Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 83

Thread: Can someone answer something for me really quickly in relation to South Asia?

  1. #11
    Registered Users
    Posts
    432
    Sex
    Location
    Elegant Decay
    Ethnicity
    Brahmin Mixed S India
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a1a1b2a1a (Y7+)
    mtDNA (M)
    M5a2a

    United States of America India Myanmar
    When did Parasar say that? Reconstructed ASI represents a basal E Eurasia population, which forms a clade with Onge. ASI is closer to Onge than it is to ANI. Crown Eurasians (ie WHG/ UHG, ANE, ASE, ASI, OCEANIAN) form a clade and are more closely related to one another than they are to African populations.
    I saw on a previous post (different thread) that you were mixing up ASI, a pure E Eurasian population, with the S Indian (hybrid) admixture component modal in S Indian tribals.the hybrid component is a mix of ASI, ANE and ENF and is roughly 50% ASI (calculator dependent).

  2. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Varun R For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (09-29-2015),  Kurd (09-29-2015),  Megalophias (09-29-2015),  Padre Organtino (10-14-2015),  paulgill (09-29-2015),  Sangarius (09-29-2015),  Sapporo (09-30-2015),  Skyfall (09-29-2015)

  3. #12
    Registered Users
    Posts
    62
    Sex

    United States of America
    Hi Varun,

    I'm sorry about the misinterpretation, I'm just learning things here.

    So what you're saying is that the "South Indian" component on the HAP Spreadsheet is only 50% ASI, and that this ASI component is East Eurasian in nature? Would this mean that if a population like the Bhatia Jatts/Rajputs are 25% South Indian, they would be 12.5% ASI/East Eurasian? And 88.5% Western Eurasian?

    It would make sense, considering the fact that the Han Chinese were a better proxy for ASI than the Onge, as I've read on the Dienekes blog. This would also mean that the Onge are not a direct substitute for the ASI, correct? In fact, they were only a poor proxy to begin with, as illustrated by the fact that the Han Chinese were a better proxy. This is also further substantiated by the aforementioned Fst distances I posted. Is this what you are essentially stating? I apologize if I made any gross errors, I'm a novice and am in the process of learning the ropes here. Please bear with me here

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Skyfall For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (09-29-2015)

  5. #13
    Registered Users
    Posts
    432
    Sex
    Location
    Elegant Decay
    Ethnicity
    Brahmin Mixed S India
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a1a1b2a1a (Y7+)
    mtDNA (M)
    M5a2a

    United States of America India Myanmar
    As Parasar stated, the Onge have been isolated from ASI like populations for many thousands of years and are therefore highly drifted. This is why Han works as a better proxy for ASI than Onge.

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Varun R For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (09-29-2015),  Kurd (09-29-2015),  paulgill (09-29-2015),  pegasus (10-05-2015),  Skyfall (09-29-2015)

  7. #14
    Registered Users
    Posts
    62
    Sex

    United States of America
    Interesting! My suspicions are confirmed then -- so South Asians are most definitely not amalgamations or hybrids of Western Eurasians and Australoids/the Onge. Instead, they are most accurately thought of as Western Eurasian/East Asian hybrids or mixes, correct? And if this ASI component is East Asian in nature, and only makes up 50% of the "South Indian" component on Harappa, then a caste like the Bhatia Jats/Rajputs, who are 25% South Indian, would only be 12.5% ASI or East Asian, correct? And ergo, a caste like the Bhatia would thus be 88.5% Western Eurasian in genetic makeup, owing to the fact that there is no other East Asian/non-Western Eurasian admixture present in the genome? I'd greatly appreciate it if you could offer some insight into that matter. Thanks again!

  8. #15
    Registered Users
    Posts
    432
    Sex
    Location
    Elegant Decay
    Ethnicity
    Brahmin Mixed S India
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a1a1b2a1a (Y7+)
    mtDNA (M)
    M5a2a

    United States of America India Myanmar
    ASI are not Onge but are a closely related population. It is believed that related E eurasian populations were at one point widespread across S & SE Eurasia. These populations contributed to the gene pool of Papuans as well as Australian Aborigines. Parasar (I think) had posted a cladogram showing the relationship of ASI to Oceanian populations- (I don't remember where this was posted, but the search bar is at your disposal.) As to what pure ASI looked like, IDK as we don't have pure ASI samples at our disposal. Speculative, but one might get a hint by looking at individuals from populations with the highest levels of ASI.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Varun R For This Useful Post:

     ashwinb (10-04-2015),  Kurd (09-29-2015)

  10. #16
    Registered Users
    Posts
    62
    Sex

    United States of America
    I see. And what about populations like the Jats I aforementioned? If they are 25% South Indian, and thus 12.5% ASI/East Asian, does that mean that they are 87.5% West Eurasian? I'm trying to get an idea of how West Eurasian certain NW populations in the subcontinent are, particularly the Jats.

    Also, even though ASI are related to the Onge, it would be correct to say that ASI is even more closely related to populations like SE or East Asians, correct? (This would explain why the Han Chinese were better proxies) So in essence, the Onge are just one of many populations that the ASI are related to, but not exactly the closest population. The closest population would be either East or South East Asians. Is this what you are stating?
    Last edited by Skyfall; 09-29-2015 at 01:22 AM.

  11. #17
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,643
    Sex
    Location
    Calgary
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2-S2361 < L801
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2b(1)
    mtDNA (P)
    H3

    Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by Skyfall View Post
    Also, even though ASI are related to the Onge, it would be correct to say that ASI is even more closely related to populations like SE or East Asians, correct? (This would explain why the Han Chinese were better proxies) So in essence, the Onge are just one of many populations that the ASI are related to, but not exactly the closest population. The closest population would be either East or South East Asians.
    What source says that Han Chinese are better ASI proxies than Onge?

    Reich et al (2009) tested Dai but chose Onge as (slightly) closer to ASI, both using ADMIXTUREGRAPH and using f4 statistics (though they don't include the actual values).

    ASI admixgraph.png

    I see no reason to think that East Asians are closer to ASI than Onge are, though the difference with Dai seems to be very small. Maybe Cambodians or Burmans, but they also have recent Indian admixture too.

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

     DMXX (09-29-2015),  Kurd (09-29-2015),  palamede (09-29-2015),  paulgill (09-29-2015),  Sangarius (09-29-2015),  Varun R (09-29-2015)

  13. #18
    Registered Users
    Posts
    432
    Sex
    Location
    Elegant Decay
    Ethnicity
    Brahmin Mixed S India
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a1a1b2a1a (Y7+)
    mtDNA (M)
    M5a2a

    United States of America India Myanmar
    Thanks for correcting me Megalophias

  14. #19
    Registered Users
    Posts
    62
    Sex

    United States of America
    This paper clearly states that the Onge are closer to South East Asians than to South Asian in the conclusion near the end: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/...ontext=humbiol

    Its one of the latest papers in the field. Also, I have read on the Eurogenes blog (and on the Dienekes blog) that when using the Han Chinese in admixture analysis, they serve as a better proxy than the Onge. Furthermore, as I posted in one of my previous posts, the Fst distances clearly suggest than there is no way ASI is related to Onge. Again:

    There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that ASI or the South Indian component in Indians is related to modern-day Australoids or even Negritos. These are the fst distances, the most widely used measure of genetic distance between populations, between ASI and other populations:

    Caucasian: 0.077
    Baloch: 0.08
    NE Asian: 0.081
    NE Euro: 0.082
    SE Asian: 0.084
    SW Asian: 0.091
    Siberian: 0.093
    Mediterranean: 0.095
    Beringian: 0.116
    E African: 0.122
    American: 0.128
    W African: 0.142
    Papuan: 0.145
    Pygmy: 0.188
    San: 0.203
    BTW, Here are the Fst distances for your perusal:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...WZzNBMEE#gid=2

    If one actually reads this fst distance spreadsheet I posted above (with data from Reich et.al and other Harvard geneticists), it is clear that the South Indian/ASI component is closest to Gedrosia (at 0.081) followed by Caucasus (at 0.082) and East Asian (at 0.085) and Northern European at (0.086). This clearly shows that it’s actually closer to Gedrosia and Caucasus than the East Asian components. Again, the component is closest to Caucasian, Baloch, NE Asian, NE Euro and SE Asian in that order. So its closer to Caucasian populations, followed by a Mongoloid South-East Asian population, followed by a North-Eastern European population.

    In other words, the ASI/South Indian component is actually closer to Caucasian populations than even Mongoloid populations, and it is nowhere near close to Australoid populations. In fact, it’s even closer to North Eastern Europeans than it is to Australoids and closer to West and East African than the Papuan component! So how can one link ASI to Australoid? I keep reading that South Asians are all admixed with Australoid, and it is really frustrating to read that when it is patently false. Even the so-called tribes of India are not all admixed with the Australoid component, and have more in common with each other than they do with the Onge: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6479999

    Also, I posted this earlier:

    And perhaps this is why initial studies lumped ASI with the Onge:

    "Another big issue for this model is simple, in truth. Australo-Melanesians, Andamanese and East Asians are seemingly closer to each other than they either is to Europeans often prompting various population geneticists to lump them into a sort of "clade" with one another like "Eastern Non-African" in Lazaridis et al. 2013 or similarly in Kay Prüfer et al. 2014 [5] as I touch upon here."

    As stated at this link: http://anthromadness.blogspot.com/20...tion-more.html

    Essentially, since they are in the same clade, ASI was erroneously assumed to be = to Onge, when in reality, it is East Asian/SE Asian in ancestry.

    Finally, I've asked this several times before, but how West Eurasian are castes like the Jatt and Bhatia exactly? If they are 25% South Indian, then it follows that they are 12.5% ASI, and thus that they are 87.5% West Eurasian, considering that there isn't any East Asian admixture apart from the ASI already present. Is this a correct value -- 87.5% West Eurasian? I'd really appreciate it if someone could confirm this for me.
    Last edited by Skyfall; 09-29-2015 at 05:01 AM.

  15. #20
    Banned
    Posts
    5,171
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Skyfall View Post
    There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that ASI or the South Indian component in Indians is related to modern-day Australoids or even Negritos. These are the fst distances, the most widely used measure of genetic distance between populations, between ASI and other populations:

    Caucasian: 0.077
    Baloch: 0.08
    NE Asian: 0.081
    NE Euro: 0.082
    SE Asian: 0.084
    SW Asian: 0.091
    Siberian: 0.093
    Mediterranean: 0.095
    Beringian: 0.116
    E African: 0.122
    American: 0.128
    W African: 0.142
    Papuan: 0.145
    Pygmy: 0.188
    San: 0.203
    BTW, Here are the Fst distances for your perusal:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...WZzNBMEE#gid=2
    First, which calculator did you get those FST distances from, Harappa? Those distances appear to be from S Indian component (modal in S Indian tribals), and not ASI. We don't know what ASI looks like since we don't have genotyped ancient S Indian samples that I am aware of .

    If it turns out that S Indian is 50% ASI and 50% W Eurasian, then those FST distances you posted are not valid at all for ASI.

    Here are the FST distances from Papuan from one of my K13 ADMIXTURE runs:

    NO POPULATION FST TO PAPUAN
    1 S_INDIAN 0.141
    2 SE_ASIAN 0.16
    3 SIBERIAN 0.178
    4 SW_ASIAN 0.184
    5 CAUCASUS 0.184
    6 NE_ASIAN 0.188
    7 EEF 0.191
    8 SHG_WHG 0.21
    9 SSA 0.212
    10 N_AMERINDIAN 0.214
    11 S_AMERINDIAN 0.249
    12 SAN_PYGMY 0.252

    You will notice that the Papuan signal is closer to S Indian than any other population, including SE Asian. Unfortunately I don't have Onge in my dataset. If I did, it would likely be even closer to S Indian than even Papuan. I may add Onge, just so that I can do statistical comparisons. So Papuan being closest to S Indian indicates to me that its divergence from S Indian was more recent than from all the other populations in the run.

    The fact that other populations such as Gedrosian, Caucasian, and even perhaps Siberian are closer to modern S Indian than Papuan, is merely an indication that there has been more recent geneflows with those populations, than the more isolated and drifted Papuans. That is all. So if you negate the effect of drift and mixing with W Eurasian populations, Ancestral S Indians (ASI) would have been considerably even more closer to Papuans than modern S Indians.

    Also, the above link you provided does not work.

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

     Awale (09-29-2015),  Megalophias (09-29-2015),  palamede (09-29-2015),  parasar (09-29-2015),  Sangarius (09-29-2015),  Varun R (09-29-2015)

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. R1a-Y7 in South Asia
    By Smashorpass in forum R1a-Z93
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-12-2021, 03:04 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-21-2020, 09:38 AM
  3. I in South Asia
    By Smashorpass in forum I
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-23-2018, 01:04 AM
  4. Q1b in south asia
    By Lara101 in forum AncestryDNA
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-12-2017, 11:39 AM
  5. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-26-2013, 08:43 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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