Ust-Ishim: a 45.000 siberian

motzart said:
Malta Boy (Who was Mongoloid)
Click to expand...

No. The whole surprise of that find was he wasn't, yet he did show affinity to American Indians. Since no trace of East-Asians was found in MA-1, American Indians had to be a combination of Mongolids and ANE.
 
epoch said:
I find it interesting that on the map of vegetation types during the LGM a desert appears between areas the two populations (to wit: WHG + ANE and East-Asians) Ust-Ishim is equidistant to reside in.

http://anthro.unige.ch/lgmvegetation/download_page_js.htm

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Last_glacial_vegetation_map.png
Click to expand...

central-asia is mainly a desert
but along the edge of the mountains there is a corridor, from to Hindu Kush to Siberia
Ust-Ishim is on that corridor, near Siberia
 
motzart said:
DOESN'T LOOK VERY EUROPEAN TO ME! I spent the $32 on the study and looks like it paid off because I get to be SOOOOO RIGHT.
Click to expand...

It is pointless to argue whether a 45,000 year-old sample is more East Asian-like, or South Asian-like or European-like... The modern differentiations didn't exist back then. The ancestral componenent of Y-haplogroup should be present in all populations descended from K, that is all Eurasians, Native Americans, as well as a small portion of the North and East African gene pool (via hg R1b-V88 and T).

We already saw something similar with the Malta boy, but more limited to haplogroups R (affinities to Europeans, South Asians and Kalash), with minor components also matching Q and M populations (Native Americans and Papuans, respectively).
 
motzart said:
DOESN'T LOOK VERY EUROPEAN TO ME! I spent the $32 on the study and looks like it paid off because I get to be SOOOOO RIGHT.
gYn3HWy.jpg
Click to expand...

Dude, why pay when you have all the free the Supplementary Info, including the admixture above.
 
bicicleur said:
central-asia is mainly a desert
but along the edge of the mountains there is a corridor, from to Hindu Kush to Siberia
Ust-Ishim is on that corridor, near Siberia
Click to expand...

But LGM was *after* Ust-Ishim. It was when Mal'ta boy lived his short live. What I mean is that two tundra's appear with a desert in between. That could have *caused* the split between two populations. Just speculation, mind you, on the basis of rather flimsy maps downloaded from the internet. It merely caught my eye.
 
Shame there is only K=10. It suppresses Lithuanian, i.e. mesolithic affinity. Would be nice to see it done like Lazardis, especially since only at K=20 that admixture run showed MA-1's west-asian affinity to be very much like Kalash.
 
epoch said:
But LGM was *after* Ust-Ishim. It was when Mal'ta boy lived his short live. What I mean is that two tundra's appear with a desert in between. That could have *caused* the split between two populations. Just speculation, mind you, on the basis of rather flimsy maps downloaded from the internet. It merely caught my eye.
Click to expand...

there is something strange : when these people entered Siberia, near the Altaï Mountains, they all went east, western Siberia remained rather uninhabited, and those in western Siberia had less sophisticated tools
eastern Siberia must have had better hunting grounds beofre the ice age
 
I used this high tech modelling software to merge Ust-Ishim's 4 largest populations (Papuan, East Asian (Korean), South Asian (Hindu), and Neanderthal so we can get an accurate image of what he looked like. Science is amazing. Terrifying.
IUWo2he.jpg
 
Another noteworthy thing is that Ust-Ishim shows NO Denisovan admixture. While being, relatively speaking, in the neighbourhood of the Denisova cave.
 
Also noteworthy is that John Hawks considers this indvidual ancestral to no known recent population.
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/ancient-genomes/ust-ishim-fu-2014.html

John Hawks said:
Considering the fact that Ust'-Ishim is equally similar to all Asian and Native American populations and equally similar to the two ancient genomes, Fu and colleagues write this:

This suggests that the population to which the Ust’- Ishim individual belonged diverged from the ancestors of present-day West Eurasian and East Eurasian populations before—or simultaneously with—their divergence from each other.
Click to expand...
I would give a strong interpretation to this. It seems unlikely that Chinese (Han) and Andaman Island (Onge) populations could be uniquely descended from this ancient Siberian individual, so Ust'-Ishim is not at the stem of the later diversification of Eurasian people. That means that these later people derive from a different group than that represented by Ust'-Ishim. The initial dispersal of humans into Eurasia contained at least one dead-end population that contributed at most some very small amount of ancestry to living people.
Click to expand...
 
epoch said:
Another noteworthy thing is that Ust-Ishim shows NO Denisovan admixture. While being, relatively speaking, in the neighbourhood of the Denisova cave.
Click to expand...
Eurogenes also pointed out the lack of Denisovan admixture and larger chunks found in Ust-Ishim.
http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/
Nature 505,43–49(02 January 2014)doi:10.1038/nature12886
Extended Data Table 2: Selected D-statistics supporting inferences about gene flows
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v505/n7481/fig_tab/nature12886_ST2.html
 
I think this is interesting for Y DNA I. There are only a few defining mutations for IJ. 49,000 ybp puts the IJ TMRCA right before the emergence of the first AMH into Europe; which is 44,000-41,000 ybp according to this study. Contemporanous with the Aurignacian culture.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v479/n7374/full/nature10484.html
 
bicicleur said:
there is something strange : when these people entered Siberia, near the Altaï Mountains, they all went east, western Siberia remained rather uninhabited, and those in western Siberia had less sophisticated tools
eastern Siberia must have had better hunting grounds beofre the ice age
Click to expand...

If you take a look at the ADMIXTURE runs from MA-1 and AG-2 - dated 42k and 17k years old - you see an increasing amount of North Euro. Let us assume that Usty's population *is* partly ancestral to ANE, than ANE was the result of some sort of admixture, where some of Usty's relatives gave rise to the Kalash part in ANE. But where did all the other affinity go, in that case? Anyway, the idea could be that some Western groups kept moving to the East during the LGM to find the part of Usty's population being cut off from the bulk of Asian population by that desert I mentioned before, and thus giving rise to MA-1 like population.

http://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...lyses-of-the-malta-and-afontova-gora-genomes/
http://genetiker.wordpress.com/2013/11/24/analyses-of-the-afontova-gora-genome/

Just an idea, mind you. Thinking aloud. Would that mean that the Amerindian part of MA-1 was brought east by westerners?
 
motzart said:
I think this is interesting for Y DNA I. There are only a few defining mutations for IJ. 49,000 ybp puts the IJ TMRCA right before the emergence of the first AMH into Europe; which is 44,000-41,000 ybp according to this study. Contemporanous with the Aurignacian culture.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v479/n7374/full/nature10484.html
Click to expand...

There are only a few defining mutations for IJ.
Indeed IJKLT probably split into IJ K and LT in a few 1000 years, and IJ and K split further soon after.
But how many defining mutations are there for I ?

I'm pretty confident Aurignacian was IJ, but I doubt it was I
Gravettian, 32000 year old is believed to be I
 
epoch said:
Another noteworthy thing is that Ust-Ishim shows NO Denisovan admixture. While being, relatively speaking, in the neighbourhood of the Denisova cave.
Click to expand...

Denisovan DNA is only found at some elevated rate in modern populations of Oceania.
That is why the mixing is beleived to have happened with Denisovans living in southeast Asia

These people from Usht Ishim had allready a well developped technology, with better tools than Neanderthals or Denisovans.
That's why they didn't mix with Neanderthal or Denisovan any more.
Instead Neanderthal and Denisovan went extinct.
 
epoch said:
Is the entire genome published? We could use a admixture break down like in lazardis: K=2 to K=20
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v513/n7518/fig_tab/nature13673_SF3.html
Click to expand...

no, there is high coverage but no full coverage :

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/ancient-genomes/ust-ishim-fu-2014.html

The new paper is interesting because it is the first modern human we have at high coverage, where the age is sufficient to estimate the number of missing mutations that would be expected in a descendant living today. Even though Ust'-Ishim may have no living descendants, this is a measure of how short his DNA branches are compared to the branches connecting living humans to their common ancestors.
 
Genetiker has put up a page on Ust-Ishim.

http://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/11/01/analyses-of-the-ust-ishim-genome/

On MDLP World-22 a rather substantial European (or west-eurasian) component starts to show up:

MDLP World-22


  • 24.86% Indian
  • 17.52% East-South-Asian
  • 10.30% Sub-Saharian
  • 7.57% Austronesian
  • 6.59% North-East-European
  • 6.03% West-Asian
  • 5.93% Near_East
  • 4.42% Melanesian
  • 3.60% Atlantic_Mediterranean_Neolithic
  • 2.70% Samoedic
  • 2.60% East-Siberean
  • 2.07% Indo-Iranian
  • 1.22% South-African
  • 1.12% Mesoamerican
  • 0.68% Pygmy
  • 0.67% Arctic-Amerind
  • 0.53% North-Amerind
  • 0.51% Indo-Tibetan
  • 0.39% North-European-Mesolithic
  • 0.33% Paleo-Siberian
  • 0.23% South-America_Amerind
  • 0.11% North-Siberean
Click to expand...

However, on MDLP Ancient Roots K17 we see very little EEF, WHG and ANE:

MDLP Ancient Roots K17

  • 29.81% Ancestral_South_Indian
  • 16.83% South_East_Asian
  • 15.37% African_Sub_Saharian
  • 9.02% Melano-Austronesian
  • 7.08% Ancestral_North_Indian
  • 3.60% Ancestral_Mediterranean_EEF
  • 3.54% West_European_HG
  • 3.13% Ancestral_East_Siberian
  • 2.92% Ancestral_East_European_ANE
  • 1.93% Uralic
  • 1.90% Caucasian-Basal
  • 1.60% Amerindian
  • 1.29% Ancestral_West_Siberian
  • 1.01% Ancestral_Sami-Finnic
  • 0.72% Circumpolar
  • 0.12% Archaic_African
  • 0.12% Near-East-Basal
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 33841 times.

Back
Top