Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: East Eurasian internal branching

  1. #1
    Banned
    Posts
    230
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Sino-Tibetan, Tungusic
    Y-DNA (P)
    O1-M119

    East Eurasian internal branching

    McColl et al. 2018 models East Asians as roughly 75% Australasian and 25% Tianyuan, while Xia et al. 2019 models East Asians as roughly 75% Tianyuan and 25% Australasian. What could account for the discrepancy? Xia seems to have included Siberian and Steppe populations such as Devil's Gate.

    https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6397/88#F1
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...0903v1.full#T5

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ren For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-16-2019),  parasar (12-26-2019)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,778
    Sex
    Location
    Calgary
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2-S2361 < L801
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2b(1)
    mtDNA (P)
    H3

    Canada
    Interesting question. Complex admixture graphs seem really opaque to me, there so many possible relationships that could affect the outcome. McColl et al's models include archaic humans while the Xia et al's do not (6-7% Neanderthal in main Eurasian branch is considerably more than usual estimates); McColl et al have Kostenki as outgroup to East Eurasians while Xia et al have Ust' Ishim; and they have different modern samples too. For instance, supposing East Asians (including Tianyuan) but not Australasians had an affinity to Ust' Ishim, then that might constrain high Tianyuan input in the one graph; conversely, if Tianyuan had an affinity to Kostenki 14 that other East Eurasians didn't, that could force low Tianyuan in the other graph. At least, I think that's how it would work?

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Megalophias For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-16-2019),  palamede (12-21-2019)

  5. #3
    Banned
    Posts
    230
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Sino-Tibetan, Tungusic
    Y-DNA (P)
    O1-M119

    McColl stated Tianyuan and East Asians formed a clad in D-stats, which seems a bit contradictory to their qpGraph tree, to my limited understanding..

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to ren For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-16-2019)

  7. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,778
    Sex
    Location
    Calgary
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2-S2361 < L801
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2b(1)
    mtDNA (P)
    H3

    Canada
    A clade against who? I don't think they form a clade against Onge. Could be against Papuans, but the Denisovan could make up for that.
    Last edited by Megalophias; 12-15-2019 at 08:30 PM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Megalophias For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-16-2019)

  9. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    402
    Sex
    Omitted
    Location
    Bermuda Triangle

    Puerto Rico Cuba
    You can perhaps find more information in this article: The GenomeAsia 100K Project enables genetic discoveries across Asia


    On here, https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...93-z/figures/5, you can find some split times for several South Asian, American, East Asian and Oceanian populations.

    There's more information in the supplementary material (supplementary note 3, Figure S3.3):


    We found that the most ancient lineages in Southeast Asia and Oceania are the Melanesians and Negritos, who show substructure from ~40 kya. Within the Negrito groups, there is evidence of separation around 20 30 kya. The large estimated population sizes for Philippine and Malay Negrito groups from 10 20 kya suggests they had prosperous settlements in the region. In contrast the Andamanese show reduced population size estimates since their split from other Negrito groups, possibly due to their geographic isolation (Figure S4.2C). The separation among Indian groups gradually occurred from between 10 24 kya, which is consistent with previous studies (Basu et al. 2016). The split of Northeast Asians with Austronesians is estimated at 6 23 kya, earlier than the estimated split time between Northeast Asians and Mongolians at 12 16 kya. Therefore, Koreans, Japanese and Mongolians likely share recent common ancestry.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Milkyway For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-16-2019)

  11. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,119
    Sex
    Location
    Central Florida
    Ethnicity
    Greek + Anglo-American
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-PF5197
    mtDNA (M)
    J1b1a

    Greece United States of America
    Even with Tianyuan, the Hoabinhians, Devil's Gate, Kolyma, and Jomon in tow, a solid East Eurasian phylogeny is still frustratingly evasive.

    Do Australo-Melanesians, AASI, Andamanese, Semang, and Philippine Negritos constitute an "Australasian clade," even if a weak one? I'm not sure. One confounding factor is that Philippine Negritos have Austronesian ancestry and Semang (Malaysian Negritos) have Austro-Asiatic ancestry. But even in admixture runs, much of the ancestry of all Negritos (even accounting for Neolithic East Asian admixture) seems to come out as East Asian-related rather than Australo-Melanesian-related. One look at the Hoabinhian and Andamanese genomes confirms this. I wonder if it might have something to do with these groups being ancestral to East Asians in some way (and have retained some drift-sharing with them), or perhaps they have some basal East Asian admixture that Papuans lack.
    Ελευθερία ή θάνατος.

  12. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Michalis Moriopoulos For This Useful Post:

     Dieu (12-20-2019),  Hando (12-16-2019),  palamede (12-21-2019),  pgbk87 (12-27-2019),  Radboud (12-16-2019),  Targum (12-16-2019),  Tsakhur (10-10-2022)

  13. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    284
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    Even with Tianyuan, the Hoabinhians, Devil's Gate, Kolyma, and Jomon in tow, a solid East Eurasian phylogeny is still frustratingly evasive.

    Do Australo-Melanesians, AASI, Andamanese, Semang, and Philippine Negritos constitute an "Australasian clade," even if a weak one? I'm not sure. One confounding factor is that Philippine Negritos have Austronesian ancestry and Semang (Malaysian Negritos) have Austro-Asiatic ancestry. But even in admixture runs, much of the ancestry of all Negritos (even accounting for Neolithic East Asian admixture) seems to come out as East Asian-related rather than Australo-Melanesian-related. One look at the Hoabinhian and Andamanese genomes confirms this. I wonder if it might have something to do with these groups being ancestral to East Asians in some way (and have retained some drift-sharing with them), or perhaps they have some basal East Asian admixture that Papuans lack.
    Even among the onge and Jarawa ?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-26-2021, 02:54 PM
  2. East Eurasian ancestry in various Turkic populations
    By Alkaevli in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 10-12-2020, 04:58 PM
  3. East Eurasian in 'Tajik people'
    By Kulin in forum General
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 02-12-2019, 05:15 AM
  4. What is South East Eurasian?
    By Lara101 in forum Southern
    Replies: 324
    Last Post: 11-12-2017, 09:50 PM
  5. Replies: 52
    Last Post: 02-18-2015, 10:14 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •