Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Ancient genomic DNA analysis of Jomon people (Kanzawa-Kiriyama 2013)

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    620
    Sex
    Location
    Gallia Cisalpina
    Ethnicity
    Mixed Italian
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA
    E-V65(xCTS194)
    mtDNA
    T2b-T16362C

    Italy

    Ancient genomic DNA analysis of Jomon people (Kanzawa-Kiriyama 2013)


  2. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Passa For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-26-2015),  Hando (06-18-2015),  Kurd (06-26-2015),  Lenny Nero (06-17-2015),  Megalophias (06-17-2015),  palamede (06-19-2015),  parasar (06-18-2015),  Psynome (03-14-2019),  Sein (06-26-2015),  Shamayim (Yesterday),  Táltos (06-28-2015),  VOX (06-17-2015)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    620
    Sex
    Location
    Gallia Cisalpina
    Ethnicity
    Mixed Italian
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA
    E-V65(xCTS194)
    mtDNA
    T2b-T16362C

    Italy

  4. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Passa For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-26-2015),  Hando (06-18-2015),  Lenny Nero (06-17-2015),  Megalophias (06-17-2015),  palamede (06-19-2015),  Sein (06-26-2015)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    620
    Sex
    Location
    Gallia Cisalpina
    Ethnicity
    Mixed Italian
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA
    E-V65(xCTS194)
    mtDNA
    T2b-T16362C

    Italy

  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Passa For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-26-2015),  Hando (06-18-2015),  Lenny Nero (06-17-2015),  Megalophias (06-17-2015),  Sein (06-26-2015)

  7. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    620
    Sex
    Location
    Gallia Cisalpina
    Ethnicity
    Mixed Italian
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA
    E-V65(xCTS194)
    mtDNA
    T2b-T16362C

    Italy
    Looking at the D-stats of the Jomon study (page 180), the ancient Jomons are:

    - More Neanderthal-related than Japanese, French, Han Chinese, Bedouins, Cambodians, Balochis, but less than Melanesians, Dai from South China and Papuans; they are however as Neanderthal-related as Karitiana from South America
    - More Denisovan-related than Bedouins, Cambodians, French, Balochis and Japanese, but less than Melanesians, Papuans, Dai, Han Chinese and Karitiana
    - Less Khoisan-related than French, Balochis, Bedouins and Han Chinese, but more than Karitiana, Cambodians, Dai, Papuans, Melanesians and Japanese
    - More French-related than Cambodians, Dai, Han Chinese, Japanese, Papuans and Melanesians, but less than Balochis, Bedouins and Karitiana
    - More Bedouin-related than Melanesians, Papuans and Dai, but less than Balochis, Cambodians, Karitiana, Japanese and Han Chinese
    - More Balochi-related than Cambodians, Dai, Melanesians and Papuans, but less than Han Chinese, Japanese and Karitiana
    - More Papuan related than Karitiana, but less than Cambodians, Dai, Han Chinese, Japanese and Melanesians

    The final picture can be summarized as follows: Jomons were clearly Eurasian, but their position in the Eurasian landscape is peculiar. They are more European-shifted than all modern East Eurasians, but less than South and West Eurasians. This is not to be undervalued and explained as mere affinity to South Asians, because Han Chinese and Japanese are more Balochi-like than Jomons, yet Jomons are closer to Europeans (French in this case) than Han Chinese and Japanese. Therefore we see here not a simple West Eurasian input, but specifically a European-like affinity of ancient Jomons, considering also that Jomons are less Bedouin-like than most East Eurasians. To accompany this European affinity there is a higher African (Khoisan in this case) affinity with respect to all East Eurasians except Han Chinese. Regarding archaic admixtures, Jomon are only slightly Denisovan-admixed, while their Neanderthal admixture is present at good levels. To conclude, Papuan affinity of Jomons is lower than most East Eurasian groups.
    Last edited by Passa; 06-26-2015 at 10:15 PM.

  8. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Passa For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-26-2015),  Kurd (06-26-2015),  lgmayka (06-27-2015),  Michał (06-27-2015),  nuadha (06-27-2015),  parasar (06-26-2015),  Psynome (03-14-2019),  R.Rocca (06-27-2015),  Rafe (03-14-2019),  Sein (06-26-2015)

  9. #5
    J Man
    Guest
    Indeed the Jomons are quite an interesting ancient group.

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

     Passa (06-27-2015)

  11. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    339

    Quote Originally Posted by Passa View Post
    Looking at the D-stats of the Jomon study (page 180), the ancient Jomons are:

    - More Neanderthal-related than Japanese, French, Han Chinese, Bedouins, Cambodians, Balochis, but less than Melanesians, Dai from South China and Papuans; they are however as Neanderthal-related as Karitiana from South America
    - More Denisovan-related than Bedouins, Cambodians, French, Balochis and Japanese, but less than Melanesians, Papuans, Dai, Han Chinese and Karitiana
    - Less Khoisan-related than French, Balochis, Bedouins and Han Chinese, but more than Karitiana, Cambodians, Dai, Papuans, Melanesians and Japanese
    - More French-related than Cambodians, Dai, Han Chinese, Japanese, Papuans and Melanesians, but less than Balochis, Bedouins and Karitiana
    - More Bedouin-related than Melanesians, Papuans and Dai, but less than Balochis, Cambodians, Karitiana, Japanese and Han Chinese
    - More Balochi-related than Cambodians, Dai, Melanesians and Papuans, but less than Han Chinese, Japanese and Karitiana
    - More Papuan related than Karitiana, but less than Cambodians, Dai, Han Chinese, Japanese and Melanesians

    The final picture can be summarized as follows: Jomons were clearly Eurasian, but their position in the Eurasian landscape is peculiar. They are more European-shifted than all modern East Eurasians, but less than South and West Eurasians. This is not to be undervalued and explained as mere affinity to South Asians, because Han Chinese and Japanese are more Balochi-like than Jomons, yet Jomons are closer to Europeans (French in this case) than Han Chinese and Japanese. Therefore we see here not a simple West Eurasian input, but specifically a European-like affinity of ancient Jomons, considering also that Jomons are less Bedouin-like than most East Eurasians. To accompany this European affinity there is a higher African (Khoisan in this case) affinity with respect to all East Eurasians except Han Chinese. Regarding archaic admixtures, Jomon are only slightly Denisovan-admixed, while their Neanderthal admixture is present at good levels. To conclude, Papuan affinity of Jomons is lower than most East Eurasian groups.
    Thanks for the observations.

    Im having some trouble putting this all into context; after all I'm trying to put it in the context of other adna which is most relevant for west eurasia. Compared to their neighbors the Jomon are more (not literally) french but less balochi and bedouin. This seems like some aversion to ASI. The jomon are more balochi than southeast asians which suggests some ANE affinity? Jomon have less archaic than pacific islands and have a greater ratio of neandertal/denisovan than their neighbors. Does this suggest a migration that didn't go through southeast asia or at least did not in time to mix with denisovans in southeast asia.

    Either way, it seems like the jomon are less the product of the "southern route" (southern india to southeast asia followed by pacific islands) than one would guess by modern uniparental dna.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to nuadha For This Useful Post:

     Passa (06-28-2015)

  13. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    647
    Sex
    Location
    Places
    Ethnicity
    Tamil

    Chola Empire India India Maratha Empire North Korea Kazakhstan Dravida Nadu
    Quote Originally Posted by Passa View Post
    Looking at the D-stats of the Jomon study (page 180), the ancient Jomons are:

    - More Neanderthal-related than Japanese, French, Han Chinese, Bedouins, Cambodians, Balochis, but less than Melanesians, Dai from South China and Papuans; they are however as Neanderthal-related as Karitiana from South America
    - More Denisovan-related than Bedouins, Cambodians, French, Balochis and Japanese, but less than Melanesians, Papuans, Dai, Han Chinese and Karitiana
    - Less Khoisan-related than French, Balochis, Bedouins and Han Chinese, but more than Karitiana, Cambodians, Dai, Papuans, Melanesians and Japanese
    - More French-related than Cambodians, Dai, Han Chinese, Japanese, Papuans and Melanesians, but less than Balochis, Bedouins and Karitiana
    - More Bedouin-related than Melanesians, Papuans and Dai, but less than Balochis, Cambodians, Karitiana, Japanese and Han Chinese
    - More Balochi-related than Cambodians, Dai, Melanesians and Papuans, but less than Han Chinese, Japanese and Karitiana
    - More Papuan related than Karitiana, but less than Cambodians, Dai, Han Chinese, Japanese and Melanesians

    The final picture can be summarized as follows: Jomons were clearly Eurasian, but their position in the Eurasian landscape is peculiar. They are more European-shifted than all modern East Eurasians, but less than South and West Eurasians. This is not to be undervalued and explained as mere affinity to South Asians, because Han Chinese and Japanese are more Balochi-like than Jomons, yet Jomons are closer to Europeans (French in this case) than Han Chinese and Japanese. Therefore we see here not a simple West Eurasian input, but specifically a European-like affinity of ancient Jomons, considering also that Jomons are less Bedouin-like than most East Eurasians. To accompany this European affinity there is a higher African (Khoisan in this case) affinity with respect to all East Eurasians except Han Chinese. Regarding archaic admixtures, Jomon are only slightly Denisovan-admixed, while their Neanderthal admixture is present at good levels. To conclude, Papuan affinity of Jomons is lower than most East Eurasian groups.
    It likely that jomons have ANE admixture and/or admixture from a ust ishim related population. There are these wierd claims that Jomon/ainu are australoid related, which is bullshit. But its likely that the jomon are more related to SE asians than yaiyoi japanese. The ainu people were consided sundodont mongoloids. From these charts though it appears, that jomon are a diverged proto east eurasian group though.

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

     lgmayka (06-28-2015),  Passa (06-28-2015)

  15. #8
    Banned
    Posts
    877
    Sex
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Ethnicity
    Scythian Massagetae
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA
    J1-ZS3668>>FGC41588
    mtDNA
    H14a+[3 Extras]

    Canada Germany Sikh Empire Sweden Russian Federation India

  16. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    72
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Multiracial
    Y-DNA
    R1b1a1a2a1a
    mtDNA
    U4c1

    Jomon DNA files, are they publicly available for download?

  17. #10
    They are probably representative of a pre-ANE population with pacific aborigine mixture. Meaning, all ANE has some ancestral Jomon component (maternal side most likely).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 05-07-2015, 03:12 PM
  2. Ancient DNA Analysis of Anatolian Goat Remains
    By Jean M in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-09-2014, 09:19 PM
  3. Ancient DNA Analysis of PPNB farmers
    By Agamemnon in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-07-2014, 01:12 PM
  4. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 02-06-2014, 07:41 PM
  5. The Royal Society's 2013 Ancient DNA meeting
    By DebbieK in forum General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-12-2013, 05:04 PM

Posting Permissions

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