Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Y-DNA haplogroup DE = "Basal Eurasians" with no Neanderthal admixture?

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union

    Y-DNA haplogroup DE = "Basal Eurasians" with no Neanderthal admixture?

    Probably those "Basal Eurasians" who had "little if any" Neanderthal admixture were mostly DE:

    IMO they ranged from North Africa to South-West Asia (despite their "exclusively Eurasian" name):

    http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/16/059311

    We show that the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their ancestry from a 'basal Eurasian' lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture and that separated from other non-African lineages prior to their separation from each other.
    Last edited by Tomenable; 06-19-2016 at 11:50 AM.

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Tomenable For This Useful Post:

     Bas (06-20-2016),  Gravetto-Danubian (06-19-2016),  Hando (06-21-2016),  Jean M (06-19-2016),  Silesian (06-19-2016)

  3. #2
    Banned
    Posts
    4,169
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Nationality
    N/A
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1-L621- PH 908
    mtDNA (M)
    H 47

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Probably those "Basal Eurasians" who had "little if any" Neanderthal admixture were mostly DE:

    IMO they ranged from North Africa to South-West Asia (despite their "exclusively Eurasian" name):

    http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/16/059311



    I don't think its that simple. Basal Eurasian isn;t simply ascribed to DE*. In fact, I think the paper found that the Iranian Mesolithic & Zargos farmers (hg J) were even more basal
    Last edited by Gravetto-Danubian; 06-19-2016 at 12:37 PM.

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Gravetto-Danubian For This Useful Post:

     Awale (06-19-2016),  Bas (06-20-2016),  Coldmountains (06-19-2016),  Hando (06-21-2016),  kingjohn (06-19-2016)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,295
    Sex
    Location
    Canada's Wonderland
    Ethnicity
    Yamnaya Orthodox
    Nationality
    Worldwide
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2110>BY593+
    mtDNA (M)
    U5B2A2
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-U106

    Quote Originally Posted by Gravetto-Danubian View Post
    I don't think its that simple. Basal Eurasian isn;t simply ascribed to DE*. In fact, I think the paper found that the Iranian Mesolithic & Zargos farmers (hg J) were even more basal
    Perhaps he has stumbled on something of interest. Any idea the major Neaderthal sites in connection with Near East/Iran and Europe? Manot cave, or Shanidar, or Mezmaiskaya- Altai? The implications of nill to zero Neaderthal in the Lazaridis et al., The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311 paper? Inverse relationship.

    Ust-Ishim
    http://siberiantimes.com/science/cas...human-history/
    Last edited by Silesian; 06-19-2016 at 12:57 PM.

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

     Hando (06-21-2016)

  7. #4
    Banned
    Posts
    4,169
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Nationality
    N/A
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1-L621- PH 908
    mtDNA (M)
    H 47

    Quote Originally Posted by Silesian View Post
    Perhaps he has stumbled on something of interest. Any idea the major Neaderthal sites in connection with Near East/Iran and Europe? Manot cave, or Shanidar, or Mezmaiskaya- Altai? The implications of nill to zero Neaderthal in the Lazaridis et al., The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311 paper? Inverse relationship.
    Yes, the inverse relationship to neanderthals is interesting. All the more given that - as the paper states- we'd expect AMH to have first encountered Neandertals in the Levant, right ? And i expect they did
    But whoever these people were, they got swamped or replaced by newcomers after the LGM, IMO - from the Gulf region, although NE Africa hasn;t been ruled out.

    As for the nitty gritty of stats, ill let someone else answer. But I think even the paper left the question unanswered.



    I.m not sure if intentional, but they have "BE" sitting between Zagros and Natufians, rather than by Africa.
    Also note that it really only accounts for 45% for, both, Natufians and Zagros. The Natufians probably have some Upper Palaeolithic "European' type stuff.

    So, still gaps remain with regard to BE.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    • File Type: jpg C.jpg (100.4 KB, 260 views)
    Last edited by Gravetto-Danubian; 06-19-2016 at 01:04 PM.

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Gravetto-Danubian For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-19-2016),  Awale (06-19-2016),  Bas (06-20-2016),  Hando (06-21-2016)

  9. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    I think the paper found that the Iranian Mesolithic & Zargos farmers (hg J) were even more basal
    But the first, original "Basal Eurasians" were most probably almost exclusively DE (or even just E).

    Naturally later this autosomal ancestry was diffused into carriers of other haplogroups as well (if anything, in long terms there is a better correlation between mtDNA and auDNA than between Y-DNA and auDNA).

    There is nothing special about J or G, they are all descended from CF, unlike DE which separated first.

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

     Hando (06-21-2016)

  11. #6
    Banned
    Posts
    4,169
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Nationality
    N/A
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1-L621- PH 908
    mtDNA (M)
    H 47

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    But the first, original "Basal Eurasians" were most probably almost exclusively DE (or even just E).

    Naturally later this autosomal ancestry was diffused into carriers of other haplogroups as well (if anything, in long terms there is a better correlation between mtDNA and auDNA than between Y-DNA and auDNA).

    There is nothing special about J or G, they are all descended from CF, unlike DE which separated first.
    ha well maybe. But that's just staring at Y lineage SNP order. The formation of genome-wide clusters is a lot more complex than that.
    But as I said, we still not sure. Hopefully others can chip in some thoughts
    Last edited by Gravetto-Danubian; 06-19-2016 at 01:08 PM.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gravetto-Danubian For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (06-19-2016),  Hando (06-21-2016)

  13. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    the Iranian Mesolithic & Zargos farmers (hg J)
    Female-mediated ancestry, founder effects, etc. As I wrote, J is descended from CF, so there is nothing special about it. On the other hand, DE separated first from all other Non-African Y-DNA (= from CF).

    The formation of genome-wide clusters is a lot more complex than that.
    The problem is that Basal Eurasians are much older than haplogroups such as J or G.

    When Basal Eurasian autosomal component emerged, there was just A, B, DE and CF.

    Other Y-DNA haplogroups emerged after the formation of "Basal Eurasian community".

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Tomenable For This Useful Post:

     Hando (06-21-2016)

  15. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    Basal Eurasians probably split from other Non-African humans between 88 and 65 thousand years ago.

    While haplogroup J formed only 43 thousand years ago, and haplogroup G ca. 49 thousand (per YFull).

    So original Basal Eurasians could not be J or G, because these haplogroups did not yet exist...

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Tomenable For This Useful Post:

     Hando (06-21-2016)

  17. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    5,335
    Sex
    Location
    Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z2552
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a

    Poland European Union
    Also a matter of fact, all of CF carriers are admixed by Neanderthals.

    Even D carriers (such as Andamanese Islanders) have this admixture, but they probably got it during expansion of D into Eurasia, rather than before the separation of haplogroups D and E from DE.

    So IMO Neanderthal admixture happened after the split of DE and CF.

    DE initially avoided that admixture, explaining why Sub-Saharans with E don't have it.
    Last edited by Tomenable; 06-19-2016 at 01:16 PM.

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

     Hando (06-21-2016),  kingjohn (06-19-2016)

  19. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    13
    Sex
    Omitted

    OP's theory is impossible because Mota doesn't have any Basal Eurasian (or Eurasian in general) and is from Haplogroup E (a descendant of DE).

    Also, Basal Eurasian is "widespread" in Europe, but not DE.

  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ep2 For This Useful Post:

     Coldmountains (06-19-2016),  Hando (06-21-2016),  kingjohn (06-19-2016)

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. "Roman DNA" "Anglo-Saxon DNA" "Viking DNA"
    By RandomUsernameGuy in forum General
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 12-23-2018, 07:25 PM
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-16-2018, 10:35 AM
  3. "Neanderthal boy's skull reveals they grew like modern boys"
    By MikeWhalen in forum Human Evolution
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-22-2017, 06:23 PM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 09:51 PM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-11-2016, 01:07 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
  •