) culture which used arrow head technology similar to American Clovis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_culture). So far there haven’t been any pre-clovis sites with this technology found. But just like with R1b1 ancient YDNA in Europe, I say keep looking. Another interesting fact is that both peoples became mound builders, however I’m not sure the dates line up for burial mounds that old. However drastic landscapes changes occur over 14,000 years.

This hypothesis can easily be proven out by NGS testing R1* Native Americans. If they break up the 40 R1* equivalents then the evidence is irrefutable.

9447

One of the major arguments in opposition is that R1 people are related to Yamnaya (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamna_culture) people so they must have come from the East. I counter argue, that Yamnaya people descend from Western Europeans, not the other way around. Let’s take the bellow tree which helps illustrate a possible stemming out of Europe. The Yamnaya people appear to have migrated from Europe to the Steppes in the bronze age.

9448
...
Thank you for posting your hypothesis. It is something think about it.

Do we have R1* found in Native American tribes? or in the far northeast of Asia?

McCown
05-23-2016, 10:20 PM
Thank you for posting your hypothesis. It is something think about it.

Do we have R1* found in Native American tribes? or in the far northeast of Asia?

According to Wikipedia, yes. But I don't have access to any of the data that is quoted here:

R1 (M137) is found predominantly in North American Algonquian groups like the Ojibwe (79%), Chipewyan (62%), Seminole (50%), Cherokee (47%), Dogrib (40%) and Papago (38%). The principal-component analysis suggests a close genetic relatedness between some North American Amerindians (the Chipewyan and the Cheyenne) and certain populations of central/southern Siberia (particularly the Kets, Yakut, Selkup, and Altais), at the resolution of major Y-chromosome haplogroups. This pattern agrees with the distribution of mtDNA haplogroup X, which is found in North America, is absent from eastern Siberia, but is present in the Altais of southern central Siberia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_X_(mtDNA)#North_America

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Ameri cas

I think X is also found in the Gobi Desert.

rms2
05-23-2016, 10:42 PM
While I don't agree that R1 came from North America, the hypothesis is intriguing and certainly worthy of respect and consideration. I was not aware of the frequency of R1-M173* among Algonquian Amerindians. Now that is fascinating and may be indicative of the presence in Siberia of R1 when the Beringian bridge was still intact. I tend to think it rather supports Davidski's notion that eastern Europe was the R1 bifurcation zone.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-23-2016, 10:54 PM
Ah yes, a reverse Solutrean hypothesis, which itself has mostly been relegated as a kind of pseudo-science with no factual basis
And 14, 000 YBP isn't "well into the ice age". It's 6, 000 years after the peak LGM

Megalophias
05-23-2016, 11:03 PM
It's not R1*, it's just R1 not tested for downstream markers, and no mystery where it comes from. Albeit there is the very occasional R1* which may be V88 or what have you. While it is possible some native R1 clade exists, it has yet to be identified.

rms2
05-23-2016, 11:07 PM
It's not R1*, it's just R1 not tested for downstream markers, and no mystery where it comes from. While it is possible some native R1 clade exists, it has yet to be found.

Speaking specifically of those Algonquian R1's, are you saying none of them was tested for any downstream markers, including the most basic ones?

lgmayka
05-23-2016, 11:25 PM
It's not R1*, it's just R1 not tested for downstream markers, and no mystery where it comes from. While it is possible some native R1 clade exists, it has yet to be found.
A Puerto Rican research sample has been classified as R1b-L389* by YFull (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389/). His patrilineage diverged from R1b-P297 about 17,000 years ago. Is his patrilineage Native American or Spanish (or something else)?

I must point out the disturbing tendency in academic publications to discard all Native American R1b, a priori, as European admixture.

lgmayka
05-23-2016, 11:31 PM
I myself have considered an America-to-Europe hypothesis to explain how:
- Q-M3 is almost entirely Native American
- Its direct brother Q-L804 is entirely Northwest European
Yet they diverged 15,000 years ago (https://yfull.com/tree/Q-M930/).

MitchellSince1893
05-24-2016, 12:07 AM
http://www.academia.edu/9562579/Solu...th_in_the_room

“In geographic plots, R1 frequencies in native populations, of the Great Lakes/ Algonquian-speakers stand out as the great majority, having among the highest worldwide R1 rates (e.g., Malhi et al. 2008; and World frequency map as of 1 June 2014), even higher than non-western Europe and far higher than other Native Americans (c. 0 – 10 per cent). When further characterized in the USA (Hammer et al. 2005), 97 per cent of R1 had the M269 SNP (unambiguous Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), which defines R1b1b, the main West European Y-haplogroup, which possibly originated there before the LGM (Morelli et al. 2010). The less-reliable P25 was used in an earlier US study (Zegura et al. 2004).

rms2
05-24-2016, 12:16 AM
http://www.academia.edu/9562579/Solu...th_in_the_room

“In geographic plots, R1 frequencies in native populations, of the Great Lakes/ Algonquian-speakers stand out as the great majority, having among the highest worldwide R1 rates (e.g., Malhi et al. 2008; and World frequency map as of 1 June 2014), even higher than non-western Europe and far higher than other Native Americans (c. 0 – 10 per cent). When further characterized in the USA (Hammer et al. 2005), 97 per cent of R1 had the M269 SNP (unambiguous Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), which defines R1b1b, the main West European Y-haplogroup, which possibly originated there before the LGM (Morelli et al. 2010). The less-reliable P25 was used in an earlier US study (Zegura et al. 2004).

Voyageurs?

MitchellSince1893
05-24-2016, 01:13 AM
Voyageurs?

French Canadians crossed my mind too. I used to live in Canada and Metis tribe is a good example of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9tis_people_(Canada)

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 01:18 AM
Speaking specifically of those Algonquian R1's, are you saying none of them was tested for any downstream markers, including the most basic ones?
The only Algonquian group mentioned by McCown was Objibwe, the others being Athapasakan, Muskogean, Iroquoian, and Uto-Aztecan. The Wikipedia table he cites is a compilation of a number of studies, some with more resolution and others with less. Most of the samples McCown cited are from Malhi et al (2008), who tested only Q-M242, Q-M3, R1-M173, and C-RPS4Y; the purpose of the study was a comparison of Q and C haplotypes among different Athapaskan-speaking groups and their neighbours. There are Objibwe (Chippewa) with high frequency reported by Bolnick et al (2006) as well, but that only goes down to M173.

The Chipewyan sample is from Bortolini et al (2003) and is actually just P*(xQ). There are 6 STR haplotypes though; modal is 14-12-24-11-13-13, AKA the Atlantic modal haplotype, typical of Western European R1b.

Zegura et al (2004), “High-resolution SNPs and microsatellite haplotypes point to a single, recent entry of Native American Y chromosomes into the Americas”, tested as far down as R1b-P25 and conclude "on the basis of our new data and analyses, 76 of 79 Native American R lineage chromosomes belong to haplogroup R-P25. The median-joining network for R-P25 (fig. 5) exhibits extensive sharing of microsatellite haplotypes between Europeans and Native Americans, unlike the case for Asians. Also, the European and Native American modal haplotypes are identical for haplogroup R-P25, whereas the Asian modal haplotype differs at two positions.... In sum, our evidence supports the admixture hypothesis for the presence of R-P25 individuals in Native American populations and concurs with the recent findings of Bosch et al. (2003), who concluded that all 18 of their haplogroup R Greenlandic Inuit (n=69) are the result of European admixture."

There are a number of other studies which have tested down to M269. Karmin et al even has full sequences of a couple of native Andean R1bs, which are (unsurprisingly) DF27. Hammer et al (2005), "Population structure of Y chromosome SNP haplogroups in the United States", sampled a pool of 398 Navajo, Apache, Cheyenne, Sioux, Pima, and unidentifed Native Americans from South Dakota and Vermont. Two-thirds had Native haplogroups (Q and C), the remainder being a diverse mixture dominated by R1b-M269 (22%), accompanied by I, E, R1a, J, G2a, N1c1. There was a single R1b*-P25.

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 01:29 AM
A Puerto Rican research sample has been classified as R1b-L389* by YFull (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389/). His patrilineage diverged from R1b-P297 about 17,000 years ago. Is his patrilineage Native American or Spanish (or something else)?

I must point out the disturbing tendency in academic publications to discard all Native American R1b, a priori, as European admixture.
Back in the early 2000s the hypothesis that the R1 was a native haplogroup was taken quite seriously; but it turned out to have European STR haplotypes, so that was dropped. But yes, interesting things could easily be thrown out. L389* however is also found in Italians, and in the R1b* project haplotype clusters include Armenians and European Jews, while Puerto Ricans have primarily South European paternal ancestry, so that is probably not a good candidate.

L804 being a sister to M3, with Z780 branching above, is totally phylogenetically Amerindian. :biggrin1: On the other hand L330, typical of Kets and South Siberians, is only one level up, with a TMRCA of 16200 years. L53* has also been reported from the New World, so potentially L330 would be nested in there too. My guess is back-migration from Beringia across North Eurasia, but a crossing from the New World is certainly not impossible.

McCown
05-24-2016, 03:54 AM
French Canadians crossed my mind too. I used to live in Canada and Metis tribe is a good example of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9tis_people_(Canada)

Do you think that 79% of Objibwe male lineages were replaced by French Canadians?

AJL
05-24-2016, 04:09 AM
Do you think that 79% of Objibwe male lineages were replaced by French Canadians?

Quite possible, when you consider that diseases like smallpox likely wiped out 80% or more of the Amerindian population.

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 07:25 AM
Do you think that 79% of Objibwe male lineages were replaced by French Canadians?

Most of the studies cited in Wikipedia are available open access, and it is a good idea to read them. Two Chippewa samples are listed on that table: one from Bolnick 2006, and one from Malhi 2008. However, whoever added them failed to notice that the data in Malhi is not original but a subset of the samples from Bolnick, and has added up the numbers to produce the spurious figure you quote. Now fixed.

There are three Chippewa samples from Bolnick 2006:
- Turtle Mountain Chippewa (n=51): 55% R1, 6% Q-M3, no C, 39% other. The Turtle Mountain Reservation is mostly in North Dakota, and the Turtle Mountain Band is mixed Chippewa and Metis (and some Cree), with an extensive history of intermarriage. Their ancestors arrived in the region in the early 19th century, together with Metis (who outnumbered them), European fur traders, some Cree, etc, largely in search of furs.
- Wisconsin Chippewa (n=37): 54% R1, 8% Q-M3, 13% Q*, no C, 24% other. I don't know which band this is, but they too were deeply involved in the fur trade for centuries.
- Minnesota Chippewa (n=9): 11% R1, 22% Q-M3, 22% Q*, 44% C. I don't know which band this is either, but they appear to be mostly full-blooded.

These are the only Ojibwe samples I know of. And yes, I guess the R1, and probably the "other" too, is all colonial. Centuries of intermarriage will do that.

McCown
05-24-2016, 12:57 PM
These are the only Ojibwe samples I know of. And yes, I guess the R1, and probably the "other" too, is all colonial. Centuries of intermarriage will do that.

French traders likely would not have carried only R1 YDNA. Why would only R1 be successful with intermarriage? Why didn't the other French haplogroups I,E,G,J, etc propagate as well?

razyn
05-24-2016, 01:36 PM
Why didn't the other French haplogroups I,E,G,J, etc propagate as well?
They would be included in the "other," who had to be something (if the samples are all male).

McCown
05-24-2016, 02:16 PM
These are the only Ojibwe samples I know of. And yes, I guess the R1, and probably the "other" too, is all colonial. Centuries of intermarriage will do that.

Let's say you're correct and that R1 among the Natives is a result of European fur traders. That doesn't explain mt-haplogroup X since fur traders were mostly men mating with native women.


I myself have considered an America-to-Europe hypothesis to explain how:
- Q-M3 is almost entirely Native American
- Its direct brother Q-L804 is entirely Northwest European
Yet they diverged 15,000 years ago (https://yfull.com/tree/Q-M930/).

In addition, assuming the above is accurate and that Q entered into the Americas over 16,000 years ago, how would it end up in Europe with a 15,000 year old split unless it went through the Americas?

AJL
05-24-2016, 03:03 PM
Let's say you're correct and that R1 among the Natives is a result of European fur traders. That doesn't explain mt-haplogroup X since fur traders were mostly men mating with native women.

The R situation is more ambiguous, but nobody with any sense thinks that mtDNA X was brought by Europeans. X is the most broadly dispersed mtDNA haplogroup, occurring from the European Atlantic coast clear across Eurasia with a fair presence in northeast Asia, and with the notable spike in Algonquian speakers. It seems to have fair concentration and variety around West Asia/the Near East which might be more or less where it arose. So X is an mtDNA haplogroup that seems to tie together Out of Africa populations on both sides of the Bering Strait.

McCown
05-24-2016, 03:13 PM
...nobody with any sense thinks that mtDNA X was brought by Europeans.

I'm suggesting that X went from NE America into NW Europe, not that X originated in Europe. X and R1 have a similar distribution. If X may have crossed from America to Europe, then which male lineage escorted them. Apparently Q-L804 is in contention, but I still suspect, so is R1.

ADW_1981
05-24-2016, 03:23 PM
If Native Americans suddenly start turning up R1 (xM343), the most logical scenario is that these are dead branches who crossed the Bering strait with Q-L53. It's one of the biggest stretches I have seen to suggest R1b could have hopped the Atlantic to Europe via North America. I haven't had much interest in it, but at least one ancient genome has been sequence from North America has it not? The autosomal mix is similar to modern Natives from the same region, and nothing remotely close to a NW European.

I have in-laws who settled in NW Ontario with the early British pioneers, and many of the settlers there "mixed" with Native tribes like Ojibwe. It shouldn't be any surprise that many Native men are actually R1b(M269).

C J Wyatt III
05-24-2016, 03:30 PM
I have in-laws who settled in NW Ontario with the early British pioneers, and many of the settlers there "mixed" with Native tribes like Ojibwe. It shouldn't be any surprise that many Native men are actually R1b(M269).

In the Southeast a lot of Scottish males married Cherokee women. Occasionally you will see a red-headed (part) Native American.

Jack

ADW_1981
05-24-2016, 03:37 PM
In the Southeast a lot of Scottish males married Cherokee women. Occasionally you will see a red-headed (part) Native American.

Jack

Ironically, my brother in-law is Canadian of Scottish descent and has distant Ojibwe ancestry through his mother. In the grand scheme of things, Scottish have made fantastic contributions to both US and Canada, but have also made significant scientific contributions as well. (I digress)

McCown
05-24-2016, 03:40 PM
If Native Americans suddenly start turning up R1 (xM343), the most logical scenario is that these are dead branches who crossed the Bering strait with Q-L53. It's one of the biggest stretches I have seen to suggest R1b could have hopped the Atlantic to Europe via North America. I haven't had much interest in it, but at least one ancient genome has been sequence from North America has it not? The autosomal mix is similar to modern Natives from the same region, and nothing remotely close to a NW European.

I have in-laws who settled in NW Ontario with the early British pioneers, and many of the settlers there "mixed" with Native tribes like Ojibwe. It shouldn't be any surprise that many Native men are actually R1b(M269).

There are 40 R1(M173) equivalents. If any of those 40 are broken up by Native American YDNA, then it's clear they branched off in America before continuing to Europe. To me, anything that breaks up those SNPs is a critical key for proving a migration hypothesis for R1 dispersion into R1a and R1b. It's a weird thing to have that such a long stretch of equivalents. Either only the patriarchal Chieftain was able to breed with the women for thousands of years or there is missing data. Perhaps, not much of Asia has tested their DNA, but Native Americans typically have an aversion to DNA testing so the data seems sparse and contains the potential for many discoveries.

If you read through those links at the bottom of the first post in this thread, you'll see that Native Americans and Europeans share common autosomal DNA. Read the link about Montana boy's DNA.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/dna-analysis-shows-native-americans-had-european-roots-a-954675.html
(http://www.spiegel.de/international/dna-analysis-shows-native-americans-had-european-roots-a-954675.html)
http://sciencenordic.com/dna-links-native-americans-europeans

AJL
05-24-2016, 03:45 PM
I have in-laws who settled in NW Ontario with the early British pioneers, and many of the settlers there "mixed" with Native tribes like Ojibwe. It shouldn't be any surprise that many Native men are actually R1b(M269).

You only have to look at how prolific some of the early Europeans in these areas were to see how rates could get this high, e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Fidler_%28explorer%29

Pragmatically, European males would have different HLA factors to Amerindian men, making them potentially more attractive to Amerindian females (http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/content/14/5/668.full). Second, they enjoyed significant technological advantages, making them better prospective providers.

Additionally, many Amerindian groups had the custom to replace lost family members with others -- sometimes Europeans -- captured in war, or kidnapped. That means there are a number of "status-Indian" (in official Canadian parlance) male lines that are very likely to be R1b-M269 of some kind because they descend from Europeans integrated into Indigenous families.

ADW_1981
05-24-2016, 03:48 PM
There are 40 R1(M173) equivalents. If any of those 40 are broken up by Native American YDNA, then it's clear they branched off in America before continuing to Europe. To me, anything that breaks up those SNPs is a critical key for proving a migration hypothesis for R1 dispersion into R1a and R1b. It's a weird thing to have that such a long stretch of equivalents. Either only the patriarchal Chieftain was able to breed with the women for thousands of years or there is missing data. Perhaps, not much of Asia has tested their DNA, but Native Americans typically have an aversion to DNA testing so the data seems sparse and contains the potential for many discoveries.

If you read through those links at the bottom of the first post in this thread, you'll see that Native Americans and Europeans share common autosomal DNA. Read the link about Montana boy's DNA.

http://sciencenordic.com/dna-links-native-americans-europeans

Very distant/weak connection when used with Lake Baikal 24,000 sample of an R* male. Not all that relevant with respect to R1b. If we look at a 14,000 R1b-P25 male in NE Italy, you will find a much stronger similarity to contemporary Europeans, and who has no similarity to Native Americans of the same period (the Q-L53 sample).

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 03:50 PM
Let's say you're correct and that R1 among the Natives is a result of European fur traders. That doesn't explain mt-haplogroup X since fur traders were mostly men mating with native women.
American X is X2a (and a singleton X2g). It was established long ago that is deeply separate from all Eurasian X, and found in pre-Columbian remains. Most recently it was found in Kennewick Man, who is around 9000 years old.

There are diverse clades of X in Western Eurasia, of which X2 is only one branch. European X is not related to X2a, and there is no reason whatsoever to think it comes from America. At present it is only known since the Neolithic in Europe, though there are not enough Palaeolithic and Mesolithic samples to rule out is presence earlier.

Of course it is also the case with R1 that diverse and ancient clades of R are found in the Old World, with Western Europe being quite undiverse in this respect, so there is no reason to look across the Atlantic in the first place.


In addition, assuming the above is accurate and that Q entered into the Americas over 16,000 years ago, how would it end up in Europe with a 15,000 year old split unless it went through the Americas?
If Q-M930 did form in the New World, then it must have back-migrated from the Americas either west through Beringia or east across the Atlantic. However, you are ignoring the confidence intervals on TMRCAs. Y-Full puts M930 at 13 400 to 16 600 years old, and that is an underestimate of the real uncertainty in the date range. Q-L54 could have formed in eastern Siberia or Beringia prior to the entry to the Americas south of the ice, with Q-Z780 and Q-M3 migrating east while Q-L330 and Q-L804 went west after the LGM.

With further study of Amerindian Y DNA we should be able to find if Q-L804 or pre-L804 is present in the New World. So far it has not been found, but most studies do not have the resolution to distinguish it. Likewise with more study of North Asians and aDNA from the region we may find relatives of L804 further to the east (keep in mind that Europe is far better studied than anywhere else).


It's a weird thing to have that such a long stretch of equivalents. Either only the patriarchal Chieftain was able to breed with the women for thousands of years or there is missing data.
No, populations were not growing quickly in the Palaeolithic, so drift removes most of the branches. This is a very basic concept which you should understand before attempting to theorize.


If you read through those links at the bottom of the first post in this thread, you'll see that Native Americans and Europeans share common autosomal DNA.
You are trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs. We have discussed this in great detail ever since it came out years ago. Ancient DNA shows that the Amerindian-like component came to Western Europe from the east, not the west, and did so quite recently.

McCown
05-24-2016, 03:51 PM
You only have to look at how prolific some of the early Europeans in these areas were to see how rates could get this high, e.g.

I get that R1 is potentially explained away by colonization and interbreeding. However, it doesn't explain mt-haplogroup X or YDNA Q-L804.

ADW_1981
05-24-2016, 03:55 PM
However, there is something parallel to this discussion that should be noted. A European branch of Q that appears embedded within the typical Native American cluster that requires more research. Did it enter Europe through Nordic contact within the last 1000 years or so? Look at the non-M3 branches.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M930/

McCown
05-24-2016, 04:10 PM
If Q-M930 did form in the New World, then it must have back-migrated from the Americas either west through Beringia or east across the Atlantic. However, you are ignoring the confidence intervals on TMRCAs. Y-Full puts M930 at 13 400 to 16 600 years old, and that is an underestimate of the real uncertainty in the date range. Q-L54 could have formed in eastern Siberia or Beringia prior to the entry to the Americas, with Q-Z780 and Q-M3 migrating east while Q-L330 and Q-L804 went west after the LGM.

With further study of Amerindian Y DNA we should be able to find if Q-L804 or pre-L804 is present in the New World. So far it has not been found, but most studies do not have the resolution to distinguish it. Likewise with more study of North Asians and aDNA from the region we may find relatives of L804 further to the east (keep in mind that Europe is far better studied than anywhere else).



Native Americans may have crossed over the Bering Strait much sooner than I've mentioned: http://time.com/3964634/native-american-origin-theory/



No, populations were not growing quickly in the Palaeolithic, so drift removes most of the branches. This is a very basic concept which you should understand before attempting to theorize.

You are trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs. We have discussed this in great detail ever since it came out years ago. Ancient DNA shows that the Amerindian-like component came from the east, not the west.

As far as my theorizing rights. You don't get to dictate who get's to hypothesize. Grandmother's aside, you can go suck an egg.

AJL
05-24-2016, 04:10 PM
This discussion has become unnecessarily personalized and the thread will be closed if personal attacks continue.

C J Wyatt III
05-24-2016, 04:19 PM
I get that R1 is potentially explained away by colonization and interbreeding. However, it doesn't explain mt-haplogroup X or YDNA Q-L804.

Rebecca Estes had this blog earlier in the year:

https://dna-explained.com/2016/01/28/native-american-haplogroup-x2a-solutrean-hebrew-or-beringian/

I think most of us would agree that some Native Americans in early Colonial Virginia and North Carolina were captured and enslaved. Some of the women likely were used for breeding. After Estes's blog, I found eight X2a's or subclades with GEDmatch kits. All eight of them had X-DNA matches which pointed to Mr. Green, the slave breeder, as a common ancestor. Undoubtedly a lot of the dispersal of X2a's has occurred in the last 300 years from situations such as this. The question still remains where Mr.Green's X2a slaves had their origins?

Jack

ArmandoR1b
05-24-2016, 04:20 PM
I get that R1 is potentially explained away by colonization and interbreeding. However, it doesn't explain mt-haplogroup X or YDNA Q-L804.
There are very simple explanations for those. Q-L804 descends from Q-L54 which is from Siberia. Some of the other descendants of Q-L54 went to Beringia and then the Americas. mtDNA X is from Eurasia. Only X2a went to Beringia and then the Americas.

ArmandoR1b
05-24-2016, 04:27 PM
However, there is something parallel to this discussion that should be noted. A European branch of Q that appears embedded within the typical Native American cluster that requires more research. Did it enter Europe through Nordic contact within the last 1000 years or so? Look at the non-M3 branches.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M930/

The following is the non-M3 branch. https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-L804/ That looks to me like a branch that stayed in Siberia. The bifurcation of it and Q-M3 is at least 15000 ybp and probably really more than 16,000 ybp. I think that maybe the TMRCA has you confused.

ArmandoR1b
05-24-2016, 04:29 PM
Native Americans may have crossed over the Bering Strait much sooner than I've mentioned: http://time.com/3964634/native-american-origin-theory/

Nice try. Now check out this new find -

Pre-Clovis occupation 14,550 years ago at the Page-Ladson site, Florida, and the peopling of the Americas (http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/5/e1600375)


Stone tools and mastodon bones occur in an undisturbed geological context at the Page-Ladson site, Florida. Seventy-one radiocarbon ages show that ~14,550 calendar years ago (cal yr B.P.), people butchered or scavenged a mastodon next to a pond in a bedrock sinkhole within the Aucilla River. This occupation surface was buried by ~4 m of sediment during the late Pleistocene marine transgression, which also left the site submerged. Sporormiella and other proxy evidence from the sediments indicate that hunter-gatherers along the Gulf Coastal Plain coexisted with and utilized megafauna for ~2000 years before these animals became extinct at ~12,600 cal yr B.P. Page-Ladson expands our understanding of the earliest colonizers of the Americas and human-megafauna interaction before extinction.

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 04:33 PM
Native Americans may have crossed over the Bering Strait much sooner than I've mentioned: http://time.com/3964634/native-american-origin-theory/
Indeed they may have, but the Q TMRCAs you are discussing reflect the colonization wave which carried Q-L54 across the New World. If the Americas were colonized earlier, then either the TMRCAs need to be adjusted upward, or the first inhabitants came from a different migration.


As far as my theorizing rights. You don't get to dictate who get's to hypothesize. Grandmother's aside, you can go suck an egg.
You have the right to theorize all you like. But if you don't understand what you're talking about, you'll come up with lousy theories.

McCown
05-24-2016, 05:02 PM
You have the right to theorize all you like. But if you don't understand what you're talking about, you'll come up with lousy theories.

First off, it's a hypothesis not theory. If you're going to quote scientific terms, perhaps you should understand them first. Second, your "concept" isn't the only possible explanation for bottlenecks.

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 05:12 PM
First off, it's a hypothesis not theory. If you're going to quote scientific terms, perhaps you should understand them first. Second, your "concept" isn't the only possible explanation for bottlenecks.
We are speaking colloquial here. Coalescence is not an explanation for bottlenecks.

McCown
05-24-2016, 05:25 PM
We are speaking colloquial here. Coalescence is not an explanation for bottlenecks.

I was referencing your prior statement on my rights to theorize.


No, populations were not growing quickly in the Palaeolithic, so drift removes most of the branches. This is a very basic concept which you should understand before attempting to theorize.[/URL]


Point being, I posted this hypothesis so that the anthropologists of the world could poke holes in it to see if it still holds water. I did not post it so that folks like yourself would discourage the sharing of information and ideas. The competition of ideas is the American way. If my idea turns out to be bunk and a better R1 model rears it's head, then great, I'm all ears. Lousy theories, I welcome!

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 05:41 PM
Point being, I posted this hypothesis so that the anthropologists of the world could poke holes in it to see if it still holds water. I did not post it so that folks like yourself would discourage the sharing of information and ideas. The competition of ideas is the American way. If my idea turns out to be bunk and a better R1 model rears it's head, then great, I'm all ears. Lousy theories, I welcome!

That's fine. We have poked holes. Now you know what you need to read up on so you can make better hypotheses, or improve on this one.

No one is discouraging the sharing of information and ideas. I have gone to some effort to share accurate information in this thread, actually, and we are quite seriously entertaining trans-Atlantic gene flow from the New World to Europe. Your hypothesis is almost certainly wrong. This should not surprise you; most hypotheses are, in the nature of things.

McCown
05-24-2016, 05:55 PM
That's fine. We have poked holes. Now you know what you need to read up on so you can make better hypotheses, or improve on this one.

No one is discouraging the sharing of information and ideas. I have gone to some effort to share accurate information in this thread, actually, and we are quite seriously entertaining trans-Atlantic gene flow from the New World to Europe. Your hypothesis is almost certainly wrong. This should not surprise you; most hypotheses are, in the nature of things.

We don't know that this hypothesis is wrong. You've shown that I might be wrong, but you have not demonstrated that I am wrong. You're basically saying that R1 can be explained by fur traders, that X2a is isolated to the Americas and that Q-L804 may have split before entering the Bering Strait. However, R1 may also have found it's way to America from the Bering, X2a's siblings are found in Europe/Eurasia so perhaps one of those paleolithic drifts you mentioned occurred while migrated across Ice sheets. Maybe Q-L804 also found it's way into America( where else does it show up )? These clades all had a bottleneck somewhere. My proposed bottleneck route is as good as your proposed bottleneck route.

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 06:12 PM
We don't know that this hypothesis is wrong. You've shown that I might be wrong, but you have not demonstrated that I am wrong. You're basically saying that R1 can be explained by fur traders, that X2a is isolated to the Americas and that Q-L804 may have split before entering the Bering Strait. However, R1 may also have found it's way to America from the Bering, X2a's siblings are found in Europe/Eurasia so perhaps one of those paleolithic drifts you mentioned occurred while migrated across Ice sheets. Maybe Q-L804 also found it's way into America( where else does it show up )? These clades all had a bottleneck somewhere. My proposed bottleneck route is as good as your proposed bottleneck route.

Why don't you give us a quick breakdown on when and where the different R1 subclades arrived via the migration from the New World and how their present distribution supports your view.

McCown
05-24-2016, 06:44 PM
Why don't you give us a quick breakdown on when and where the different R1 subclades arrived via the migration from the New World and how their present distribution supports your view.

I tried to convey that in my original post by showing where I think R1a and R1b split and how R1b appears to have it's oldest branches in Europe. If you go by the YFull age of R1a/R1b then it arrived 22,800 years ago. We have about 1200 years of missing migration information for R1 arriving between Siberia and Europe. If we conclude that R1b-M269 was born in America and migrated East to Europe, and R1a migrated West from Eurasia, and then collided along the Rhine, we can push back the American R1b migration into Europe to after 17,000 years ago.

AJL
05-24-2016, 06:50 PM
R1b appears to have it's oldest branches in Europe.

Diversity in basal subclades at the moment suggests somewhere nearer Anatolia, the northern Levant, the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea or the Iranian Plateau is more likely than Europe. Perhaps you mean "West Eurasia."

McCown
05-24-2016, 07:01 PM
Diversity in basal subclades at the moment suggests somewhere nearer Anatolia, the northern Levant, the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea or the Iranian Plateau is more likely than Europe. Perhaps you mean "West Eurasia."

Can you point to a data example? The SNP branching that I've seen seems to show major R1b branches with European representation. So unless all the branches migrated to Europe from somewhere else, I think Europe is the source.

9448

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 07:34 PM
Can you point to a data example? The SNP branching that I've seen seems to show major R1b branches with European representation. So unless all the branches migrated to Europe from somewhere else, I think Europe is the source.
The tree has only Europeans on it. You can find members of all those branches in the Middle East, too. Heck, you could find them all in China, with the exception of V88 - but then you can find PH1165 in China, and that branches off even earlier.

McCown
05-24-2016, 07:35 PM
I tried to convey that in my original post by showing where I think R1a and R1b split and how R1b appears to have it's oldest branches in Europe. If you go by the YFull age of R1a/R1b then it arrived 22,800 years ago. We have about 1200 years of missing migration information for R1 arriving between Siberia and Europe. If we conclude that R1b-M269 was born in America and migrated East to Europe, and R1a migrated West from Eurasia, and then collided along the Rhine, we can push back the American R1b migration into Europe to after 17,000 years ago.

I wanted to correct myself. According to YFull R1 was created about 28,200 years ago. We don't know if it's more likely that Mal'ta boy's descendants or his ancestors went to America. Somewhere between 28,200 YBP and 22,800 YBP, 40 SNP equivalents were born. So instead of needing to account for 1200 years, we need to account for 6,000 years of R1 migration. Mal'ta boy's descendants may not have gone on to other lands. Perhaps his ancestral cousins did.

AJL
05-24-2016, 07:36 PM
Can you point to a data example?

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-basal-subclades/about/results

McCown
05-24-2016, 07:42 PM
The tree has only Europeans on it. You can find members of all those branches in the Middle East, too. Heck, you could find them all in China, with the exception of V88 - but then you can find PH1165 in China, and that branches off even earlier.

That's true. Note that the China branch could also be Marco Polo's explorers. The China branch is off on it's own. Until China branches surround Europe branches or vice versa, it's hard to say who branched from who. But one thing I do know is that Europe has very old branching, not just a couple of testers in far off lands.

Same goes for Middle East representation. I can think of several out of Europe explorations to the Middle East. There is no consistency in the branching from either China or the Middle East.

Tomenable
05-24-2016, 08:00 PM
In the Southeast a lot of Scottish males married Cherokee women. Occasionally you will see a red-headed (part) Native American.

Jack

Well, Genetiker claims that there are also Pre-Columbian red-headed Native American mummies.

Tomenable
05-24-2016, 08:03 PM
It is also claimed, that Native Americans due to their genetics cannot grow beards.

However... :

Four ceramic vessels from the ancient Peruvian Moche culture (100 AD - 800 AD):

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MocheBeardedMen.jpg

https://genetiker.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/moche.jpg

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 08:05 PM
That's true. Note that the China branch could also be Marco Polo's explorers. The China branch is off on it's own. Until China branches surround Europe branches or vice versa, it's hard to say who branched from who. But one thing I do know is that Europe has very old branching, not just a couple of testers in far off lands.
Europe has enormous numbers of private testers, like everyone on your tree. Most other places do not. V88 is most common in Central Africa. Z2103 is most common in the Near East. M335 is, as far as can be judged, much more common in Turkey or Kashmir than in Europe. Where are those samples on your tree? How do you know how deep their branching is? Do you know what the R1b*(xM269, M73, V88) in Iran or Afghanistan or Tibet or Indonesia is? Europe is far better studied than anywhere else, and arguments from diversity based on European samples are very weak.

McCown
05-24-2016, 08:07 PM
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-basal-subclades/about/results

This tree differs a little bit from ISOGG's. They have placed PH155 in a different spot. I'm not sure which tree is correct. Setting aside the possibility of English colonization, It's hard to get a feel for the placement of the China/India branch relative to Europe without knowing which tree is correct.

AJL
05-24-2016, 08:14 PM
Note that the China branch could also be Marco Polo's explorers. The China branch is off on it's own. Until China branches surround Europe branches or vice versa, it's hard to say who branched from who. But one thing I do know is that Europe has very old branching, not just a couple of testers in far off lands.

Same goes for Middle East representation. I can think of several out of Europe explorations to the Middle East. There is no consistency in the branching from either China or the Middle East.

You are engaged in what is called special pleading (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/specplea.html).

Here are the facts:

(1) Early R1b branches are generally found at their highest concentrations between Bulgaria/Sardinia to the west and Uyghur country to the east, and not in either Western Europe nor the Americas.
(2) Any given example of early R1b outside here is rare and is therefore more likely to have resulted from proportionally higher testing of Western Europeans rather than origins there, since basal R1b forms an astonishingly low proportion of all haplogroups in Western Europe.


Here is your argument:

Any example of R1b in the area between Bulgaria and China is most likely to have come from outside this area.


Totally illogical.

Tomenable
05-24-2016, 08:15 PM
Here is what German blogger FrankN wrote in one of his comments on Eurogenes blog:


Re: Amerindian R1b

I am not aware of any recent studies on Amerindian R1b. However, in the following study of pacific NW Amerindians, two inland populations (Splatsin and Stswecem'c, both part of Salishan-speaking Shuswap people) cluster close to, or among Europeans. This is interpreted as reflecting recent admixture. However, ADMIXTURE runs place them in a separate, orange-coloured cluster at K=10, while in other Amerindian populations, including MXL, the European signals (light and full blue) are maintained and not replaced by that orange component (Fig. 8).
http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1004530#s5

Another recent study on the coastal Tsimshian finds no evidence of European admix in Tsimshian aDNA, but, however, an respective signal in Anzick-1 (Fig. 1a). Current European admix in Tsimshian is estimated at some 33%. "The best-fitting model suggests that a bottleneck occurred approximately 175 years BP (bootstrap 95% confidence interval: 125-225, Table 1) in the ancestors of the modern Tsimshian with an accompanying reduction in effective population size
of 57%. The timing of the bottleneck coincides with the documented smallpox epidemics of the 19th Century and historical reports of large scale population declines. A majority of the European admixture in the population likely occurred after the epidemics."
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/04/29/051078.full.pdf

This gives us some baseline on the European admix that may be expected in smaller, isolated communities with relatively late European contact. Another baseline, for a large population with early European contact, is provided by the Maya, with some 10% European admixture. In relation to both, R1(b) percentages above 50%, as reported for Chippewa (Ojibwe), Seminole, Sioux and Cherokee look extraordinarily high. Note here also that IIRC both the Raghavan and Skoglund/Reich 2015 papers on the Peopling of the Americas failed to identify Athabascans that weren't signficantly "European admixed".

There are two scenarios that might explain such high R1(b) scenarios from post-columbian contact:

1. Early admix (fur trade), with founder effects that were enhanced by better resistance to European diseases (smallpox etc.): This scenario has been refuted for the Tsimshian (see above). It also doesn't apply to the Ojibwe, where Bolnick e.a. failed to identify any star-like structure of R1(b) lineages, but instead more than 60 different R1 haplotypes among 80 R1 individuals:
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/11/2161.full.pdf

2. Late (19-20th century) admix from various sources: In that case we would expect:

(i) A distribution of "European" yDNA among Amerindians that more or less mirrors the genetic profile of European settlers, i.e. includes substantial I, R1a, etc. However, Hammer e.a. (Fig. 1) provide the following ratios for the USA (Native American share, European Ancestry share, quotient), which disprove that expectation (...)

(ii) Amerindian R1(b) haplotypes that are identical to European ones. However, Bolnick e.a. (Fig. 6, see above) reported 20 out of ~60 Amerindian haplotypes not shared with Europeans, five of which were 4-8 mustations removed from European ones. [Goiello: You said you checked Amerindian subclades some years ago - did that include the ones from Bolnick e.a.?]

In short: I have little doubt that a good part, maybe 2/3, of Amerindian R1b relates to recent European admixture. But there is quite some indication of an older admixture layer that appears to have received little attention in research so far.

(...)

Here is some background on Afontonova Gora, for anybody interested:

http://www.donsmaps.com/afontovagora.html

Riverside location (upper Yenisei). Spear straighteners made from deear antlers. Carefully rounded stones that may have served as bolas, or net sinkers.
Let me put it like this: I wouldn't focus too much on mammooths, the subsistence base appears to rather have been ungulates (deer) and fish. Rather than "the Steppe", watercourses seem to have been the main communication channels. Several other UP East European sites, e.g. Kostenki on the Don, have a similar location as AG, namely uphill overseeing a major river.

The Yenisei location is intriguing. The mammooth maps linked by epoch further above show evidence of pines on the lower Yenisei and along the Siberian Polar Sea coast 15-20 kya. The Polar Sea seems to have been relatively ice free during interstadials, and might have served as communication channel into Karelia, as well as North East America, where R1b(1) is the predominant Amerindian yDNA...

McCown
05-24-2016, 08:15 PM
Europe has enormous numbers of private testers, like everyone on your tree. Most other places do not. V88 is most common in Central Africa. Z2103 is most common in the Near East. M335 is, as far as can be judged, much more common in Turkey or Kashmir than in Europe. Where are those samples on your tree? How do you know how deep their branching is? Do you know what the R1b*(xM269, M73, V88) in Iran or Afghanistan or Tibet or Indonesia is? Europe is far better studied than anywhere else, and arguments from diversity based on European samples are very weak.

I tend to look at what's common where branches merge. So if a branch from Turkey merges into branches with testers further West, I conclude the Turkey branch migrated from the West. I look for where the lines converge. Yes there could be missing data, but so far, the major subclades of R1b seem to have old European splits( with the exception of the China/India branch ). With so few testers, it's hard to know what will become of this branch and if our R1b nomads kept moving East just like they went South to Africa.

AJL
05-24-2016, 08:17 PM
if a branch from Turkey merges into branches with testers further West, I conclude the Turkey branch migrated from the West.

This directionality runs against archeological and linguistic evidence.

AJL
05-24-2016, 08:20 PM
Here is what German blogger FrankN wrote in one of his comments on Eurogenes blog:

You cannot compare the Tsimshian and Algonquian peoples.

The Tsimshian lived in fixed settlements for centuries, and only had European contact very recently.

The Anishinaabe were migrant and so never had large and concentrated populations, and furthermore had European contact from the 17th century.

lgmayka
05-24-2016, 08:24 PM
The following is the non-M3 branch. https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-L804/ That looks to me like a branch that stayed in Siberia.
That is a definite possibility. But then why has it not yet been found in Asia, or even Eastern Europe, but only Northwestern Europe?

Tomenable
05-24-2016, 08:25 PM
BTW - if I'm not mistaken, these Native American and Métis tribes with high percentages of R1b haplogroup have spoken Native American languages as their mother tongues, rather than Indo-European languages? This would indicate that R1b men learned to speak languages of their Amerindian women. Wikipedia says that Métis tribes of Canada speak both Native American languages, "Métis French", and various creole dialects. If languages are being spread by men (e.g. our idea about PIE), why many examples show the opposite? Also in Paraguay children of Spanish men and Guarani women in the 1500s spoke Guarani, rather than Spanish.

In Polish we say "język ojczysty" ("father's tongue"), hinting that fathers teach children the language. But Germans have "Muttersprache", English have "mother tongue", reflecting the role of women.

lgmayka
05-24-2016, 08:34 PM
(2) Any given example of early R1b outside here is rare and is therefore more likely to have resulted from proportionally higher testing of Western Europeans rather than origins there, since basal R1b forms an astonishingly low proportion of all haplogroups in Western Europe.
That is exactly why the discovery of R-L389* in a Puerto Rican sample from the 1000 Genomes project (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389*/) is so intriguing. Several years ago, Dienekes wrote about this surprising find (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/07/on-age-of-y-chromosome-haplogroup-r1b.html). He was amazed that such a small sample would include a lineage allegedly European, yet vanishingly rare in Europe itself.

McCown
05-24-2016, 08:45 PM
That is exactly why the discovery of R-L389* in a Puerto Rican sample from the 1000 Genomes project (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389*/) is so intriguing. Several years ago, Dienekes wrote about this surprising find (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/07/on-age-of-y-chromosome-haplogroup-r1b.html). He was amazed that such a small sample would include a lineage allegedly European, yet vanishingly rare in Europe itself.

This is a really interesting find, but even I have to admit, it could mean that Spain simply has 17,000 YBP R1b. We already know that 14K YBP R1b1 was in Northern Italy.

This discovery could also mean that R1b was born in America. In which case I need to adjust my hypothesis from an R1 migration from America to an R1b migration from America.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-24-2016, 08:46 PM
That is exactly why the discovery of R-L389* in a Puerto Rican sample from the 1000 Genomes project (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389*/) is so intriguing. Several years ago, Dienekes wrote about this surprising find (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/07/on-age-of-y-chromosome-haplogroup-r1b.html). He was amazed that such a small sample would include a lineage allegedly European, yet vanishingly rare in Europe itself.

Doesn't Goioello argue that several L389 exist in Italian genealogy samples ?

AJL
05-24-2016, 08:46 PM
That is exactly why the discovery of R-L389* in a Puerto Rican sample from the 1000 Genomes project (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389*/) is so intriguing. Several years ago, Dienekes wrote about this surprising find (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/07/on-age-of-y-chromosome-haplogroup-r1b.html). He was amazed that such a small sample would include a lineage allegedly European, yet vanishingly rare in Europe itself.

Yes, this is why we can't entirely discount the existence of early R1b in the Americas. Unfortunately, pretty well all early testing suffered from limited SNP panels combined with significant confirmation bias.

AJL
05-24-2016, 08:50 PM
BTW - if I'm not mistaken, these Native American and Métis tribes with high percentages of R1b haplogroup have spoken Native American languages as their mother tongues, rather than Indo-European languages?

It depends. In some cases the fathers weren't around, and the mothers did all the child-rearing, so the children learned their mother's language. In other cases the children were raised by religious school systems and learned, e.g., French. In still other cases the fathers settled down with the women, and sometimes hybrid languages like Michif (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michif_language) formed as a result.

McCown
05-24-2016, 09:03 PM
This directionality runs against archeological and linguistic evidence.

If Turkey only had one haplogroup, perhaps you could make a case, but R1b isn't necessarily tied to which ever culture flow you're referring to. There is plenty of haplogroup diversity in these regions to connect to various cultures. How much is known about the flow of stone age linguistics?

AJL
05-24-2016, 09:11 PM
If Turkey only had one haplogroup, perhaps you could make a case, but R1b isn't necessarily tied to which ever culture flow you're referring to. There is plenty of haplogroup diversity in these regions to connect to various cultures. How much is known about the flow of stone age linguistics?

There's nothing wrong with your positing theories but there's also no sense my discussing this with you further because you're not proceeding from logic, parsimony, evidence. So I will withdraw from direct conversation with you and interact with you here only in the event that there is another violation of forum rules.

McCown
05-24-2016, 09:22 PM
There's nothing wrong with your positing theories but there's also no sense my discussing this with you further because you're not proceeding from logic, parsimony, evidence. So I will withdraw from direct conversation with you and interact with you here only in the event that there is another violation of forum rules.

It's fine if you want to say criticize my evidence and hypothesis, but note that you didn't provide any evidence for R1b Ice age nomadic culture spreading from Turkey into Western Europe. I am unaware of whatever you're referring to so if you'd like to share your archeological evidence, I'll listen. Not everyone here is an expert in Ice Age culture flows so feel free to enlighten us.

Silesian
05-24-2016, 09:34 PM
Doesn't Goioello argue that several L389 exist in Italian genealogy samples ?
Italy has the oldest European R1b sample to date -Villabruna.
http://oi63.tinypic.com/1zhcu0.jpg
Spain has Els Trocs
http://oi66.tinypic.com/ogb6f4.jpg

Italy, Cagliari has some of the oldest living R1b-V88 samples. No others even come close, not even the Middle East samples.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 10:07 PM
Italy has the oldest European R1b sample to date -Villabruna.
http://oi63.tinypic.com/1zhcu0.jpg
Spain has Els Trocs
http://oi66.tinypic.com/ogb6f4.jpg

Italy, Cagliari has some of the oldest living R1b-V88 samples. No others even come close, not even the Middle East samples.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/

M18 has been reported from Lebanon, which would put the Middle East on both branches too if confirmed.

McCown
05-24-2016, 10:14 PM
M81 has been reported from Lebanon, which would put the Middle East on both branches too if confirmed.

Does the Middle East have any M335? Going back one more branch, R1a appears to be oldest in Europe as well.

http://r1a.org/2.htm

http://r1a.org/img/r1a1_720.jpg

Silesian
05-24-2016, 10:15 PM
M81 has been reported from Lebanon, which would put the Middle East on both branches too if confirmed.Yes, a lot of things need confirming. What is your source?

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 10:22 PM
Yes, a lot of things need confirming. What is your source?
Zalloua et al (2008), "Y-chromosomal diversity in Lebanon is structured by recent historical events"
(and I meant M18 of course)

Silesian
05-24-2016, 10:25 PM
Zalloua et al (2008), "Y-chromosomal diversity in Lebanon is structured by recent historical events"
(and I meant M18 of course)
Of course. What exactly did they test for?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427286/

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 10:30 PM
Does the Middle East have any M335? Going back one more branch, R1a appears to be oldest in Europe as well.
M335 was first found in Turkey. And the parts of your tree labelled "R1a relics" and "R1a1 relics" reach their highest frequency in Iran and eastern Turkey. Even M417* can be found in Turkey, Iran, and India.

I suggest you read some academic studies like "The phylogenetic and geographic structure of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a" and "A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe" to get a bigger picture, though the latter is still mostly about Europe.

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 10:31 PM
Of course. What exactly did they test for?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427286/
Um, you linked the study, read it and find out.

Silesian
05-24-2016, 10:35 PM
Um, you linked the study, read it and find out. Exactly I quoted the study and you "um" corrected yourself on the classification.

McCown
05-24-2016, 10:40 PM
M335 was first found in Turkey. And the parts of your tree labelled "R1a relics" and "R1a1 relics" reach their highest frequency in Iran and eastern Turkey. Even M417* can be found in Turkey, Iran, and India.

I suggest you read some academic studies like "The phylogenetic and geographic structure of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a" and "A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe" to get a bigger picture, though the latter is still mostly about Europe.

Can you point me to that data. This source: http://r1a.org/2.htm shows the oldest R1a at 12,000 YBP in NW Europe. Turkey is practically part of Europe and not all that far from Italy where much of this old DNA has been found.

Silesian
05-24-2016, 10:41 PM
Europe has enormous numbers of private testers, like everyone on your tree. Most other places do not. V88 is most common in Central Africa. Z2103 is most common in the Near East....
For the sake of accuracy please be more specific. For example Z2103 in the Near East where is it most common?What snp's?
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z2103/
http://www.kumbarov.com/ht35/aDNA_02_11_30_2015.png
Same goes with R1b V-88
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/
Where is it most common?What snp's?

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 10:45 PM
Exactly I quoted the study and you "um" corrected yourself on the classification.

I don't follow.

Silesian
05-24-2016, 10:47 PM
M335 was first found in Turkey. And the parts of your tree labelled "R1a relics" and "R1a1 relics" reach their highest frequency in Iran and eastern Turkey. Even M417* can be found in Turkey, Iran, and India.

I suggest you read some academic studies like "The phylogenetic and geographic structure of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a" and "A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe" to get a bigger picture, though the latter is still mostly about Europe.

Here is a Near East project.
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Lebanon-Syria-DNA/default.aspx?section=yresults

Here is another.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/assyrian-heritage-dna-project/about/background

Is this what you are thinking of?

Silesian
05-24-2016, 10:49 PM
I don't follow.
You are being vague, or I misunderstand what you are trying to convey.

McCown
05-24-2016, 10:55 PM
Can you point me to that data. This source: http://r1a.org/2.htm shows the oldest R1a at 12,000 YBP in NW Europe. Turkey is practically part of Europe and not all that far from Italy where much of this old DNA has been found.

Here is the "Old European" R1a distribution (https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?ll=50.209986%2C5.141773&spn=17.298477%2C31.15757&ptab=2&hl=en&oe=UTF8&msa=0&source=embed&ie=UTF8&mid=1xoby146BKX50zmwv052UFNkqYHg):

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 11:02 PM
You are being vague, or I misunderstand what you are trying to convey.
I mean, the study says M18 was tested in Fig. 2. I'm not going to dig into the detailed methods to find out if they used the right primer or whatever, or be concerned whether it's a recurrent mutation or some such thing.


Here is a Near East project.
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Lebanon-Syria-DNA/default.aspx?section=yresults

Here is another.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/assyrian-heritage-dna-project/about/background

Is this what you are thinking of?
I am referring to the data from Underhill 2014. Given where Assyrians come from, chances are good that it would show up in them. The Assyrian sample from Grugni has 2 R1*(xSRY1532, M343) which I guess is likely M420*. About those specific projects I know nothing.

Tomenable
05-24-2016, 11:07 PM
This source: http://r1a.org/2.htm shows the oldest R1a at 12,000 YBP in NW Europe.

But this claim is not based on actual ancient DNA samples, but on speculations.

Silesian
05-24-2016, 11:09 PM
Here is the "Old European" R1a distribution (https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?ll=50.209986%2C5.141773&spn=17.298477%2C31.15757&ptab=2&hl=en&oe=UTF8&msa=0&source=embed&ie=UTF8&mid=1xoby146BKX50zmwv052UFNkqYHg):
There are some that say that R1a and R1b parted in Europe, others on the Steppe, still others, in the Near East.
Europe and Steppe look the most plausible IMO.

Tomenable
05-24-2016, 11:10 PM
Here is the "Old European" R1a distribution (https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?ll=50.209986%2C5.141773&spn=17.298477%2C31.15757&ptab=2&hl=en&oe=UTF8&msa=0&source=embed&ie=UTF8&mid=1xoby146BKX50zmwv052UFNkqYHg):

It is not "Old European", it was being spread only by CWC culture relatively recently.

"Old European", Non-M198, is for example Mr Bazyl Shpakovsky from Belarus:

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/polish?iframe=yresults

http://s33.postimg.org/4i0bu42vz/Szpakowski.png

Tomenable
05-24-2016, 11:13 PM
^
^
Sorry, I didn't read the description of that map carefully enough.

Yellow and Red Pins from that map (negative for M198) are indeed perhaps "Old European".

But Blue Pins are positive for M198, and this means they are not "Old European".

Not any more "Old European", than "Old Xinjiangian" (since Xiaohe mummies were M198+).

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 11:13 PM
For the sake of accuracy please be more specific. For example Z2103 in the Near East where is it most common?What snp's?
Same goes with R1b V-88
Where is it most common?What snp's?

"Human Y-chromosome haplogroup R-V88: a paternal genetic record of early-mid Holocene trans-Saharan connections and the spread of Chadic languages"
"A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe"
"A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity coincides with a global change in culture"
"Ancient Migratory Events in the Middle East: New Clues from the Y-Chromosome Variation of Modern Iranians"
"Neolithic patrilineal signals indicate that the Armenian plateau was repopulated by agriculturalists"

Are a good start. Starving farmers from the Sahel don't sell their last cow to buy a DNA test, so don't expect to find a lot of high-resolution data.

Silesian
05-24-2016, 11:19 PM
"Human Y-chromosome haplogroup R-V88: a paternal genetic record of early-mid Holocene trans-Saharan connections and the spread of Chadic languages"
"A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe"
"A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity coincides with a global change in culture"
"Ancient Migratory Events in the Middle East: New Clues from the Y-Chromosome Variation of Modern Iranians"
"Neolithic patrilineal signals indicate that the Armenian plateau was repopulated by agriculturalists"

Are a good start. Starving farmers from the Sahel don't sell their last cow to buy a DNA test, so don't expect to find a lot of high-resolution data.
I don't think it will be that much different from Kano, Nigeria samples, with dated TMRCA around 1950+/- ybp. Do you?
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fula_people
Fula-Fulani are usually cattle herders and considered warriors by other tribesmen of the region they live. Or so I've been told by people from Africa, Mali,Ghana, Nigeria.

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 11:24 PM
I don't think it will be that much different from Kano, Nigeria samples, with dated TMRCA around 1950+/- ybp. Do you?
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/

Clade of that and V69, more or less, would be my guess going by the haplotype network from Cruciani.

Silesian
05-24-2016, 11:33 PM
http://africanspotlight.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Picture-39-300x263.png
http://www.vacationstogo.com/images/ports/maps/503_w.gif

Clade of that and V69, more or less, would be my guess going by the haplotype network from Cruciani.
Cagliari is much much older than Kano, Nigeria. It is also much much more closer to Villabruno.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/
R-M18PF6372 * PF6319 * PF6326+9 SNPs

id:ERS256975ITA [IT-CA]
id:ERS256965ITA [IT-CA]

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V69/
KWT [KW-KU]&SAU [SA-01]-TMRCA 4400 ybp

Megalophias
05-24-2016, 11:55 PM
Cagliari is much much older than Kano, Nigeria. It is also much much more closer to Villabruno.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/
Ok, but we were talking about Lebanon. From which we do not have 1200 sequences. ;)

McCown
05-25-2016, 12:08 AM
I am referring to the data from Underhill 2014. Given where Assyrians come from, chances are good that it would show up in them. The Assyrian sample from Grugni has 2 R1*(xSRY1532, M343) which I guess is likely M420*. About those specific projects I know nothing.

Do R1a and R1b appear to branch out of Iran? The goal here is to find where R1a and R1b split. This thread is full of examples of how it may have happened in Europe so I won't rehash it. Is there another concrete region that can make the same claim?

Silesian
05-25-2016, 12:10 AM
Ok, but we were talking about Lebanon. From which we do not have 1200 sequences. ;)
Yes, I even linked 2 projects, for you. However you admitted your limited knowledge "about those specific projects I know nothing." Really no sense in continuing.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-25-2016, 12:11 AM
Italy has the oldest European R1b sample to date -Villabruna.
http://oi63.tinypic.com/1zhcu0.jpg
Spain has Els Trocs
http://oi66.tinypic.com/ogb6f4.jpg

Italy, Cagliari has some of the oldest living R1b-V88 samples. No others even come close, not even the Middle East samples.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V88/

So what are you suggesting, then (hypothesis wise) ?

Silesian
05-25-2016, 12:32 AM
So what are you suggesting, then (hypothesis wise) ?
All the great finds detailing both R1a and R1b have been in this region. I expect more.
http://oi67.tinypic.com/14y3j9z.jpg

Megalophias
05-25-2016, 12:48 AM
Yes, I even linked 2 projects, for you. However you admitted your limited knowledge "about those specific projects I know nothing." Really no sense in continuing.
Do those projects demonstrate that R1 originated in America? What statement of mine do you imagine you are addressing?

Gravetto-Danubian
05-25-2016, 02:17 AM
Would anyone be interesting in compiling a list of "interesting" samples, odd & ends, unusual R1b samples from public projects and academic publications ?
If so, we can fund raise, and offer to sponsor tests. I'd be happy to contribute a few bob.

ArmandoR1b
05-25-2016, 02:26 AM
That is a definite possibility. But then why has it not yet been found in Asia, or even Eastern Europe, but only Northwestern Europe?
I should have elaborated that Q-L804 stayed in Siberia at the time that Q-M3 moved to Beringia. Q-L804 would have then moved to Europe some point after that. Descendants of Q-L804 are also in Norway and Sweden which aren't part of northwestern Europe.

parasar
05-25-2016, 05:10 PM
However, there is something parallel to this discussion that should be noted. A European branch of Q that appears embedded within the typical Native American cluster that requires more research. Did it enter Europe through Nordic contact within the last 1000 years or so? Look at the non-M3 branches.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M930/

It could have come in across or along the Arctic from Beringia to Europe.
Notice also the EDAR in Motala, and per Genetiker (as mentioned to me by a forum member) present in the 12600ybp Anzick-1.

crossover
05-25-2016, 05:17 PM
A Puerto Rican research sample has been classified as R1b-L389* by YFull (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389/). His patrilineage diverged from R1b-P297 about 17,000 years ago. Is his patrilineage Native American or Spanish (or something else)?

I must point out the disturbing tendency in academic publications to discard all Native American R1b, a priori, as European admixture.

it probably is european admixture. it wasn't rare for conquistadors and settlers to rape native american women

McCown
05-25-2016, 07:52 PM
It could have come in across or along the Arctic from Beringia to Europe.
Notice also the EDAR in Motala, and per Genetiker (as mentioned to me by a forum member) present in the 12600ybp Anzick-1.

Here's a link to the EDAR info: http://www.unz.com/gnxp/selection-in-europeans-but-it-still-sweeps/

"...the weirdest aspect of the Scandinavian samples is that they carry the East Asian/Native American variant of EDAR at appreciable frequencies!"

McCown
05-26-2016, 01:57 PM
mtDNA haplogroup C1 seems to fit a similar migration pattern.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/02/new-subclade-of-mtdna-haplogroup-c1.html

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-V8maTmo5av4/U527P9wlR3I/AAAAAAAAAow/p79o_vIGDXQ/w350-h264-no/C1_subclades_Fig_1_2014_small.png

ArmandoR1b
05-26-2016, 02:18 PM
Here's a link to the EDAR info: http://www.unz.com/gnxp/selection-in-europeans-but-it-still-sweeps/

"...the weirdest aspect of the Scandinavian samples is that they carry the East Asian/Native American variant of EDAR at appreciable frequencies!"
Since it also exists in East Asians and there isn't a single Native American with an SNP from the Q-L804 branch then it is safe to say that branch never made it's way into the Americas.

McCown
05-26-2016, 02:26 PM
Since it also exists in East Asians and there isn't a single Native American with an SNP from the Q-L804 branch then it is safe to say that branch never made it's way into the Americas.

That's not safe to say. As you can see from the C1f mtDNA, lineages die out or bottleneck on their nomadic migration path. Same could have happened to Q-L804 branches as they crossed northern America, only dispersing once they got to Europe. East Asians became Native Americans. Ice Age Native Americans may have then become Europeans. Most of these expansions line up with the Ice Age. The lines that went south in the Americas would have had more chance to disperse because of warmer climate. I imagine the nomads of the ice age north kept following mammoths east, never creating settlements like they could have in the south.

ArmandoR1b
05-26-2016, 02:43 PM
mtDNA haplogroup C1 seems to fit a similar migration pattern.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/02/new-subclade-of-mtdna-haplogroup-c1.html

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-V8maTmo5av4/U527P9wlR3I/AAAAAAAAAow/p79o_vIGDXQ/w350-h264-no/C1_subclades_Fig_1_2014_small.png

Did you even read the study? Here's the link http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087612

Three of the C1 sub-clades (C1b, C1c and C1d) are restricted to Native American populations.....The resulting phylogenetic reconstruction shows that clade C1 is now characterised by six monophyletic sub-clades: C1a, C1b, C1c, C1d, C1e and C1f. The tree topology suggests that the Eurasian C1 sub-clades, the East Asian C1a, the rare C1f branch from Yuzhnyy Oleni Ostrov and the Icelandic C1e split early from the most recent common ancestor of the C1 clades and evolved independently (Figure 3)

Behar et al. (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2024885281/2044552800/mmc1.pdf) estimates C1 to be 18,252.3 years old which is prior to the migration to the Americas. So C1f in Russia is no surprise and doesn't support your hypothesis.

ArmandoR1b
05-26-2016, 02:45 PM
That's not safe to say. As you can see from the C1f mtDNA, lineages die out or bottleneck on their nomadic migration path. Same could have happened to Q-L804 branches as they crossed northern America, only dispersing once they got to Europe. East Asians became Native Americans. Ice Age Native Americans may have then become Europeans. Most of these expansions line up with the Ice Age. The lines that went south in the Americas would have had more chance to disperse because of warmer climate. I imagine the nomads of the ice age north kept following mammoths east, never creating settlements like they could have in the south.

As I can see from C1f mtDNA there is a trail of C1 from Asia towards the Americas and not from the Americas to Asia.

McCown
05-26-2016, 02:49 PM
Did you even read the study? Here's the link http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087612

Three of the C1 sub-clades (C1b, C1c and C1d) are restricted to Native American populations.....The resulting phylogenetic reconstruction shows that clade C1 is now characterised by six monophyletic sub-clades: C1a, C1b, C1c, C1d, C1e and C1f. The tree topology suggests that the Eurasian C1 sub-clades, the East Asian C1a, the rare C1f branch from Yuzhnyy Oleni Ostrov and the Icelandic C1e split early from the most recent common ancestor of the C1 clades and evolved independently (Figure 3)

Behar et al. (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2024885281/2044552800/mmc1.pdf) estimates C1 to be 18,252.3 years old which is prior to the migration to the Americas. So C1f in Russia is no surprise and doesn't support your hypothesis.

18,252.3 years old does line up with the possible migration to the Americas. The range of entry into America is about 15,000 to 35,000 YBP. C1f does support my hypothesis. C1 appears to be born in East Asia. C1b,c,d are clearly Native American. C1e looks like a possible migration from American into Iceland and C1f actually made it back to North East Europe( I would argue, from America ).

McCown
05-26-2016, 02:50 PM
As I can see from C1f mtDNA there is a trail of C1 from Asia towards the Americas and not from the Americas to Asia.

Most people think C1 came into America from Bering.

ArmandoR1b
05-26-2016, 02:56 PM
18,252.3 years old does line up with the possible migration to the Americas. The range of entry into America is about 15,000 to 35,000 YBP. C1f does support my hypothesis. C1 appears to be born in East Asia. C1b,c,d are clearly Native American. C1e looks like a possible migration from American into Iceland and C1f actually made it back to North East Europe( I would argue, from America ).

If C1f went back to North East Europe from America then it would exist in America. But it doesn't.

McCown
05-26-2016, 02:59 PM
If C1f went back to North East Europe from America then it would exist in America. But it doesn't.

Above I argue that C1e, C1f and Q-L804 bottlenecked on their nomadic journey across the ice age tundra. Only the lineages that went south have surviving branches left behind. For example, C1e and C1f had to bottleneck somewhere. Where else do they split off? I think they bottlenecked migrating across northern America.

ArmandoR1b
05-26-2016, 03:00 PM
Most people think C1 came into America from Bering.

Please point to where the academic community has made that statement. C1a has been found in Japan and China. Extremely doubtful that it doubled back from Beringia to Japan and China.

ArmandoR1b
05-26-2016, 03:02 PM
Above I argue that C1e, C1f and Q-L804 bottlenecked on their nomadic journey across the ice age tundra. Only the lineages that went south have surviving branches left behind. For example, C1e and C1f had to bottleneck somewhere. Where else do they split off? I think they bottlenecked migrating across northern America.

You are missing C1e, C1f and Q-L804 in the Americas for them to have bottlenecked migrating across northern America. There is no evidence whatsoever to support your hypothesis.

McCown
05-26-2016, 03:07 PM
Please point to where the academic community has made that statement. C1a has been found in Japan and China. Extremely doubtful that it doubled back from Beringia to Japan and China.

Enjoy: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3913659/pdf/pone.0087612.pdf

https://dnaexplained.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/beringia-map.jpg

McCown
05-26-2016, 03:11 PM
You are missing C1e, C1f and Q-L804 in the Americas for them to have bottlenecked migrating across northern America. There is no evidence whatsoever to support your hypothesis.

It's as good as any other hypothesis. When you have proof, I think it becomes a theory. If you were a nomadic tribe following heards of mammoths migrating across northern America in the Ice age, how many settlements do you think you would have set up?

Megalophias
05-26-2016, 03:59 PM
Please point to where the academic community has made that statement. C1a has been found in Japan and China. Extremely doubtful that it doubled back from Beringia to Japan and China.
Actually that is a pretty mainstream hypothesis. There was nothing to stop people from the Beringian refuge expanding westward as well as eastward after the LGM.

Beringian Standstill and Spread of Native American Founders (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0000829)
Linguistic Phylogenies Support Back-Migration from Beringia to Asia (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0091722)

ArmandoR1b
05-26-2016, 04:03 PM
Enjoy: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3913659/pdf/pone.0087612.pdf

https://dnaexplained.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/beringia-map.jpg

Fair enough. A2a and C1a were hypothesized by some academics to be back-migrations. A2a is only found in Chukchi, Siberian and North American Eskimos, Aleuts, and Na-Dene populations so they do have shared ancestry. However, C1a has not been found in any Native Americans and the Japanese and Chinese C1a have been found after the publications that hypothesized the back migration. If the academics knew about the Japanese C1a may not have believed it was a back migration. Those additional samples could also provide a much older date for C1a.

McCown
05-26-2016, 04:42 PM
Fair enough. A2a and C1a were hypothesized by some academics to be back-migrations. A2a is only found in Chukchi, Siberian and North American Eskimos, Aleuts, and Na-Dene populations so they do have shared ancestry. However, C1a has not been found in any Native Americans and the Japanese and Chinese C1a have been found after the publications that hypothesized the back migration. If the academics knew about the Japanese C1a may not have believed it was a back migration. Those additional samples could also provide a much older date for C1a.

Regardless of C1a's dispersion, C1b,c,d are the basis of my American migration example. C1a show common origins in East Asia with Y-haplogroups R1 and Q. They came from the same region and possibly migrated together. A Y haplogroup has to migrate with and mt haplogroup.

McCown
05-26-2016, 05:30 PM
I attempted to make a new migration map for this hypothesis that includes the other haplogroups. It might be hard to see with all of the crisscrossed lines and the small resolution I have to shrink it down to in order to upload it here. X2 has a lot of branches so I only showed what fit. However you can get a feel for X2 here: http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_X_mtDNA.shtml

Newest Image: 9477

MTDNA is dashed lines.
YDNA is solid lines.

Attached thumbnails are prior versions.

McCown
05-26-2016, 10:51 PM
Latest image. I can't figure out how to delete old images so I have to create a new post. Some branches of Q1a2b appear to have also found there way to Europe in addition to their brother Q1a2a.

It's easiest to see here:http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_Q_Y-DNA.shtml

9481

GailT
05-26-2016, 10:58 PM
Above I argue that C1e, C1f and Q-L804 bottlenecked on their nomadic journey across the ice age tundra. Only the lineages that went south have surviving branches left behind. For example, C1e and C1f had to bottleneck somewhere. Where else do they split off? I think they bottlenecked migrating across northern America.

It is always possible to construct a complex hypothesis that is consistent with the data. but the simpler hypothesis is more likely to be correct. It seems like you came up with this North America to Europe idea based on an overly simplistic analysis of high level haplogroup assignments and now you are set on interpreting other data in complex ways to fit that hypothesis. You should go back to the basics and only use samples that have been tested at a more refined level. If you do this you might find that all of the R1b Native American samples fall into relatively young, European subclades of R1b. To support your hypothesis you need to find samples of R1b among Native Americans that represent an ancient branch point in R1b that is not found in Eurasia. Unless you can find such samples, I think you are really wasting your time trying to make other data fit your hypothesis. I'm not saying your hypothesis is impossible (thought it seems very unlikely) but you should be looking for a very specific kind of evidence to support it.

lgmayka
05-26-2016, 11:47 PM
If you do this you might find that all of the R1b Native American samples fall into relatively young, European subclades of R1b.
That's why we need more samples from Puerto Rico--to investigate the rare R1b-L389* (https://yfull.com/tree/R-L389*/) found there by the 1000 Genomes project. But we also need Big Y testing of Eurasians who appear to belong to L389xP297 (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1b1asterisk/default.aspx?section=yresults), to see what their relationship is to the Puerto Rican example.

McCown
05-27-2016, 12:26 AM
It is always possible to construct a complex hypothesis that is consistent with the data. but the simpler hypothesis is more likely to be correct. It seems like you came up with this North America to Europe idea based on an overly simplistic analysis of high level haplogroup assignments and now you are set on interpreting other data in complex ways to fit that hypothesis. You should go back to the basics and only use samples that have been tested at a more refined level. If you do this you might find that all of the R1b Native American samples fall into relatively young, European subclades of R1b. To support your hypothesis you need to find samples of R1b among Native Americans that represent an ancient branch point in R1b that is not found in Eurasia. Unless you can find such samples, I think you are really wasting your time trying to make other data fit your hypothesis. I'm not saying your hypothesis is impossible (thought it seems very unlikely) but you should be looking for a very specific kind of evidence to support it.

My hypothesis isn't complex. Quantum mechanics is complex. Population migrations from genetic phylotrees is pretty straight forward. If you want to look at migrations from the Ice age you need to look at high level haplogroups. I arrived at my conclusions by looking at the haplotree and the ages of the lineages. Like any good hypothesis, it is verifiable with more testing and more data. I would love to see a large scale NGS testing of Native Americans to figure this out. I would love to see excavations of Canada in search of clovis artifacts. I don't have those resources at my disposal, perhaps someone on anthrogenica does and will solicit a study.

In my opinion, my explanation for R1( and now X2, C1, Q1a2 ) is simpler than the others I've seen.

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 01:15 AM
In my opinion, my explanation for R1( and now X2, C1, Q1a2 ) is simpler than the others I've seen.
You ought to discuss this with kinship anthropologist German Dziebel. His blog is http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/. He may be able to offer some anthropological and linguistic support for your hypothesis.

McCown
05-27-2016, 01:31 AM
You ought to discuss this with kinship anthropologist German Dziebel. His blog is http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/. He may be able to offer some anthropological and linguistic support for your hypothesis.

I posted a comment on his blog since I didn't see another way to contact him. Perhaps he'll chime in.

parasar
05-27-2016, 01:54 AM
My hypothesis isn't complex. Quantum mechanics is complex. Population migrations from genetic phylotrees is pretty straight forward. If you want to look at migrations from the Ice age you need to look at high level haplogroups. I arrived at my conclusions by looking at the haplotree and the ages of the lineages. Like any good hypothesis, it is verifiable with more testing and more data. I would love to see a large scale NGS testing of Native Americans to figure this out. I would love to see excavations of Canada in search of clovis artifacts. I don't have those resources at my disposal, perhaps someone on anthrogenica does and will solicit a study.

In my opinion, my explanation for R1( and now X2, C1, Q1a2 ) is simpler than the others I've seen.


While we can't just go by one divergent R1b in Puerto Rico, there is also one R1a in the Latin American Guaymi. http://anthro.vancouver.wsu.edu/media/Course_files/anth-490-edward-h-hagen/schurr.pdf

Overall though what you propose is well into the theory category. After all the EDAR mutation in Motala is on the same haplotype background as that of Amerindians, and the oldest evidence of EDAR is from the Americas, so it is very possible that there was a migration from the Americas/Beringia.

Language
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2314-Linguistic-Phylogenies-Support-Back-Migration-from-Beringia-to-Asia&p=34077&viewfull=1#post34077

"Then one from the Americas to Europe."
"a component entering Russians and Orcadians from the Americas. This arrow comes off the American branch, but prior to the Americans themselves splitting."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2314-Linguistic-Phylogenies-Support-Back-Migration-from-Beringia-to-Asia&p=34077&viewfull=1#post34077

"Motala12 could also be an independent ANE incursion into Europe in the form of early Q and R types from across the Arctic. It is perhaps not a coincidence that Orcadia, Konosha, Motala, Afontova Gora, Baikal, etc are all in close proximity with or have riverine connection to the Arctic."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1958-7-000-Year-Old-Human-Bones-Suggest-New-Date-for-Light-Skin-Gene&p=29910&viewfull=1#post29910

McCown
05-27-2016, 02:07 AM
"Then one from the Americas to Europe."
"a component entering Russians and Orcadians from the Americas. This arrow comes off the American branch, but prior to the Americans themselves splitting."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2314-Linguistic-Phylogenies-Support-Back-Migration-from-Beringia-to-Asia&p=34077&viewfull=1#post34077

"Motala12 could also be an independent ANE incursion into Europe in the form of early Q and R types from across the Arctic. It is perhaps not a coincidence that Orcadia, Konosha, Motala, Afontova Gora, Baikal, etc are all in close proximity with or have riverine connection to the Arctic."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1958-7-000-Year-Old-Human-Bones-Suggest-New-Date-for-Light-Skin-Gene&p=29910&viewfull=1#post29910

According to Europedia, X2b shows up in Orkney as well.

"In Western Europe, X peaks in Orkney (7%)"
"X2b: found throughout Europe (incl. Sardinia and Orkney)..."

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_X_mtDNA.shtml

McCown
05-27-2016, 02:18 AM
"Then one from the Americas to Europe."
"a component entering Russians and Orcadians from the Americas. This arrow comes off the American branch, but prior to the Americans themselves splitting."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2314-Linguistic-Phylogenies-Support-Back-Migration-from-Beringia-to-Asia&p=34077&viewfull=1#post34077

[/url]
I really wanted to add this image to this thread. If I understand it correctly, there is a genetic componet that looks a whole lot like the dispersion of mtDNA haplogroup X and YDNA R1 entering into the admix from America to Europe. ie...first green to purple( Russia to america ) then... purple to green( American to Europe/Russia ). Do I understand this correctly. This seems like very good supporting evidence.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.2332v1.pdf
http://i46.tinypic.com/slppbt.jpg

Gravetto-Danubian
05-27-2016, 02:43 AM
While we can't just go by one divergent R1b in Puerto Rico, there is also one R1a in the Latin American Guaymi. http://anthro.vancouver.wsu.edu/media/Course_files/anth-490-edward-h-hagen/schurr.pdf

Overall though what you propose is well into the theory category. After all the EDAR mutation in Motala is on the same haplotype background as that of Amerindians, and the oldest evidence of EDAR is from the Americas, so it is very possible that there was a migration from the Americas/Beringia.

Language
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2314-Linguistic-Phylogenies-Support-Back-Migration-from-Beringia-to-Asia&p=34077&viewfull=1#post34077

"Then one from the Americas to Europe."
"a component entering Russians and Orcadians from the Americas. This arrow comes off the American branch, but prior to the Americans themselves splitting."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2314-Linguistic-Phylogenies-Support-Back-Migration-from-Beringia-to-Asia&p=34077&viewfull=1#post34077

"Motala12 could also be an independent ANE incursion into Europe in the form of early Q and R types from across the Arctic. It is perhaps not a coincidence that Orcadia, Konosha, Motala, Afontova Gora, Baikal, etc are all in close proximity with or have riverine connection to the Arctic."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1958-7-000-Year-Old-Human-Bones-Suggest-New-Date-for-Light-Skin-Gene&p=29910&viewfull=1#post29910

This is becoming comical
The "divergent" Puerto Rican probably has Spanish or Italian male ancestry ; areas where "old" forms of R1b abound within a European context
No need for pseudo-sciencey and otherwise undocumented migrations from the Americas to Europe, from a time when Americas weren even populated by human beings

parasar
05-27-2016, 02:50 AM
This is becoming comical
The "divergent" Puerto Rican probably has Spanish or Italian male ancestry ; areas where "old" forms of R1b abound within a European context
No need for pseudo-sciencey and otherwise undocumented migrations from the Americas to Europe, from a time when Americas weren even populated by human beings

How did EDAR get into Motala?

Gravetto-Danubian
05-27-2016, 02:52 AM
How did EDAR get into Motala?

Boreal Eurasian route

parasar
05-27-2016, 02:55 AM
As far the time-frame of occupation of Americas two groups now have come up with pretty early numbers:
http://news.berkeley.edu/2015/07/21/genome-analysis-pins-down-arrival-and-spread-of-first-americans/
http://news.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/migration750.jpg

parasar
05-27-2016, 02:57 AM
Boreal Eurasian route

From where?
As far as evidence goes, the earliest evidence of EDAR is in Anzick-1.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-27-2016, 02:59 AM
As far the time-frame of occupation of Americas two groups now have come up with pretty early numbers:
http://news.berkeley.edu/2015/07/21/genome-analysis-pins-down-arrival-and-spread-of-first-americans/
http://news.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/migration750.jpg

Ok. So if Humans were reaching west coast USA c. 13 - 14 kya (rapid west Coastal dispersion), how did they then manage to adapt to the Plains/ deserts, mountains further east, then hit the eastern seaboard, then invent highly sophisticated & undocumented seafaring technology, then sail to Britain or Iceland, and reach Italy by 14 kya ? (ie at the very same time, if not 1, 000 year earlier ?)

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 03:06 AM
From where?
As far as evidence goes, the earliest evidence of EDAR is in Anzick-1.
From the North Asians we don't have aDNA from, most likely.

parasar
05-27-2016, 03:07 AM
Ok. So if Humans were reaching west coast USA c. 13 - 14 kya (rapid west Coastal dispersion), how did they then manage to adapt to the Plains/ deserts, mountains further east, then hit the eastern seaboard, then invent highly sophisticated & undocumented seafaring technology, then sail to Britain or Iceland, and reach Italy by 14 kya ? (ie at the very same time, if not 1, 000 year earlier ?)

If you saw the map, they had already reached the tip of Chile 14.6kybp.
The Alaska/Berigian occupation is proposed at 23kybp - "apparently hung out in the north – perhaps for thousands of years"

There is more that sufficient time to reach Italy 14kybp. You can measure from Alaska/Beringia along the Arctic down to Italy and see that that is a shorter distance than from Alaska to Monte Verde.

parasar
05-27-2016, 03:11 AM
From the North Asians we don't have aDNA from, most likely.

Possible. EDAR is nearly fixed in almost all of America that is why I think it originated in its founding population or soon thereafter.

McCown
05-27-2016, 03:17 AM
Ok. So if Humans were reaching west coast USA c. 13 - 14 kya (rapid west Coastal dispersion), how did they then manage to adapt to the Plains/ deserts, mountains further east, then hit the eastern seaboard, then invent highly sophisticated & undocumented seafaring technology, then sail to Britain or Iceland, and reach Italy by 14 kya ? (ie at the very same time, if not 1, 000 year earlier ?)

I think they arrived in Europe in the height of the Ice Age at 22,000 YBP( speculative based on age of R1a/R1b split and the age of the X2 split ) there would have been a land bridge and ice bridge into Europe. Much of the land between the two continents was above water, when so much more of the water was ice. That's somewhat shown on my migration map in this thread( see image on post #123 ).

parasar
05-27-2016, 03:48 AM
Already we have good evidence of modern human occupation of the Arctic 45000ybp, the same time as Europe.
"45,000 years ago at 72°N, well within the Siberian Arctic ... The evidence is in the form of a frozen mammoth carcass bearing many signs of weapon-inflicted injuries, both pre- and postmortem. The remains of a hunted wolf from a widely separate location of similar age"
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6270/260

And Australia, which would have required crossing the ocean, 50000ybp.

They essentially reached the two opposite ends of the globe from Africa, as per current proposals, in just about 5000 years.

So with this kind of mobility, any back and forth scenario is plausible.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-27-2016, 03:49 AM
If you saw the map, they had already reached the tip of Chile 14.6kybp.
The Alaska/Berigian occupation is proposed at 23kybp - "apparently hung out in the north – perhaps for thousands of years"

There is more that sufficient time to reach Italy 14kybp. You can measure from Alaska/Beringia along the Arctic down to Italy and see that that is a shorter distance than from Alaska to Monte Verde.

I saw the map, but as I already stated: the colonization of Americas was distinctly a west coast phenomenon initially. Spread inland was slower and later.

Moreover, how do we suppose the humans survived living on the hypothetical ice bridge from East Canada to Ireland ? Eating plankton ?

And why don't we have any evidence of humans on the other side: in UK or Scandinavia
before 11 Kya ?

When do the earliest east American settlenents date from ?

Gravetto-Danubian
05-27-2016, 03:54 AM
Already we have good evidence of modern human occupation of the Arctic 45000ybp, the same time as Europe.
"45,000 years ago at 72°N, well within the Siberian Arctic ... The evidence is in the form of a frozen mammoth carcass bearing many signs of weapon-inflicted injuries, both pre- and postmortem. The remains of a hunted wolf from a widely separate location of similar age"
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6270/260

And Australia, which would have required crossing the ocean, 50000ybp.

They essentially reached the two opposite ends of the globe from Africa, as per current proposals, in just about 5000 years.

So with this kind of mobility, any back and forth scenario is plausible.

Early AMH were tropically adapted
Early temporary hunter camps aren't evidence of "Arctic colonization" . In fact both UI and Mal'ta became extinct.
Arctic adaptation came significantly later

McCown
05-27-2016, 04:06 AM
I saw the map, but as I already stated: the colonization of Americas was distinctly a west coast phenomenon initially. Spread inland was slower and later.

Moreover, how do we suppose the humans survived living on the hypothetical ice bridge from East Canada to Ireland ? Eating plankton ?

And why don't we have any evidence of humans on the other side: in UK or Scandinavia before 11 kya ?
Really Parasar, youre normally very rational

The Inuit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit) were pretty successful in a similar landscape. Humans are resourceful and smart. We do have evidence on the European side. There was 14K YPB ancient DNA found with R1b1 in Northern Italy. The age YFull gives to the R1a/R1b split is 22,800 YBP. The age others have given to the X2 split is about the same as R1.

Further more. http://sciencenordic.com/scandinavians-are-earliest-europeans Although I should mention that I don't think this is R1.

parasar
05-27-2016, 04:32 AM
I saw the map, but as I already stated: the colonization of Americas was distinctly a west coast phenomenon initially. Spread inland was slower and later.

Moreover, how do we suppose the humans survived living on the hypothetical ice bridge from East Canada to Ireland ? Eating plankton ?

And why don't we have any evidence of humans on the other side: in UK or Scandinavia before 11 kya ?
...

Ice can sometimes make it easier to travel (eg. fording a water body in winter) than through a forest.
The evidence is presumably under water, both in Beringia and in Europe.
They were hunting mammoths (which by the way later in Siberia is of American origin) and other game (rhinos etc.) till about 10000ybp when grasslands wiped them out. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140205-mammoth-grass-clover-food-ice-age/

Early AMH were tropically adapted
Early temporary hunter camps aren't evidence of "Arctic colonization" . In fact both UI and Mal'ta became extinct.
Arctic adaptation came significantly later

I agree, but IMO, you stating as fact things that while they may be factual (as nearly all lines are dead ends) are of no relevance.

GailT
05-27-2016, 05:26 AM
My hypothesis isn't complex. Quantum mechanics is complex. Population migrations from genetic phylotrees is pretty straight forward.

Inferring population migrations from genetic phylotrees is far from straight forward, and your scenario for the migration of mtDNA haplogroup C is more complex than the simpler scenario in which C originates in Eurasia and migrates to North America, with some subclades originating in Eurasia and others originating in North America. Instead, your more complex scenario is based on an earlier migration to North America, the origin of C subclades in North America, back migration of some of these subclades to Eurasia and then extinction of these subclades in North America. This is more complex and less likely than the simpler explanation that Armando quoted above.

GailT
05-27-2016, 05:36 AM
You ought to discuss this with kinship anthropologist German Dziebel. His blog is http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/. He may be able to offer some anthropological and linguistic support for your hypothesis.

German believes that modern humans originated in the Americas. It is unfortunate that psuedo-science and conspiracy theories sometimes seem more appealing than the difficult and slow process of normal scientific research.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-27-2016, 05:52 AM
Ice can sometimes make it easier to travel (eg. fording a water body in winter) than through a forest.
The evidence is presumably under water, both in Beringia and in Europe.
They were hunting mammoths (which by the way later in Siberia is of American origin) and other game (rhinos etc.) till about 10000ybp when grasslands wiped them out. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140205-mammoth-grass-clover-food-ice-age/

The terminus post quem isn't the issue, but the TAP here.

That AMHs were 'waiting around Beringia' since 20 kya isn't the issue. Its getting them to Europe via East USA which is. So I ask again where is the archaeological trail ?

- when is the earliest evidence of AMHs in the eastern seaboard of USA
- when is the earliest evidence of AMHs in Greenland, Ireland, or whatever stepping stone was used to reach western Europe ?
- why does the human presence in post-LGM Europe undoubtedly look like a spread from France & Italy north to UK & Scandinavia, rather than any evidence of vice-versa, or in addition to.

- in addition, how do we explain the clear & documented trail of post-LGM movement from Siberia to eastern Europe ?

saltranger
05-27-2016, 11:08 AM
We all assume too much on scanty evidence like building a whole simian tree from a molar. Who knows how old is human race really and how they have moved over the planet? Too little is known. There have been very old advanced civilizations discovered but set aside as they don't fit in the current hypothesis.

ArmandoR1b
05-27-2016, 12:34 PM
Possible. EDAR is nearly fixed in almost all of America that is why I think it originated in its founding population or soon thereafter.

Frequency does not equal origin but even so East Asians have EDAR at a higher rate than Native Americans. Since Native Americans descend from East Asians then the most logical conclusion is that Native Americans descend from a group of East Asians that already had EDAR. Even the authors that found EDAR in the Motala specimens state "the EDAR gene that is the strongest known signal of selection in East Asians and that is thought to have arisen in East Asia."

ArmandoR1b
05-27-2016, 12:50 PM
Regardless of C1a's dispersion, C1b,c,d are the basis of my American migration example. C1a show common origins in East Asia with Y-haplogroups R1 and Q. They came from the same region and possibly migrated together. A Y haplogroup has to migrate with and mt haplogroup.
All C1 has common origins in Asia with R1 and Q. It's the subclades, their ages, and the distribution of the subclades that matter. So far the only young pre-Colombian subclades proven to be shared be people in both the Americas and Asia is A2a. C1a has not been found in the Americas. The R1a found in Native Americans has not been proven to be pre-Colombian and probably never will since they don't seem to be willing to have additional testing. The Q subclades are specific and I have already gone over that one. The ancestors in common with C1b,c,d and Q migrated to America from Europe but so far only A2a can be shown to be in both continents but in a very limited region in each.

McCown
05-27-2016, 01:09 PM
Inferring population migrations from genetic phylotrees is far from straight forward, and your scenario for the migration of mtDNA haplogroup C is more complex than the simpler scenario in which C originates in Eurasia and migrates to North America, with some subclades originating in Eurasia and others originating in North America. Instead, your more complex scenario is based on an earlier migration to North America, the origin of C subclades in North America, back migration of some of these subclades to Eurasia and then extinction of these subclades in North America. This is more complex and less likely than the simpler explanation that Armando quoted above.

My explanation is less complex. These haplogroups migrate together into America. The northern bound American nomads would not leave settlements on the frozen landscape as they followed mammoths east( hence an explanation for the bottleneck and washed away evidence ). The haplogroups eventually explode into Europe( just as the DNA tree suggests ) as they head south into Europe and the Ice age recedes. In the alternate model( for which there is less DNA evidence ) they diverge with their tribes and migrate westward across an inhabitable Asia leaving no trace of habitats. How is that simpler?

McCown
05-27-2016, 01:41 PM
Frequency does not equal origin but even so East Asians have EDAR at a higher rate than Native Americans. Since Native Americans descend from East Asians then the most logical conclusion is that Native Americans descend from a group of East Asians that already had EDAR. Even the authors that found EDAR in the Motala specimens state "the EDAR gene that is the strongest known signal of selection in East Asians and that is thought to have arisen in East Asia."

Point being that EDAR isn't found in West Asians. So the path to Europe based on EDAR appears to be through America, not the other way.

McCown
05-27-2016, 02:32 PM
I was curious what Mammoths ate in the Arctic.

Now I know... http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/woolly-mammoth-diet-mystery-solved-by-dna-analysis-1.2524015

They ate Forbs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forb).

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 02:45 PM
Point being that EDAR isn't found in West Asians. So the path to Europe based on EDAR appears to be through America, not the other way.
EDAR isn't found in Europeans either.

parasar
05-27-2016, 03:29 PM
Frequency does not equal origin but even so East Asians have EDAR at a higher rate than Native Americans. Since Native Americans descend from East Asians then the most logical conclusion is that Native Americans descend from a group of East Asians that already had EDAR. Even the authors that found EDAR in the Motala specimens state "the EDAR gene that is the strongest known signal of selection in East Asians and that is thought to have arisen in East Asia."

If you see my response in post 140, I admit that it possible that EDAR could have arisen among East Asians.
But as the authors say, it is thought to have arisen in East Asia, not known.

Anzick1 is the earliest known oldest sample with EDAR, and at time it was possibly not fixed in Amerindians as he is hetero
Anzick1 has an East Asian element.
Motala EDAR samples do not have an East Asian element.

So it could follow that the EDAR in Anzick1 came from its non East Asian portion.

McCown
05-27-2016, 04:02 PM
EDAR isn't found in Europeans either.

EDAR was found in Swedish hunter gathers. That counts as European.

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/03/13/016477.full.pdf

We find a surprise in seven Scandinavian hunter-gatherers from the Motala site in southern
94 Sweden who lived around 7,700 years before present. While the western hunter-gatherers of central and
95 southern Europe largely have the ancestral allele at the two major European skin pigmentation loci, the
96 closely related Scandinavian hunter-gatherers have both the derived alleles contributing to light skin
97 pigmentation at high frequency (Figure 2B). Thus, the derived allele of SLC24A5 was common in both the
98 Scandinavian hunter-gatherers and Early European farmers, but not in the geographically intermediate
99 western hunter-gatherers. Further, in four out of seven Motala samples, we observe the derived allele of
rs3827760 in the EDAR gene, which has effects on tooth morphology and hair thickness36,37 100 This allele has
been the subject of a selective sweep in East Asia38 101 , and today it is at high frequency in East Asians and
peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
bioRxiv preprint first posted online Mar. 14, 2015; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/016477. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not
102 Native Americans. The EDAR derived allele is largely absent in present-day Europe except in Scandinavia,
103 which is plausibly due to Siberian movements into the region associated with the arrival of the Finno-
104 Ugric languages many millennia after the date of the Motala samples - we estimate a date of admixture of
East Asian and Sardinian like ancestry in present-day Finns at 56 ± 7 generations using ALDER39 105 . The
106 derived allele in the Motala samples lies on the same haplotype as in modern East Asians (Extended Data
107 Figure 4) implying a shared origin. The statistic f4(Yoruba, Scandinavian hunter-gatherers, Han, Onge
108 Andaman Islanders) is significantly negative (Z=-3.9) implying gene flow between the ancestors of
109 Scandinavian hunter-gatherers and Han so this shared haplotype is likely the result of ancient gene flow
110 between groups ancestral to these two populations.

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 04:26 PM
EDAR was found in Swedish hunter gathers. That counts as European.
EDAR370A isn't found in Europeans now. You are counting lack of EDAR370A in modern West Asians as evidence that it couldn't get to Europe via Asia back in the Mesolithic. See the problem?

McCown
05-27-2016, 04:34 PM
EDAR370A isn't found in Europeans now. You are counting lack of EDAR370A in modern West Asians as evidence that it couldn't get to Europe via Asia back in the Mesolithic. See the problem?

I see what you're saying, since it was weeded out of Europeans, it could have been weeded out of West Asians. However, we do have evidence connecting EDAR to European hunter gathers in a location that I suggest arrived from an EDAR region( America ). We don't have evidence for the other direction.

GailT
05-27-2016, 04:52 PM
My explanation is less complex. These haplogroups migrate together into America. The northern bound American nomads would not leave settlements on the frozen landscape as they followed mammoths east( hence an explanation for the bottleneck and washed away evidence ). The haplogroups eventually explode into Europe( just as the DNA tree suggests ) as they head south into Europe and the Ice age recedes. In the alternate model( for which there is less DNA evidence ) they diverge with their tribes and migrate westward across an inhabitable Asia leaving no trace of habitats. How is that simpler?

The conventional theory requires one intercontinental migration and no extinctions. Yours requires two intercontinental migrations plus one extinction event which makes it more complex. Not impossible but certainly less likely.

McCown
05-27-2016, 05:21 PM
The conventional theory requires one intercontinental migration and no extinctions. Yours requires two intercontinental migrations plus one extinction event which makes it more complex. Not impossible but certainly less likely.

Who went extinct in my hypothesis? One thing to keep in mind is that a trip around the Arctic pole is much shorter journey than a trip around the equator. Those long lines on my map are a distorted view of the distance because of the flatting out of the earth which is actually a sphere. The journey to South America was a long "complex" one. Why is a trip to Europe any different? We're talking thousands of years to migrate in what could probably be done in a life time( especially by nomads ).

Kale
05-27-2016, 05:42 PM
If you see my response in post 140, I admit that it possible that EDAR could have arisen among East Asians.
But as the authors say, it is thought to have arisen in East Asia, not known.

Anzick1 is the earliest known oldest sample with EDAR, and at time it was possibly not fixed in Amerindians as he is hetero
Anzick1 has an East Asian element.
Motala EDAR samples do not have an East Asian element.

So it could follow that the EDAR in Anzick1 came from its non East Asian portion.

Motala samples are roughly 50/50 Loschbour/Karelia_HG, and as such they have about 50% of Karelia's East Asian mixture.

Chimp Karelia_HG Ami Onge -0.0164 -4.036 16194 16735 341554
Chimp Karelia_HG Atayal Onge -0.0179 -4.221 16185 16774 341554

Chimp Motala_HG Ami Onge -0.0081 -2.374 16503 16772 346177
Chimp Motala_HG Atayal Onge -0.0086 -2.461 16498 16784 346177

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 06:00 PM
Who went extinct in my hypothesis? One thing to keep in mind is that a trip around the Arctic pole is much shorter journey than a trip around the equator. Those long lines on my map are a distorted view of the distance because of the flatting out of the earth which is actually a sphere. The journey to South America was a long "complex" one. Why is a trip to Europe any different?

Striking out across the vast, stormy, deadly cold Atlantic in a little boat in order to... uh... find mammoths on the other side...
vs
Moving a little further south in search of more of that delicious megafauna, because there's a lot of people around and the game is all hunted out

yeah, no difference at all

McCown
05-27-2016, 06:11 PM
Striking out across the vast, stormy, deadly cold Atlantic in a little boat in order to... uh... find mammoths on the other side...
vs
Moving a little further south in search of more of that delicious megafauna, because there's a lot of people around and the game is all hunted out

yeah, no difference at all

Some did go south. Those are the haplogroups we see today in Native American samples. Who needed a boat? There was a land bridge( see my ice age migration map ). Seas were over 350 feet lower in the ice age( not to mention the traversable ice sheet ) See post #155 regarding megafauna.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/woolly-mammoth-diet-mystery-solved-by-dna-analysis-1.2524015

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 06:37 PM
There was a land bridge across the *Atlantic*?

McCown
05-27-2016, 06:43 PM
There was a land bridge across the *Atlantic*?

That's part of my argument, yes.

9488

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 07:06 PM
That's part of my argument, yes.

9488
So there is a continuous path from America to Europe across the Atlantic with ocean depths of 150 m or less? Where?

McCown
05-27-2016, 07:14 PM
So there is a continuous path from America to Europe across the Atlantic with ocean depths of 150 m or less? Where?

Several factors come into play here.

1) There was an ice sheet to fill any gaps in land( if there were gaps ).
2) When glaciers melt they erode the land so land elevations were likely higher prior to the erosion.
3) The trip between Greenland, Iceland, Scotland isn't all that deep.

Doggerland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland) didn't sink until much later when a glacier wall broke in Canada and let all the water out of a giant lake.

http://web.gfi.uib.no/The%20Norwegian%20Sea/Plater-JPG/01.jpg

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 07:39 PM
Lol let me know when you've published your paper demonstrating the existence of the hitherto unheard of Atlantic land bridge.

parasar
05-27-2016, 07:43 PM
By the way what is theory on how mtDNA M got to NW Europe? Present with U2 and Y C1a, C1b, to boot.

Along with the Villabuna R-1b, the M findings in both the Posth (La Rochette, Goyet) and the Fu (Ostuni) papers was quite surprising.
"We unexpectedly find mtDNA lineage M in individuals prior to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). This lineage is absent in contemporary Europeans, although it is found at high frequency in modern Asians, Australasians, and Native Americans."

McCown
05-27-2016, 07:46 PM
Lol let me know when you've published your paper demonstrating the existence of the hitherto unheard of Atlantic land bridge.

I didn't make that world map. I just drew arrows on it. I certainly welcome the input of a ice age geologist. Never the less, there was an ice sheet so the point is practically moot.

McCown
05-27-2016, 07:51 PM
By the way what is theory on how mtDNA M got to NW Europe? Present with U2 and Y C1a, C1b, to boot.

Along with the Villabuna R-1b, the M findings in both the Posth (La Rochette, Goyet) and the Fu (Ostuni) papers was quite surprising.
"We unexpectedly find mtDNA lineage M in individuals prior to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). This lineage is absent in contemporary Europeans, although it is found at high frequency in modern Asians, Australasians, and Native Americans."

I'll take a look at these and see if I should update my migration map with more haplogroups.

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 08:19 PM
Never less, there was an ice sheet so the point is practically moot.
I know, but it's fun to see what ridiculous claim you'll make next.

So... how (and why) did people cross this gigantic ice sheet?

McCown
05-27-2016, 08:36 PM
I know, but it's fun to see what ridiculous claim you'll make next.

So... how (and why) did people cross this gigantic ice sheet?

Why do humans explore anything?

1) It's in our nature
2) To explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before.
3) Nomadic hunters typically follow the food (http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/woolly-mammoth-diet-mystery-solved-by-dna-analysis-1.2524015).

Megalophias
05-27-2016, 08:39 PM
3) Nomadic hunters typically follow the food (http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/woolly-mammoth-diet-mystery-solved-by-dna-analysis-1.2524015).
Yes, food is important.

McCown
05-27-2016, 09:03 PM
By the way what is theory on how mtDNA M got to NW Europe? Present with U2 and Y C1a, C1b, to boot.

Along with the Villabuna R-1b, the M findings in both the Posth (La Rochette, Goyet) and the Fu (Ostuni) papers was quite surprising.
"We unexpectedly find mtDNA lineage M in individuals prior to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). This lineage is absent in contemporary Europeans, although it is found at high frequency in modern Asians, Australasians, and Native Americans."

Do you have a link to your M studies? U2e is an interesting candidate. It's connected to Asia and NW Europe, but as far as I can tell not America( yet ).

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_U2_mtDNA.shtml

U2e : found in most of Europe and Central Asia
U2e1:
U2e1a : found in central, western and northern Europe
U2e1b
U2e1b1 : found in western and central Europe, in the eastern Baltic, and in India (might be tied to British colonization )
U2e1b2 : found in western Europe
U2e1c : found in northern Europe
U2e1d
U2e1e
U2e1f : found in Britain
U2e1g : found in Germany and Scandinavia
U2e1h
U2e2:
U2e2a
U2e2a1 : found in Germany and Scandinavia
U2e2a2
U2e2a3 : found in Scotland
U2e2a4 : found in Russia (Karelia)
U2e3:
U2e3a : found in Ireland

Also interesting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_C-M130
C-P33 (C1b2a1a ): found at high frequencies among Polynesian males.[12][18]
C-M8, an ancient but at present extremely rare lineage, is specific to the Japanese and Ryukyuan populations of Japan, among whom it occurs with a frequency of about 5%.
C-M38 (C1b2a; previously C2), among some local populations within Indonesia, Melanesia (especially New Guinea), Micronesia, and some islands of Polynesia, C-M38 has become the modal haplogroup, probably due to severe founder effects and genetic drift.[5]
C-M356 has been detected with low frequency in samples from India, Nepal,[19][20] Pakistan, Afghanistan, Arabia,[21][22] and northern China.[2] [5]
C-V20 (C1a2; previously C6) is found at low frequencies amongst Southern Europeans.[23] The 7,000-year-old remains of a hunter-gatherer from La Braña, Asturias, Spain carried it,[24] and C1a2 was also present in Hungary at around the same time.[25] [5] In 2016, a 35,000-year-old remains of a hunter gatherer from Goyet (http://archaeology.about.com/od/stoneage/fl/Goyet-Cave-Belgium.htm) and a 30,000-year-old remains of a hunter gatherer from Vestonice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doln%C3%AD_V%C4%9Bstonice_(archaeology)) were found with this haplogroup.[26]

McCown
05-27-2016, 10:17 PM
Lol let me know when you've published your paper demonstrating the existence of the hitherto unheard of Atlantic land bridge.

Exploring the land bridge some more. It looks like a land bridge would have been likely from Greenland to Iceland with the exception of a very narrow channel called the Denmark Strait. All of the terrain is less than 125 meters deep. The other side heading to Doggerland looks more tenuous but not impossible to imagine. It really depends on if everyones sea level calculations include the water that sunk Doggerland and if the the depth factors in glacial erosion.

But as noted previously, there was a glacier bridge( nobody seems to be disputing this ).

http://cp12.nevsepic.com.ua/57/1354223383-0526928-www.nevsepic.com.ua.jpg

parasar
05-28-2016, 12:37 AM
Do you have a link to your M studies? U2e is an interesting candidate. It's connected to Asia and NW Europe, but as far as I can tell not America( yet ).
...
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)00087-7
http://cdn4.sci-news.com/images/enlarge2/image_3617e-Glacial-Maximum-Europe.jpg


http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature17993.html
http://cdn4.sci-news.com/images/enlarge2/image_3833_2e-Genetic-History-Europeans.jpg

awheaton
05-28-2016, 05:11 PM
- when is the earliest evidence of AMHs in the eastern seaboard of USA



Apparently 14550 YBP in Florida - http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/ancient-stone-tools-are-best-evidence-yet-early-peopling-americas

Chad Rohlfsen
05-28-2016, 05:50 PM
There's no genetic connection to UP Europeans for Native Americans.

Chad Rohlfsen
05-28-2016, 05:53 PM
Native Americans invented their own tools, pottery, farming, and some metallurgy.

parasar
05-29-2016, 02:33 PM
The terminal pleistocene (11,500-7500 ybp) coastline is shown here:
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0091722.g004&representation=PNG_M

Zokhov island would fall within it.
"The De Long Islands were once major hills within the Great Arctic Plain that once formed the northern part of Late Pleistocene “Beringia” between Siberia and Alaska during the Last Glacial Maximum (Late Weichselian Epoch). These islands are what remains of about 1.6 million square kilometres (620 thousand square miles) of the formally subaerial Great Arctic Plain that now lies submerged below the Arctic Ocean and East Siberian Sea. At this plain's greatest extent during the Last Glacial Maximum, sea level was 100–120 m below modern sea level and the coastline was located 700 to 1,000 kilometres (430–620 miles) north of its current position. This plain was neither extensively glaciated during the Late Pleistocene nor during the Last Glacial Maximum because it lay in the rain shadow of the Northern European ice sheet."
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Siberia_DL.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/East_Siberian_Sea_map.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Delong1.PNG

We have evidence of habitation at Zokhov 8000bc about the same time as Motala. So people were indeed living within the current boundary of the Arctic ocean.
http://uralhist.uran.ru/en/pdf/UIV_2(47)_Pitulko_et_al.pdf
"ancientmost antropological remains ever found in the High Arctic that date to ~8000 years ago. The study of the isolated mtDNA allowed to identify the gender and the degree of kinship of the studied samples. Most of them belonged to haplogroup К."

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 04:01 PM
Point being that EDAR isn't found in West Asians. So the path to Europe based on EDAR appears to be through America, not the other way.

LOL. EDAR not being found in West Asians only proves that it is not found in them and they did not inherit it from East Asians. EDAR is found in East Asians and East Asians went to America. End of story.

parasar
05-29-2016, 04:02 PM
LOL. EDAR not being found in West Asians only proves that it is not found in them and they did not inherit it from East Asians. EDAR is found in East Asians and East Asians went to America. End of story.

EDAR is found at present in East Asians.
We need to show it was present in them prior to 12600ybp (the age of Anzick1).

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 04:21 PM
If you see my response in post 140, I admit that it possible that EDAR could have arisen among East Asians.
But as the authors say, it is thought to have arisen in East Asia, not known.
They do not even hint at a proposal that it could have come from Native Americans.


Anzick1 is the earliest known oldest sample with EDAR, and at time it was possibly not fixed in Amerindians as he is hetero
Anzick1 has an East Asian element.
Motala EDAR samples do not have an East Asian element.
Anzick-1 is a Native American and there is evidence that Native Americans had been in America for 1,000 years prior to Anzick-1 so it is only logical to conclude that all Native Americans already had EDAR.
All Native Americans have an East Asian element which is expected since they come from East Asia.
Motala having EDAR but not having an East Asian element isn't proof of gene flow from America to Sweden.


So it could follow that the EDAR in Anzick1 came from its non East Asian portion.
Then East Asians also get EDAR from non-East Asian ancestry and it proves nothing about gene flow since Native Americans ancestors passed through East Asia before arriving in America.

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 04:28 PM
I see what you're saying, since it was weeded out of Europeans, it could have been weeded out of West Asians. However, we do have evidence connecting EDAR to European hunter gathers in a location that I suggest arrived from an EDAR region( America ). We don't have evidence for the other direction.
The ancestors of Native Americans had to pass through East Asia then on to America. We don't know who had EDAR first but it was someone common to Motala HG, East Asians, South Asians, and Native Americans. That does not mean Native Americans went to Europe. It means the ancestors of Native Americans who lived prior to the existence of Native Americans also had descendants in Europe. Do you know to create genealogical trees? They aren't straight lines unless it is just a direct male or direct female line you are drawing out.

parasar
05-29-2016, 04:37 PM
They do not even hint at a proposal that it could have come from Native Americans.


Anzick-1 is a Native American and there is evidence that Native Americans had been in America for 1,000 years prior to Anzick-1 so it is only logical to conclude that all Native Americans already had EDAR.
...


They likely did not as it was not yet fixed in them, as I had mentioned Anzick-1 was EDAR and ancestral too.
As the maps I posted show there were no separate Americas in that time-frame. Much of N. America and Europe were still under ice while Beringia was a vast plain now under water that was not extensively glaciated.

Chad Rohlfsen
05-29-2016, 05:02 PM
Motala and EHG have minor East Asian. There's no migration between Europe and America. That's ridiculous.

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 05:35 PM
EDAR is found at present in East Asians.
We need to show it was present in them prior to 12600ybp (the age of Anzick1).
No, you need to prove it wasn't in any East Asian prior to 12,600 ybp in order to prove EDAR in Native Americans does not come from East Asians. You also need to prove it was not anywhere outside of America prior to 18,000 years ago which is about when the subclades of Native Americans arose. Then you would also have to show how EDAR got into Motala from Native Americans without Native American DNA at an appreciable level. If they lost NA admixture then they would have lost the EDAR gene also.

EDAR also exists in South Asians at frequencies of up to 65%. http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/10/26/molbev.msq288.short?rss=1

It is quite a leap of faith to believe that Native Americans are the common ancestor to all of the people that have EDAR.

Until tangible evidence can be presented to show otherwise there is a common ancestor to South Asians, East Asians, Native Americans, and Motala HGs that had EDAR and the ancestor lived prior to the migration of the people that populated America.

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 05:48 PM
They likely did not as it was not yet fixed in them, as I had mentioned Anzick-1 was EDAR and ancestral too.If he was EDAR he had the gene.


As the maps I posted show there were no separate Americas in that time-frame. Much of N. America and Europe were still under ice while Beringia was a vast plain now under water that was not extensively glaciated.Maps don't prove a presence of a gene and they don't prove direction of gene flow. Only the DNA of specimens prove the existence of a gene. There is a logical conclusion based on the available data and that logical conclusion isn't the one that you are proposing.

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 05:50 PM
By the way what is theory on how mtDNA M got to NW Europe? Present with U2 and Y C1a, C1b, to boot.

Along with the Villabuna R-1b, the M findings in both the Posth (La Rochette, Goyet) and the Fu (Ostuni) papers was quite surprising.
"We unexpectedly find mtDNA lineage M in individuals prior to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). This lineage is absent in contemporary Europeans, although it is found at high frequency in modern Asians, Australasians, and Native Americans."

You need to provide the academic studies that have found mtDNA M, not mtDNA C or mtDNA D, that exists in Native Americans and proven to be pre-Colombian.

parasar
05-29-2016, 06:53 PM
If he was EDAR he had the gene.

Maps don't prove a presence of a gene and they don't prove direction of gene flow. Only the DNA of specimens prove the existence of a gene. There is a logical conclusion based on the available data and that logical conclusion isn't the one that you are proposing.

Only ancient DNA can prove the direction of gene flow and right now there is no evidence that EDAR existed anywhere prior to the Americas.

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 06:56 PM
Only ancient DNA can prove the direction of gene flow and right now there is no evidence that EDAR existed anywhere prior to the Americas.

LOL. That's only because not enough ancient specimens outside of the Americas have been tested. This is a very simple fact that you continue to willingly ignore which points to a bias.

parasar
05-29-2016, 07:00 PM
You need to provide the academic studies that have found mtDNA M, not mtDNA C or mtDNA D, that exists in Native Americans and proven to be pre-Colombian.

Nowhere did I claim that mtDNA M in Europe was connected to the Americas, it was a query on its provenance - that's all.
As far as xC,D M in the Americas:
https://public.wsu.edu/~bmkemp/publications/pubs/Malhi_et_al_2007.pdf

parasar
05-29-2016, 07:03 PM
LOL. That's only because not enough ancient specimens outside of the Americas have been tested. This is a very simple fact that you continue to willingly ignore which points to a bias.

I can only go by what evidence we have not what may come up. The bias may be in the available samples, not my interpretation.

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 07:26 PM
I can only go by what evidence we have not what may come up. The bias may be in the available samples, not my interpretation.
Absolutely false. You are proposing that since the oldest ancient specimen that has the EDAR gene was in a Native American it is evidence that EDAR in Asia and Motala is from Native Americans. You are proposing that without ever mentioning that there isn't any ancient Asian DNA other than the low coverage Mal'ta (MA-1) We wouldn't even be having this discussion if that weren't a hypothesis that you were entertaining while willfully ignoring the obvious.

parasar
05-29-2016, 07:41 PM
Absolutely false. You are proposing that since the oldest ancient specimen that has the EDAR gene was in a Native American it is evidence that EDAR in Asia and Motala is from Native Americans. You are proposing that without ever mentioning that there isn't any ancient Asian DNA other than the low coverage Mal'ta (MA-1) We wouldn't even be having this discussion if that weren't a hypothesis that you were entertaining while willfully ignoring the obvious.

To repeat: "If you see my response in post 140, I admit that it possible that EDAR could have arisen among East Asians.
But as the authors say, it is thought to have arisen in East Asia, not known."

Time and again, ancient dna has proven pre-conceived notions to be wrong. I may also be wrong on EDAR, so I will wait for the proof from East Asia older than 12600ybp.

ArmandoR1b
05-29-2016, 07:48 PM
To repeat: "If you see my response in post 140, I admit that it possible that EDAR could have arisen among East Asians.
But as the authors say, it is thought to have arisen in East Asia, not known."
It doesn't have to have arisen in East Asia for it to not have arisen in Native Americans. It's a very simple concept.


Time and again, ancient dna has proven pre-conceived notions to be wrong. I may also be wrong on EDAR, so I will wait for the proof from East Asia older than 12600ybp.
You can wait but it doesn't even have to be from East Asians and your hypothesis that EDAR that exists outside of the Americas originates from Native Americans will never be the mainstream hypothesis of academics for a logical reason.

Chad Rohlfsen
05-29-2016, 08:11 PM
EDAR increases sweat glands and decreases body hair. Hair on the head is thicker and less numerous. These are tropical adaptations of early East Asians. Just wait and see. I'll bet it's over 30kyo.

parasar
05-29-2016, 08:13 PM
It doesn't have to have arisen in East Asia for it to not have arisen in Native Americans. It's a very simple concept.

...

I agree. Inner Asia is also possible.

From modern DNA we get a calculated time-frame of about 10,700 years for fixation.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0002209.g001

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0002209.g004
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0002209#pone-0002209-g001

Vladimir Diakoff
05-30-2016, 02:03 PM
It's a very interesting hypothesis. I have followed German Dziebel's work for a while now (mostly, his Indo-European studies). I'm Russian and I have read his Russian publications, too. He seems to postulate a simple migration or two out of the Americas across the conventional Bering Strait to explain "Amerindian" genetic signatures in East Asians and in Western Europeans. Why do you think that a migration from North America to Europe across an alternative geographic route, namely the Atlantic, needs to be postulated?

BTW, I tried to post a comment or two on one of his websites - he never cleared them and never responded. I don't know why that is, but you may be luckier.

McCown
05-30-2016, 10:24 PM
Why do you think that a migration from North America to Europe across an alternative geographic route, namely the Atlantic, needs to be postulated?



A few ancient NE Siberian/Asian genetic lines managed to explode in NW Europe after a long bottleneck. They managed to get to Europe without leaving much of a genetic trace across Central Eurasia. Europeans share DNA with Native Americans. To me, the puzzle pieces seem to fit into place with this hypothesis. The age of the haplogroups mentioned are very consistent with Ice Age migrations which would have made a American Arctic migration into NW Europe possible. It explains Y haplogroups R1, Q1a2 and mtDNA C1 and X2. It also helps make sense of EDAR gene being present in both hunter gather populations. Autosomal DNA studies have found links of Europeans to Native Americans. The conventional wisdom is they share this DNA because it split before going into America. I am suggesting it's because they migrated through North America.

Vladimir Diakoff
05-30-2016, 11:44 PM
Yes, this makes a lot of sense. You are just shifting the epicenter of migration to Western Europe and to South America from Northeast Asia to North America where the said lineages are actually well attested. This reminds me of one of Dziebel's hypotheses that he discussed with one Max Lushington, namely that if Amerindians are to be deemed admixed, then this admixture between would-be East Asians and would-be West Eurasians (or Ancient North Eurasians, or ANE) had happened in North America after these two previously unadmixed Amerindian populations left North America to go to West Eurasia and East Asia. http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/2015/07/amerindians-are-even-more-genetically-diverse-and-older-than-we-thought/.

Xuipa
05-31-2016, 03:39 AM
The tree has only Europeans on it. You can find members of all those branches in the Middle East, too. Heck, you could find them all in China, with the exception of V88 - but then you can find PH1165 in China, and that branches off even earlier.


yet you do not consider these in Asia to have come from Europeans ... what Europeans never traded and screwed with the chinese ever ? isn't that intellectually dishonest! you apply one set of standards to china and another to the Americas! that is dishonest at best.
kind of like how you all have NOT even started looking in the new world for the proven to be a minimum of 1000000 missing offspring of asians slaves, railroad workers , pearl divers rice field slaves just to name but a few and all these came to the " new world "
after columbus and that doesn't even include the Ming dynasty who probably got here even a few days before Columbus!
the intellectually dishonest use these people's dna to cherry pick
" real native americans ( mostly mexicans.. ) this whole discussion is only for the terminally ignorant and dishonest in the first place.

Megalophias
05-31-2016, 04:35 AM
yet you do not consider these in Asia to have come from Europeans ... what Europeans never traded and screwed with the chinese ever ? isn't that intellectually dishonest! you apply one set of standards to china and another to the Americas! that is dishonest at best.
kind of like how you all have NOT even started looking in the new world for the proven to be a minimum of 1000000 missing offspring of asians slaves, railroad workers , pearl divers rice field slaves just to name but a few and all these came to the " new world "
after columbus and that doesn't even include the Ming dynasty who probably got here even a few days before Columbus!
the intellectually dishonest use these people's dna to cherry pick
" real native americans ( mostly mexicans.. ) this whole discussion is only for the terminally ignorant and dishonest in the first place.

What on earth are you talking about?

McCown
05-31-2016, 01:24 PM
yet you do not consider these in Asia to have come from Europeans ... what Europeans never traded and screwed with the chinese ever ? isn't that intellectually dishonest! you apply one set of standards to china and another to the Americas! that is dishonest at best.
kind of like how you all have NOT even started looking in the new world for the proven to be a minimum of 1000000 missing offspring of asians slaves, railroad workers , pearl divers rice field slaves just to name but a few and all these came to the " new world "
after columbus and that doesn't even include the Ming dynasty who probably got here even a few days before Columbus!
the intellectually dishonest use these people's dna to cherry pick
" real native americans ( mostly mexicans.. ) this whole discussion is only for the terminally ignorant and dishonest in the first place.

We're discussing Ice age / Stone age migrations. The above cultures didn't migrate until much later. The ancient China / India branch of R1b is interesting, but I have a feeling that either they are a result of European nomads continuing east( who circled the globe ) or that R1b back migrated from Bering or R1b split before entering America. It's difficult to know which of the above scenarios happened without more data.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 12:37 PM
Only ancient DNA can prove the direction of gene flow and right now there is no evidence that EDAR existed anywhere prior to the Americas.

This makes sense to me. Interestingly, the "Mongoloid" skull shape, too, shows up in the Americas first and only about 7000 YBP in East Asia. Wikipedia writes: "In 1999, Peter Brown of the Department of Anthropology and Paleoanthropology at the University of New England evaluated three sites with early East Asian modern human skeletal remains (Liujiang, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China; Shandingdong Man of (but not Peking Man) Zhoukoudian's Upper Cave; and Minatogawa in Okinawa) dated to between 10,175 to 33,200 years ago, and finds lack of support for the conventional designation of skeletons from this period as "Proto-Mongoloid". He stated that "The colonisation of the Americas by 11 kyr indicates an earlier date for the appearance of distinctively East Asian features, however, the earliest unequivocal evidence for anatomically East Asian people on the Asian mainland remains at 7000 years BP." He saw this as "possibility that migration across the Bering Strait went in two directions and the first morphological Mongoloids evolved in the Americas." [48]"

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 01:12 PM
I really wanted to add this image to this thread. If I understand it correctly, there is a genetic componet that looks a whole lot like the dispersion of mtDNA haplogroup X and YDNA R1 entering into the admix from America to Europe. ie...first green to purple( Russia to america ) then... purple to green( American to Europe/Russia ). Do I understand this correctly. This seems like very good supporting evidence.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.2332v1.pdf
http://i46.tinypic.com/slppbt.jpg

I don't understand how they build those trees with "admixture edges": why can't the Amerindian-East Asian connection be an "admixture edge", while the Amerindian-West European connection be the "genealogical link"? Does it simply mean that Amerindians share genetic material with both West Europeans and with East Asians (so the "admixture edge" has the same "genealogical status" as the genealogical branches on this tree), whereas East Asians and West Europeans don't share anything special with each other? If this is the case, it would mean that Amerindians are simply more upstream from both East Asians and West Europeans. No need for an "admixture edge".

On hg X, I read that the versions of X found in South Siberia are products of a Bronze Age back-migration from the Caucasus and not retentions from the time when East Asians and Amerindians split up. Also, hg X is closely related to hg A (they even share one mutation in common that's specific only to them within the overall N cluster of lineages - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11553319). hg A is very frequent in the Americas but is rare in East Asia and non-existent in Europe. Hg X is widely spread in North America, absent in East Asia but is found in Western Europe. So hgs X and A have diametrically opposing geographic distributions in the Old World but share the same North American provenance in the New World. This supports the idea that a migration from America went to East Asia and to Western Europe, not just to Western Europe. This would make the Bering Strait a more likely geographic bridge for the (boreal) dispersal into Western Europe. No need for an "Atlantic" one.

ArmandoR1b
06-01-2016, 02:32 PM
I agree. Inner Asia is also possible.

From modern DNA we get a calculated time-frame of about 10,700 years for fixation.

They also say the following -

This estimate involves several assumptions (see Materials and Methods) and should be interpreted with caution.

Additionally, study is from May 21, 2008. The following study is from 2014 Feb 14 so it's newer and presumably more accurate - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575602/


Single Origin of 370A in Central China

Using both newly generated and publicly available data, we examined 280 SNPs flanking the 370A SNP in 51 worldwide populations in order to assess the origin of 370A. Haplotype analysis supports a single origin of the derived allele (Figure 1A), with the mutation lying on a unique, nearly unbroken haplotype extending more than 100 kb among both East Asians and Native Americans (Figure S1).
Figure 1
Figure 1
Origins of 370A

To estimate the allele’s geographic and temporal origin, we performed more than one million spatially explicit demic forward simulations modeling the appearance and spread of 370A in Asia (Itan et al., 2009) (Supplemental Information S1). We used approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) (Beaumont et al., 2002) to compare simulated to observed allele frequencies and to estimate key evolutionary and demographic parameters (Fagundes et al., 2007; Itan et al., 2009; Ray et al., 2010). This analysis estimated the 370A allele originated in central China (Figure 1B) between 13,175 and 39,575 years BP (95% confidence interval (CI)), with a mode of 35,300 years BP and a median of 30,925 years BP. The estimated selection coefficient has a 95% CI between 0.030 and 0.186, with a mode of 0.122, and a median of 0.114 (Figures S2–4, Table S1–S4, and Supplemental Information S1).

As a separate calculation of the age of 370A, we performed a maximum likelihood inference analysis using the allele frequency spectrum of 1,677 nearby SNPs in present day Han Chinese (Supplemental Information S2) (Chen, 2012). This method provided similar estimates of the allele age (95% CI: 34,775–38,208 years BP; maximum likelihood estimation (MLE): 36,490 years BP,) and selection intensity (95% CI: 0.0657–0.0831; MLE: 0.0744; Figure S5).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575602/figure/F1/

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 02:40 PM
They also say the following -

This estimate involves several assumptions (see Materials and Methods) and should be interpreted with caution.

Additionally, study is from May 21, 2008. The following study is from 2014 Feb 14 so it's newer and presumably more accurate - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575602/



https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575602/figure/F1/

Judging by the way they phrased it "To estimate the allele’s geographic and temporal origin, we performed more than one million spatially explicit demic forward simulations modeling the appearance and spread of 370A in Asia," they may not have even considered America as a possible source of this mutation. The "probability density map" in Fig. 1, too, seems to be focused on Asia only.

parasar
06-01-2016, 03:07 PM
This makes sense to me. Interestingly, the "Mongoloid" skull shape, too, shows up in the Americas first and only about 7000 YBP in East Asia. Wikipedia writes: "In 1999, Peter Brown of the Department of Anthropology and Paleoanthropology at the University of New England evaluated three sites with early East Asian modern human skeletal remains (Liujiang, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China; Shandingdong Man of (but not Peking Man) Zhoukoudian's Upper Cave; and Minatogawa in Okinawa) dated to between 10,175 to 33,200 years ago, and finds lack of support for the conventional designation of skeletons from this period as "Proto-Mongoloid". He stated that "The colonisation of the Americas by 11 kyr indicates an earlier date for the appearance of distinctively East Asian features, however, the earliest unequivocal evidence for anatomically East Asian people on the Asian mainland remains at 7000 years BP." He saw this as "possibility that migration across the Bering Strait went in two directions and the first morphological Mongoloids evolved in the Americas." [48]"

Plus now with entry into the Americas postulated well into the 20+ ky range, we have more of a margin to play with.

The way I see it is that the initial migrants into the Americas did not have EDAR nor were particularly 'East Asiatic' looking but were Otomid Sundadonts.

Either by a later influx or alternatively by a change in the Americas/Beringia itself, East Asiatic features spread both in the Americas and in East Asia.

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 03:13 PM
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575602/figure/F1/

While the estimated time of origin of the new paper is likely more accurate, the model they used restricted the possible point of origin to East Eurasia, so it couldn't come up with America. It could probably have come up with far northeast Asia, though. Not that I'd particularly trust this kind of simulation.

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 03:21 PM
Plus now with entry into the Americas postulated well into the 20+ ky range, we have more of a margin to play with.

The way I see it is that the initial migrants into the Americas did not have EDAR nor were particularly 'East Asiatic' looking but were Otomid Sundadonts.

Either by a later influx or alternatively by a change in the Americas/Beringia itself, East Asiatic features spread both in the Americas and in East Asia.
Or parallel evolution in East Asia and the Americas from the same genetic starting material. Changes in physical features over the Holocene happened pretty much globally.

Turner found that both Paleoindians and modern Amerindians were Sinodonts. Powell argued that Kennewick Man was Sundadont, but even if that were the case (Turner considered his teeth too worn to make the call) he is homozygous derived for EDAR and genetically Native American.

parasar
06-01-2016, 03:27 PM
Or parallel evolution in East Asia and the Americas from the same genetic starting material. Changes in physical features over the Holocene happened pretty much globally.

Turner found that both Paleoindians and modern Amerindians were Sinodonts. Powell argued that Kennewick Man was Sundadont, but even if that were the case (Turner considered his teeth too worn to make the call) he is homozygous derived for EDAR and genetically Native American.

East Asiatic features, I am not sure about, but if I am not mistaken EDAR is on the same background thus indicating a point origin.
Do you know Naia's EDAR state?

ArmandoR1b
06-01-2016, 03:34 PM
On hg X, I read that the versions of X found in South Siberia are products of a Bronze Age back-migration from the Caucasus and not retentions from the time when East Asians and Amerindians split up. Also, hg X is closely related to hg A (they even share one mutation in common that's specific only to them within the overall N cluster of lineages - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11553319). hg A is very frequent in the Americas but is rare in East Asia and non-existent in Europe. Hg X is widely spread in North America, absent in East Asia but is found in Western Europe. So hgs X and A have diametrically opposing geographic distributions in the Old World but share the same North American provenance in the New World. This supports the idea that a migration from America went to East Asia and to Western Europe, not just to Western Europe. This would make the Bering Strait a more likely geographic bridge for the (boreal) dispersal into Western Europe. No need for an "Atlantic" one.
Of the X subclades only X2a and X2g exists in the indigenous people of the Americas. It does not exist anywhere outside of the Americas because it developed there and never left.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1179/2055556315Z.00000000040

http://www.ianlogan.co.uk/sequences_by_group/x2a_genbank_sequences.htm

http://www.ianlogan.co.uk/sequences_by_group/x2g_genbank_sequences.htm

http://www.phylotree.org/mtDNA_seqs.htm

ArmandoR1b
06-01-2016, 03:44 PM
Judging by the way they phrased it "To estimate the allele’s geographic and temporal origin, we performed more than one million spatially explicit demic forward simulations modeling the appearance and spread of 370A in Asia," they may not have even considered America as a possible source of this mutation. The "probability density map" in Fig. 1, too, seems to be focused on Asia only.

Because they used logic. An origin of EDAR in American is nonsense.

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 03:45 PM
I don't think there's any autosomal DNA for Naia.

Yes, they are on the same haplotype background, they are definitely from the same origin, but we don't know what the selection pressure was and when it began. In any case EDAR in itself is only one of many genes affecting sinodonty and Mongoloid phenotype; those are probably just side effects of whatever is really being selected for; and Kennewick Man was morphologically Paleo-American despite being homozygous for it. So clearly we can't use Mongoloid morphology to track EDAR or vice versa.

parasar
06-01-2016, 04:15 PM
I don't think there's any autosomal DNA for Naia.

Yes, they are on the same haplotype background, they are definitely from the same origin, but we don't know what the selection pressure was and when it began. In any case EDAR in itself is only one of many genes affecting sinodonty and Mongoloid phenotype; those are probably just side effects of whatever is really being selected for; and Kennewick Man was morphologically Paleo-American despite being homozygous for it. So clearly we can't use Mongoloid morphology to track EDAR or vice versa.

I think Kennewick is too late, something like the Anzick time-frame or earlier. Naia is about 12500ybp, and I believe work was ongoing on her nuclear DNA but I have not seen any report. Her facial reconstruction does show some E/SE Asiatic features.

Kennewick reconstruction
Smithsonian
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZDVIH0SapZs/UJVYDLYqKqI/AAAAAAAAgDw/g2y1ozi9JG4/s1600/Kennewick-Man_03.jpg

Naia reconstruction
Re-Creation: James Chatters, Applied Paleoscience; Tom McClelland
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/01/first-americans/img/02-naia-facial-reconstruction-580v.jpg

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 04:29 PM
Also, hg X is closely related to hg A (they even share one mutation in common that's specific only to them within the overall N cluster of lineages - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11553319).
You mean the one sample of X and the one sample of A from that 15 year old paper share a mutation specific to them among the 42 samples on that tree. To be precise they are X2b2 and some kind of A2; the mutation A153G is shared by X1'2'3 and A2, not by X and A; and A153G is found in sub-branches of many other haplogroups. So no, A and X are not known to be more related than any other two branches of N.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 04:36 PM
The way I see it is that the initial migrants into the Americas did not have EDAR nor were particularly 'East Asiatic' looking but were Otomid Sundadonts.

Either by a later influx or alternatively by a change in the Americas/Beringia itself, East Asiatic features spread both in the Americas and in East Asia.

Yes, this makes sense to me. Considering that Malta boy is EDAR-ancestral and related to Amerindians, at least some of the earliest Amerindians must have been EDAR-ancestral. Or an EDAR-derived population has been tucked away in Asia or in America for a very long time before expanding out.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 04:42 PM
The mutation A153G is shared by X1'2'3 and A2, not by X and A.

Even better. So Amerindian A2 may be more upstream than the host of East Asian A's then because it's uniquely linked to a whole another lineage X1'2'3. Fascinating! I understand that A153G is a recurrent mutation and hence anything is possible but considering that A and X are the only two N haplogroups found in America and are more widely distributed in North America than in South America (R aside) makes it likely that A153G is a genuine sign of X1'2'3 and A2 forming a phylogenetic clade. There're other one-mutation clades in PhyloTree.

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 04:48 PM
Even better. So Amerindian A2 may be more upstream than the host of East Asian A's then because it's uniquely linked to a whole another lineage X1'2'3. Fascinating! I understand that A153G is a recurrent mutation and hence anything is possible but considering that A and X are the only two N haplogroups found in America and are more widely distributed in North America than in South America (R aside) makes it likely that A153G is a genuine sign of X1'2'3 and A2 forming a phylogenetic clade. There're other one-mutation clades in PhyloTree.
LOL I guess you are Dziebel's sockpuppet, that's such typical parsimony-free Dziebel-logic.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 05:31 PM
LOL I guess you are Dziebel's sockpuppet, that's such typical parsimony-free Dziebel-logic.

I gathered you are trying to be rude but I don't understand what you are saying. What "parsimony-free logic"? I gave you a reference to an academic publication in which A and X form a clade. You yourself updated the data to suggest that it's X1'2'3 and Amerindian-only X2 that form a clade. All good so far. But then you ran out of rational steam and spinned off into a rant. Well done!

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 05:36 PM
I gathered you are trying to be rude but I don't understand what you are saying. What "parsimony-free logic"? I gave you a reference to an academic publication in which A and X form a clade. You yourself updated the data to suggest that it's X1'2'3 and Amerindian-only X2 that form a clade. All good so far. But then you ran out of rational steam and spinned off into a rant. Well done!
Hey, man, I'm just correcting your errors of fact; correcting your errors of logic would be a never-ending task. I summoned you to crack pots with McCown, and serve (hopefully) as an anti-pattern for him, not in a quixotic attempt to educate the ineducable.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 05:40 PM
I'm just correcting your errors of fact.

What errors o'fact? You first said that I'm someone else's sock puppet using "parsimony-free logic". I asked you to clarify. You switched to accusing me of "errors of fact". You are behaving like a moving target.

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 05:51 PM
What errors o'fact? You first said that I'm someone else's sock puppet using "parsimony-free logic". I asked you to clarify. You switched to accusing me of "errors of fact". You are behaving like a moving target.
The error of fact was that A and X share a unique mutation under N. I'm not going to debate parsimony with you; you know what it is. I have nothing further to say on this topic.

ArmandoR1b
06-01-2016, 05:56 PM
Even better. So Amerindian A2 may be more upstream than the host of East Asian A's then because it's uniquely linked to a whole another lineage X1'2'3. Fascinating! I understand that A153G is a recurrent mutation and hence anything is possible but considering that A and X are the only two N haplogroups found in America and are more widely distributed in North America than in South America (R aside) makes it likely that A153G is a genuine sign of X1'2'3 and A2 forming a phylogenetic clade. There're other one-mutation clades in PhyloTree.

mtDNA A2 is very common in Panama http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0038337 and in Ecuador http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356810/ and other South American indigenous groups http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25397700

Only X2a and X2g are indigenous to the Americas.

The dating of the parent haplogroups are older than the proposed entry dates into the Americas and their Native American subclades are estimated to be young enough to have developed in Beringia per Behar et al. (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2024885281/2044552800/mmc1.pdf) and those subclades are not found outside of the Americas except for one specific subclade that has a very limited range.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 06:25 PM
The error of fact was that A and X share a unique mutation under N. I'm not going to debate parsimony with you; you know what it is. I have nothing further to say on this topic.

Ok, I got it now. I didn't know what "sock puppet" means. Well, you are mistaken. I do like reading Dziebel, though. In any case, you did not correct any errors, just made my claim about A and X more specific. And you still owe me an explanation of how all of this is related to parsimony. I know what the word means but I don't know why you used it here.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 06:27 PM
mtDNA A2 is very common in Panama http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0038337 and in Ecuador http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356810/ and other South American indigenous groups http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25397700

Only X2a and X2g are indigenous to the Americas.

The dating of the parent haplogroups are older than the proposed entry dates into the Americas and their Native American subclades are estimated to be young enough to have developed in Beringia per Behar et al. (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2024885281/2044552800/mmc1.pdf) and those subclades are not found outside of the Americas except for one specific subclade that has a very limited range.

Thanks. I remember reading, though, that hg A increases in frequencies from South America to North America and I think it reaches fixation in some Northern Amerindians.

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 09:06 PM
Ok, I got it now. I didn't know what "sock puppet" means. Well, you are mistaken. I do like reading Dziebel, though. In any case, you did not correct any errors, just made my claim about A and X more specific. And you still owe me an explanation of how all of this is related to parsimony. I know what the word means but I don't know why you used it here.
I apologize if you aren't Dziebel's sock.

A2 and X1'2'3 cannot form a clade with each other against *other* branches of A and X, because A and X each have several stable coding-region mutations shared by all of their own branches and none of the other's branches. They'd have to have all either have back-mutated or recurred, which is highly unparsimonious compared to having just occurred once in the A and X branches.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-01-2016, 09:42 PM
I apologize if you aren't Dziebel's sock.

A2 and X1'2'3 cannot form a clade with each other against *other* branches of A and X, because A and X each have several stable coding-region mutations shared by all of their own branches and none of the other's branches. They'd have to have all either have back-mutated or recurred, which is highly unparsimonious compared to having just occurred once in the A and X branches.


I apologize if you aren't Dziebel's sock.

A2 and X1'2'3 cannot form a clade with each other against *other* branches of A and X, because A and X each have several stable coding-region mutations shared by all of their own branches and none of the other's branches. They'd have to have all either have back-mutated or recurred, which is highly unparsimonious compared to having just occurred once in the A and X branches.

Ok, now I understand what you mean. Thanks. But, listen, why can't it be that A153G first happened on a post-N lineage, then it split into X1'2'3 vs. A2? That's when all the X- and A-defining mutations happened. Then all the non-A2 lineages broke off, flipped the 153 site and developed their unique mutations and then A2 developed its own unique mutations, while keeping the 153 mutation. It's really about the order in which mutations happened, not whether there was a lot of non-parsimonious changes.

Megalophias
06-01-2016, 10:30 PM
Ok, now I understand what you mean. Thanks. But, listen, why can't it be that A153G first happened on a post-N lineage, then it split into X1'2'3 vs. A2? That's when all the X- and A-defining mutations happened. Then all the non-A2 lineages broke off, flipped the 153 site and developed their unique mutations and then A2 developed its own unique mutations, while keeping the 153 mutation. It's really about the order in which mutations happened, not whether there was a lot of non-parsimonious changes.

Sure, what you are trying to do is make X2 and A2 primary branches of A and X under A'X. The basal nodes of A and X are only defined by unstable coding-region mutations that back-mutate in some branches. I doubt PhyloTree's preferred topology is very strongly favoured over alternatives, though realistically you'd have to ask a computer the relative likelihoods. You could shift 153G and a couple others around and make X2 (better for you than X1'2'3) and A2 primary branches of A'X, which would be defined by a couple of coding mutations under N.

A and X wouldn't be A2 and X2 though, those still have their defining mutations apart from 153G. Which means, even having cherry-picked this particular tree, it's still no evidence for Out of America. Suppose A'X formed from N, moved into America, and split into A and X there. X splits up and X2 and X1'3'4 move out of America, across North Asia, diversify in West Eurasia, and die out in North Asia, while X1'3'4 dies out and X2 survives in America. Meanwhile pre-A1'3-26 moves into Asia and diversifies there, while A2 diversifies in the New World. Alternatively, A'X forms in Eurasia, A and X split up in Eurasia, X2 and A2 move to America, X dies out in North Asia. There's no reason to make a detour to America (except for A2 in Chukotka of course).

McCown
06-02-2016, 01:07 AM
mtDNA A2 is very common in Panama http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0038337 and in Ecuador http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356810/ and other South American indigenous groups http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25397700

Only X2a and X2g are indigenous to the Americas.

The dating of the parent haplogroups are older than the proposed entry dates into the Americas and their Native American subclades are estimated to be young enough to have developed in Beringia per Behar et al. (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2024885281/2044552800/mmc1.pdf) and those subclades are not found outside of the Americas except for one specific subclade that has a very limited range.

The ages that I've seen for X2 are 20K - 25K YBP. That lines up with my hypothesis. As shown in my migration map in post #123, the other X2 branches exploded into Europe. Only X2a/g managed to establish long lasting roots in America. X2a/g are evidence that X2 was in America, the sister clades kept migrating east and eventually exploded into Europe. Where else has X2 branched off on the way to Europe other than in America?

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_X_mtDNA.shtml#subclades

9481

Vladimir Diakoff
06-02-2016, 01:26 AM
Sure, what you are trying to do is make X2 and A2 primary branches of A and X under A'X. The basal nodes of A and X are only defined by unstable coding-region mutations that back-mutate in some branches. I doubt PhyloTree's preferred topology is very strongly favoured over alternatives, though realistically you'd have to ask a computer the relative likelihoods. You could shift 153G and a couple others around and make X2 (better for you than X1'2'3) and A2 primary branches of A'X, which would be defined by a couple of coding mutations under N.

A and X wouldn't be A2 and X2 though, those still have their defining mutations apart from 153G. Which means, even having cherry-picked this particular tree, it's still no evidence for Out of America. Suppose A'X formed from N, moved into America, and split into A and X there. X splits up and X2 and X1'3'4 move out of America, across North Asia, diversify in West Eurasia, and die out in North Asia, while X1'3'4 dies out and X2 survives in America. Meanwhile pre-A1'3-26 moves into Asia and diversifies there, while A2 diversifies in the New World. Alternatively, A'X forms in Eurasia, A and X split up in Eurasia, X2 and A2 move to America, X dies out in North Asia. There's no reason to make a detour to America (except for A2 in Chukotka of course).

Yes, of course, gene trees can be compatible with different population scenarios. But the fact that only in the New World that we have basal A'X lineages occurring in the same geographic area (North America) and sometimes in the same population (e.g., Nul-chath-nulth), whereas in the Old World their descendants are split into East Asian (A) and West Eurasian (X) clusters speaks a world about where this A'X originated.

You may counter that the N cluster must have arrived to the New World prior to the split of A'X, so it's not parsimonious to create a back-and-forth between the Old World and the New World when one can center everything in Siberia. That's what you essentially proposed above. But, notably, some hg A2 lineages (A2d1) have 9-bp deletion, which otherwise is widely found on hg B in the Americas. If we reorder the mutations within the broader N/R cluster the sharing of 9bp deletion between an Amerindian-specific A2 lineage and Amerindian-Oceanian B lineages may mean that there was an ancient A'X'B cluster whose basal lineages are best represented in the New World but Siberia is largely lacking not just X but B lineages as well.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-02-2016, 01:54 AM
Where else has X2 branched off on the way to Europe other than in America?

I completely agree with you methodologically here. We can't use East Asia or Africa or any other place where X is not found - as centers from which those lineages presumably migrated to Europe and America. So your logic is spot on. It's either from Europe to America or from America to Europe.

GailT
06-02-2016, 03:21 AM
Yes, of course, gene trees can be compatible with different population scenarios. But the fact that only in the New World that we have basal A'X lineages

There is no A'X lineage. Check the Phylotree (link (http://phylotree.org/tree/index.htm)) and you'll see that A and X do not share a defining mutation. The same mutation can occur independently in many different subclades (especially for markers in the hypervariable region like 153) so finding the same mutation in two subclades in different haplogroups does not indicate some sort of connection between those two haplogroups. Rather, it means that this mutation occurred independently in those two subclades. You need to look at the entire set of mutations that define A and X and each of their subclades at each level. If you study the Phylotree you will find many cases in which the same mutation occurred independently in different haplogroups and subclades.

Megalophias
06-02-2016, 03:43 AM
You may counter that the N cluster must have arrived to the New World prior to the split of A'X, so it's not parsimonious to create a back-and-forth between the Old World and the New World when one can center everything in Siberia. That's what you essentially proposed above. But, notably, some hg A2 lineages (A2d1) have 9-bp deletion, which otherwise is widely found on hg B in the Americas. If we reorder the mutations within the broader N/R cluster the sharing of 9bp deletion between an Amerindian-specific A2 lineage and Amerindian-Oceanian B lineages may mean that there was an ancient A'X'B cluster whose basal lineages are best represented in the New World but Siberia is largely lacking not just X but B lineages as well.
When you've published your revolutionary new phylogeny let us know about the paper, okay? Until then we'll just have to go with all of the existing studies which say you are wrong.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-02-2016, 12:29 PM
There is no A'X lineage. Check the Phylotree (link) and you'll see that A and X do not share a defining mutation. The same mutation can occur independently in many different subclades (especially for markers in the hypervariable region like 153) so finding the same mutation in two subclades in different haplogroups does not indicate some sort of connection between those two haplogroups. .

If you look up PhyloTree, you'll see that A153G is currently defining the X1'2'3 clade as a single mutation. This clade spans lineages from West Asia, Europe and America, which is like half the globe. And, once again, they are linked by just one mutation, the same mutation as I, following Maca-Meyer, proposed to define the A'X (or A2'X1'2'3) clade. Please don't use double standards.

lgmayka
06-02-2016, 02:29 PM
If you look up PhyloTree, you'll see that A153G is currently defining the X1'2'3 clade as a single mutation.
Can X4 give us a hint? Has it been found anywhere other than
Armenia (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/HQ456226)
Turkey (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/JQ245765)
Hungary, Ukraine, and Poland (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/polish/default.aspx?section=mtresults)
?

AJL
06-02-2016, 02:37 PM
Can X4 give us a hint? Has it been found anywhere other than
Armenia (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/HQ456226)
Turkey (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/JQ245765)
Hungary, Ukraine, and Poland (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/polish/default.aspx?section=mtresults)
?

This Russian sample (http://www.mitosearch.org/haplosearch_view.asp?haplo=X&viewuid=XPVXX&p=0) is ambiguous but looks like it might be X4.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-02-2016, 02:55 PM
Can X4 give us a hint?

A hint of what? Sorry I'm not following.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-02-2016, 02:59 PM
When you've published your revolutionary new phylogeny let us know about the paper, okay? Until then we'll just have to go with all of the existing studies which say you are wrong.

If I get a Ph.D. and publish a new mtDNA phylogeny, why would I be talking to you? See, forums are for people like you and me - amateurs with curiosity, hobbyisis with day jobs that don't satisfy our passion for knowledge and abstract matters. You seem to follow along for a while, but then you put on your science soccer fan hat with clapping hands and start yelling at the fans of another soccer club.

Megalophias
06-02-2016, 03:40 PM
If I get a Ph.D. and publish a new mtDNA phylogeny, why would I be talking to you? See, forums are for people like you and me - amateurs with curiosity, hobbyisis with day jobs that don't satisfy our passion for knowledge and abstract matters.
Published or otherwise, it needs to be an actual working phylogeny - all you are doing is speculating that maybe the existing one is wildly wrong because that would be convenient for you. A waste of everyone's time, and I am done wasting my time replying unless there is something substantive to talk about.

McCown
06-02-2016, 04:08 PM
Even better. So Amerindian A2 may be more upstream than the host of East Asian A's then because it's uniquely linked to a whole another lineage X1'2'3. Fascinating! I understand that A153G is a recurrent mutation and hence anything is possible but considering that A and X are the only two N haplogroups found in America and are more widely distributed in North America than in South America (R aside) makes it likely that A153G is a genuine sign of X1'2'3 and A2 forming a phylogenetic clade. There're other one-mutation clades in PhyloTree.

Without knowing more about the DNA region and having access to the raw data it's hard to know if what you're suggesting is plausible. Looking at the tree as it is today, it seems to be a identical mutation on different lines. However, the same environment may have caused the same mutation, which may be indicative of a common region or circumstances that caused that mutation. So if American migration environmental conditions caused this mutation in one line, why not the other?

Megalophias
06-02-2016, 04:32 PM
Without knowing more about the DNA region and having access to the raw data it's hard to know if what you're suggesting is plausible. Looking at the tree as it is today, it seems to be a identical mutation on different lines. However, the same environment may have caused the same mutation, which may be indicative of a common region or circumstances that caused that mutation. So if American migration environmental conditions caused this mutation in one line, why not the other?

The data for every sample on PhyloTree is in GenBank. Just click on the sample name on the right hand side of the page to get its complete mitogenome sequence.

153G is just an ordinary control region transition. If you search for it in the rest of PhyloTree you will see that it shows up in many haplogroups from all over the world.

lgmayka
06-02-2016, 07:29 PM
A hint of what?
The geographical origin and expansion of X, the relationship between X4 and X1'2'3, and the (more distant) relationship between X and A.

Vladimir Diakoff
06-03-2016, 01:19 AM
The geographical origin and expansion of X, the relationship between X4 and X1'2'3, and the (more distant) relationship between X and A.

It's interesting that you bring up X4 which does not have A153G. But then the small cluster of lineages comprising X2g (Ojibwe) and X2l (Iran?) don't have it either. In PhyloTree it's shown as a reverse mutation G153A! So if 153 is so critical for the evolution of this clade, then we can postulate that there was a post-N lineage that developed A153G mutation. Then it split into X and A branches. Then, on the X branch, T195C! mutation happened that's shared between X4 and X2 and mutation T146C! that defines X1'3. Then X4'X2 split into X4'X2g'l by flipping G153A. Then X4'X2g'l split off by developing G1719A, which became the defining mutation for X2.

So we have Amerindian representation at every node of X phylogeny. But the broader point that I'm trying to make is that Northern Amerindians partake in both A and X clades (assuming they are related via 153G), while Old World populations are split into the West Asian clade (X) and East Asian clade (A).

Vladimir Diakoff
06-03-2016, 02:19 AM
Published or otherwise, it needs to be an actual working phylogeny - all you are doing is speculating that maybe the existing one is wildly wrong because that would be convenient for you. A waste of everyone's time, and I am done wasting my time replying unless there is something substantive to talk about.

How do people draw phylogenies? What program do they use? I've seen some done in Excel.

Megalophias
06-03-2016, 03:03 AM
How do people draw phylogenies? What program do they use? I've seen some done in Excel.
There are a bunch of tree-drawing utilities, like FigTree, which take input in the form of a Newick string in text or XML or something like that and spit out a tree for you. For example Trex-online (http://www.trex.uqam.ca/index.php?action=newick&project=trex). The input is usually produced in BEAST or Mr Bayes or some such.

I've never tried it myself, I just use Paint. :)