Genomic Insights into the Demographic History of Southern Chinese

[ybmpark]

Genomic Insights into the Demographic History of Southern Chinese

I thought somebody would set up a new thread for this shocker.

It radically departs from the position that most other Chinese researchers have held.
It posits that there were relatively "pure" East Asians up until very recently and for most East Asians Andaman_HG - like elements are still minor.
According to them East Asians expanded into Southeast Asian territories rather than the other way around(largely).

This is not really incompatible with the prevailing theories but it is incompatible with the more radical ones(like the one held by Li Jin) and Max Planck Inst.'s(because they modeled the split between Tianyuan and Onge in the absence of Mongolian Neolithic etc. that would come later).

[adriyu]

1606439700.png

[Megalophias]

It doesn't look like they included Tianyuan in this paper though. He isn't in the qpGraph in Fig 3A. So we don't know where Mongolian Neolithic would fall in a Tianyuan + Onge related model (unless it's in some other paper).

[ybmpark]

It doesn't look like they included Tianyuan in this paper though. ...

If you look at 3A, Andaman-Mongolian split is roughly comparable to WHG-ANE split in terms of time depth.
So my guess is that Tianyuan is an outlier belonging to Early East Eurasian instead of Early East Asian(like the main component of Alaska_LP).
Tianyuan - > Early East Asian influx is likely but not that certain so Tianyuan may have been omitted altogether for "clarity".

[Bbgum]

Why do you say minor? THe authors say cambodians, laos, thai have almost 50% (third column)

[ybmpark]

Thai, Vietnamese etc. probably acquired the additional Andaman component relatively recently.
Their ancestors in Southern China probably were similar to Ami, Atayal, Tagalog in that coefficient.
By "minor" I meant ~1/3 or less.
Most Han Chinese have less than 30 percent and other East Asians(X Southeast Asians), substantially less.

[ybmpark]

...
So my guess is that Tianyuan is an outlier belonging to Early East Eurasian instead of Early East Asian(like the main component of Alaska_LP).

Tianyuan may be Early East Asian and basal to both northern and southern East Asians, forming a clade with Alaska_LP.
Or Tianyuan is basal to both East Asians and Andaman_HG as suggested by Max Planck Inst. people.

Southern East Asians acquired Andaman_HG component without exception while some northern East Asians remained relatively unadmixed even to this day.

[davit]

If you look at 3A, Andaman-Mongolian split is roughly comparable to WHG-ANE split in terms of time depth.
So my guess is that Tianyuan is an outlier belonging to Early East Eurasian instead of Early East Asian(like the main component of Alaska_LP).
Tianyuan - > Early East Asian influx is likely but not that certain so Tianyuan may have been omitted altogether for "clarity".

Could you explain the difference between East Eurasian and East Asian in this context?

[ybmpark]

Australian aborigines and Papua NewGuneans are East Eurasian but not East Asian.
Likewise for Onge and Ancestral South Asians etc.

[VladimirTaraskin]

1606439700.png

Do you have any suggestions about the subclades of Y haplogroups that predominate in these admixtures ?