With which Y DNA was the proto caucausoid/mongoloid?

Or, rather, is the "East Asian" component as it exists today a later admixture formed from the ancient ANE populations of northern Eurasia with this later appearing element from the southeast. After all, we know from recent work on Europeans that admixture like or "calculator" like components in Europeans are admixtures of various more ancient strata. Why should the "East Asian" component be any different?

Population change happened in the east as well as in Europe. Certainly, this recent paper about East Asians indicates just that.
Nonmetric dental traits and the origin of East Asians:
http://www.dienekes.blogspot.com/2014/06/nonmetric-dental-traits-and-origin-of.html

" Principal findings indicated a major dichotomization of the dataset into (1) an early Southeast Asian sample with close affinities to modern Australian and Melanesian populations and (2) a very distinct grouping of ancient and modern Northeast Asians. Distinct patterns of clinal variation among Neolithic and post-Neolithic Mainland Southeast Asian samples suggest a center to periphery spread of genes into the region from Northeast Asia. This pattern is consistent with archaeological and linguistic evidence for demic diffusion that accompanied agriculturally driven population expansion in the Neolithic. Later Metal Age affinities between Island and Mainland coastal populations with Northeast Asian series is likely a consequence of a South China Sea interaction sphere operating from at least 500 BCE, if not from the Neolithic. Such results provide extensive support for the two-layer hypothesis to account for the population history of the region."

As concerns Afontova Gora and Mal'ta, I was aware of those papers, and I don't understand, if indeed the analysis was correct, what is so surprising about the findings, given their age and location. Who says that those traits did not go into the current "East Asian" population precisely from that area? So far as I can tell from the research and the discussions, it seems far from settled exactly where they developed. I also wonder about those descriptions of "Negroid" elements. I haven't read the original papers, so bear with me on this, but were they "Negroid" or Australoid and Melanesian like? Perhaps someone should give those remains another look. Given what we are learning about the flow of population from south east Asia back to northern Asia, isn't that a possibility?
 
Haplogroups E & D represent the Negroid race.

Isnt Haplogroup D predominant of East Asia? How can it represent Negroid race?
 
Yes, indeed! Recent genetic evidence (Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014)) shows that there has been a major gene flow from east to west during the Upper Palaeolithic. Moreover and in addition to that, it looks like the Europeans and East Asians both have their share of ancient Siberian migrations (cf. Tianyuan man who was equally close to Europeans and East Asians). Perhaps we soon learn more on this shared ancestry when Pääbo’s Ust Ishim paper is published.

As for yDNA P, its route to Siberia is a higly exciting issue. However, provided that the analysis of the morphological traits of Afontova Gora and Mal’ta individuals is correct - and I am now deliberately provocative - the current ancient evidence in Siberia and America is as follows:

Mal’ta boy, 24 kya, yDNA R, mtDNA U, Mongoloid race
Afontova Gora man, 17 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA R, Mongoloid race
Anzick boy, 12.5 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA D4, with all probability of Mongoloid race
Saqqaq man, 4 kya, yDNA Q1a*, mtDNA D2a1 (D4e1), with all probability of Mongoloid race

Let’s see if yDNA C pops up some day somewhere in pre-Ice Age Siberian burials.
 
Yes, indeed! Recent genetic evidence (Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014)) shows that there has been a major gene flow from east to west during the Upper Palaeolithic. Moreover and in addition to that, it looks like the Europeans and East Asians both have their share of ancient Siberian migrations (cf. Tianyuan man who was equally close to Europeans and East Asians). Perhaps we soon learn more on this shared ancestry when Pääbo’s Ust Ishim paper is published.

As for yDNA P, its route to Siberia is a higly exciting issue. However, provided that the analysis of the morphological traits of Afontova Gora and Mal’ta individuals is correct - and I am now deliberately provocative - the current ancient evidence in Siberia and America is as follows:

Mal’ta boy, 24 kya, yDNA R, mtDNA U, Mongoloid race
Afontova Gora man, 17 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA R, Mongoloid race
Anzick boy, 12.5 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA D4, with all probability of Mongoloid race
Saqqaq man, 4 kya, yDNA Q1a*, mtDNA D2a1 (D4e1), with all probability of Mongoloid race

Let’s see if yDNA C pops up some day somewhere in ancient Siberian burials.

you need to prove that (K2 group), when the P haplogroup formed in modern Malaya/Borneo area, that .............did it back track in a NW and northern path.......Before the forming of R from P.
or did R form in this south-east asian area before moving.

You also recall that the K1 group ( L, T, N and O ) never reached south-east asia and formed prior to P arrival in south-east asia.

Unless P exploded in population growth in south-east asia, I cannot see how your theory stacks as a high percentage outcome.
N and O clearly began migrating northwards at least 10000 years before P could return
 
Yes, indeed! Recent genetic evidence (Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014)) shows that there has been a major gene flow from east to west during the Upper Palaeolithic. Moreover and in addition to that, it looks like the Europeans and East Asians both have their share of ancient Siberian migrations (cf. Tianyuan man who was equally close to Europeans and East Asians). Perhaps we soon learn more on this shared ancestry when Pääbo’s Ust Ishim paper is published.

As for yDNA P, its route to Siberia is a higly exciting issue. However, provided that the analysis of the morphological traits of Afontova Gora and Mal’ta individuals is correct - and I am now deliberately provocative - the current ancient evidence in Siberia and America is as follows:

Mal’ta boy, 24 kya, yDNA R, mtDNA U, Mongoloid race
Afontova Gora man, 17 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA R, Mongoloid race
Anzick boy, 12.5 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA D4, with all probability of Mongoloid race
Saqqaq man, 4 kya, yDNA Q1a*, mtDNA D2a1 (D4e1), with all probability of Mongoloid race

Let’s see if yDNA C pops up some day somewhere in pre-Ice Age Siberian burials.

Thank you for your awesome contribution to this thread Kristiina!

I hope the Ust Ishim paper gives a great insight into the migrations of mongoloids into central Asia. It would be very interesting to see if their proposed date would be prior to or contemporaneous with the rise of the first Mesopotamian civilizations.
 
Yes, indeed! Recent genetic evidence (Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014)) shows that there has been a major gene flow from east to west during the Upper Palaeolithic. Moreover and in addition to that, it looks like the Europeans and East Asians both have their share of ancient Siberian migrations (cf. Tianyuan man who was equally close to Europeans and East Asians). Perhaps we soon learn more on this shared ancestry when Pääbo’s Ust Ishim paper is published.

As for yDNA P, its route to Siberia is a higly exciting issue. However, provided that the analysis of the morphological traits of Afontova Gora and Mal’ta individuals is correct - and I am now deliberately provocative - the current ancient evidence in Siberia and America is as follows:

Mal’ta boy, 24 kya, yDNA R, mtDNA U, Mongoloid race
Afontova Gora man, 17 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA R, Mongoloid race
Anzick boy, 12.5 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA D4, with all probability of Mongoloid race
Saqqaq man, 4 kya, yDNA Q1a*, mtDNA D2a1 (D4e1), with all probability of Mongoloid race

Let’s see if yDNA C pops up some day somewhere in pre-Ice Age Siberian burials.

Yet not a trace of East-Asian autosomical DNA in Mal'ta. Now, the mongolid features always were highly disputed - Almost all features that are allegedly perceived in ancient skulls are, mind you, just recall the Grimaldi negroid features - so I consider the total absence of that autosomical DNA decisive.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Admixtures-Lazaridis.png
 
Last edited:
17,000YBP Siberian AG2 had Y DNA P, mtDNA R*, was probably a pure west Eurasians and had no signs of east Asian ancestry.

Afontova Gora man, 17 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA R, Mongoloid race

For all I know Afontova Gora 2 was contaminated and the authors kept out data, which meant that Y/MT DNA haplogroup could be determined.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1656-Afontova-R1a/page4

Unfortunately, the Afontova Gora-2 sample was highly contaminated with modern DNA (as indicated in Supplementary information section 5). Hence, the only analysis we could use it for was PCA, and that too after filtering for damaged reads. By filtering for damaged reads I mean, selecting those DNA molecules which show a cytosine to thymine base change, which is characteristic of ancient DNA damage. By performing such a filtering, we can be somewhat certain that we have by and large only kept behind sequences that are ancient in origin i.e. belonging to the ancient skeleton. Such an approach of filtering was not possible for mtDNA and Y sequences because the depth of coverage (how many reads cover each base) was very low. Any filtering meant that we would lose practically all data on the mt/Y. Hence, it was not possible to determine the haplogroups for this sample.
 
Yes, indeed! Recent genetic evidence (Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014)) shows that there has been a major gene flow from east to west during the Upper Palaeolithic. Moreover and in addition to that, it looks like the Europeans and East Asians both have their share of ancient Siberian migrations (cf. Tianyuan man who was equally close to Europeans and East Asians). Perhaps we soon learn more on this shared ancestry when Pääbo’s Ust Ishim paper is published.

As for yDNA P, its route to Siberia is a higly exciting issue. However, provided that the analysis of the morphological traits of Afontova Gora and Mal’ta individuals is correct - and I am now deliberately provocative - the current ancient evidence in Siberia and America is as follows:

Mal’ta boy, 24 kya, yDNA R, mtDNA U, Mongoloid race
Afontova Gora man, 17 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA R, Mongoloid race
Anzick boy, 12.5 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA D4, with all probability of Mongoloid race
Saqqaq man, 4 kya, yDNA Q1a*, mtDNA D2a1 (D4e1), with all probability of Mongoloid race

Let’s see if yDNA C pops up some day somewhere in pre-Ice Age Siberian burials.
Also there are few signs of non mongoloid people in Siberia whose characteristic seem to be caucasian.
1. Paleolithic evidence: Kennewick Man. Skeleton of caucasian male 9500 years old found in Kennewick in Washington USA in 1996.
2. Ainu people seem to look more caucasoid then mongoloid.
3. Ket people's (hunter gatherers from Siberia) race is rather caucasian similar to Ainu, with some mongoloid admixture, then pure mongoloid (same as most of Native Americans).
I would recommend the lecture of Dr. Edward Vadja on Kets: here
 
@Kristiina: You may be right. However, I'm going to offer a different prediction, based on my understanding of the genetic evidence, and on points others have made in this thread. I predict:

Mal'ta boy, Caucausoid
Afontova Gora man, Caucausoid
Anzick boy, 75% Mongoloid - 25% Caucausoid
Saqqaq man, Mongoloid
 
Yes, indeed! Recent genetic evidence (Refined structure in haplogroup K-M526 (Karafet et al. 2014)) shows that there has been a major gene flow from east to west during the Upper Palaeolithic. Moreover and in addition to that, it looks like the Europeans and East Asians both have their share of ancient Siberian migrations (cf. Tianyuan man who was equally close to Europeans and East Asians). Perhaps we soon learn more on this shared ancestry when Pääbo’s Ust Ishim paper is published.

You're giving Europeans(Mixture of three highly divergent stone age (Mainly from same western root)populations) to much esteem by using them to represent what should always be called west Eurasian. Y DNA P's(Became popular in Europe because of founder effects in the last 5,000 years) ancestors probably lived before the autosomal west-east split and so the fact(probably) it made a migration from southeast Asia to central Asia and existed in early west Eurasians isn't evidence of Upper Paleolithic east-west admixture. If the Tianyuan man is closely related to west and east Eurasians it is probably because he is over 40,000 years old, and the only common ancestry he is revealing between west and east Eurasians and Eurasian ancestry.

As for yDNA P, its route to Siberia is a higly exciting issue. However, provided that the analysis of the morphological traits of Afontova Gora and Mal’ta individuals is correct - and I am now deliberately provocative - the current ancient evidence in Siberia and America is as follows:

Mal’ta boy, 24 kya, yDNA R, mtDNA U, Mongoloid race
Afontova Gora man, 17 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA R, Mongoloid race
Anzick boy, 12.5 kya, yDNA Q, mtDNA D4, with all probability of Mongoloid race
Saqqaq man, 4 kya, yDNA Q1a*, mtDNA D2a1 (D4e1), with all probability of Mongoloid race

Let’s see if yDNA C pops up some day somewhere in pre-Ice Age Siberian burials.

MA1 and AG2 were culturally and genetically west Eurasian, with no east Asian ancestry. DNA beats what a Soviet said nearly 100 years ago about skeletal remains. All we know is that AG2 had Y DNA P it is possibly he had Q1a1 but not enough Y SNPs got results to be sure.
 
My R1b friends seem to be in denial about their Chinese grandpas. It is alright just add another label onto the Aryan-Celto-Germanic-Mongoloid heroes of ancient history LOL.
 
As I stated above, part of this discussion is predicated on whether the physical anthropology analysis that was done is correct. It probably has to be revisited.

Also, as another poster has noted, the yDNA classification for AG is highly questionable.

As far as these samples being "Mongoloid", I'm personally not comfortable with assigning modern "racial" categories to specimens that are this old. Even if the traits do now appear in East Asians, does it make the original carriers, whomever they were, or all ancient carriers, East Asian, or Mongoloid?

I have a somewhat similar objection to saying that Mal'ta is "West-Eurasian" because there is no "East Asian" in autosomal admixture analyses. As I said above, isn't "East Asian" a later cluster formed by the merging of two groups originally from southeast Asia, one of which, ANE, merely arrived earlier and might have been a population where different phenotypic traits had appeared? I think this entire classification of these very ancient samples into "West Eurasian" and "East Eurasian" is very questionable.
 
My R1b friends seem to be in denial about their Chinese grandpas. It is alright just add another label onto the Aryan-Celto-Germanic-Mongoloid heroes of ancient history LOL.

What would make you think this? I have nothing against having an east Asian paternal lineage but the facts are I don't.
 
Also, as another poster has noted, the yDNA classification for AG is highly questionable.

His Y DNA P result makes sense, but his mtDNA R* result doesn't.

As far as these samples being "Mongoloid", I'm personally not comfortable with assigning modern "racial" categories to specimens that are this old. Even if the traits do now appear in East Asians, does it make the original carriers, whomever they were, or all ancient carriers, East Asian, or Mongoloid?

Our best bet is that if an ancient population has distinct skeletal features only certain modern populations have is that the ancient population and the modern population got it from the same ancestral source, but of course we should always be open to other explanations. Native Americans and east Asians have many of the same facial features even though native American's ancestors last lived in east Asia over 20,000 years ago. Every stone age European skull I have heard of that is not from early Upper Palaeolithic had the same basic Caucasoid skull shapes as do modern west Eurasians, and we know through ancient DNA they were basically west Eurasians.

I have a somewhat similar objection to saying that Mal'ta is "West-Eurasian" because there is no "East Asian" in autosomal admixture analyses. As I said above, isn't "East Asian" a later cluster formed by the merging of two groups originally from southeast Asia, one of which, ANE, merely arrived earlier and might have been a population where different phenotypic traits had appeared? I think this entire classification of these very ancient samples into "West Eurasian" and "East Eurasian" is very questionable.

Admixture results for MA1 say he is a totally mix of many modern ancestral components which is probably because his people contributed alleles to those components. Admixtures are not good for testing the ancestry of some ancient populations especially Upper Paleolithic ones because the components in the admixtures are probably much younger than the ancient individual. As far as I remember Laz showed that all east Asians are equally related to west Eurasians, except native Americans who are more related to west Eurasians than other east Asians are, and Olade 2014 found that MA1 is more related to La Brana-1(clearly fits as being west Eurasian) than to any modern populations, and Laz found that ANE ancestry in west Asians causes them to be more related to Loschbour. It appears to me that MA1 and Mesolithic Europeans came from the same west Eurasian source while "Near eastern ancestry" is a mix of something very related to WHG and "basal Eurasians". This can explain why MA1 is so related to La Brana-1 and why ANE ancestry causes west Asians to be more related Loschbour.

I have been studying other things lately, so I don't know much about MA1's west Eurasianism. My definition of west Eurasian is very broad and I think it is most likely the common source of WHG-west Asian brother and ANE.
 
You're giving Europeans(Mixture of three highly divergent stone age (Mainly from same western root)populations) to much esteem by using them to represent what should always be called west Eurasian.

How can P be west-eurasian if it 's origins are south-east asia?

the only west-eurasians are I, J, T, L .............maybe N and O also before they drifted northwards and north-easterly

Why are you so anti easterner ? ..............Whats wrong with being eastern...............its not the eastern of today if that concerns you

Let me know about where your R originated ...........was it also SE-Asia or much later when the SE-Asian P back tracked to the Pamir region
 
My R1b friends seem to be in denial about their Chinese grandpas. It is alright just add another label onto the Aryan-Celto-Germanic-Mongoloid heroes of ancient history LOL.

I think some must be in denial
 
Fire Haired14, genetic ancestry cannot supersede skeletal morphological traits as an indicator of race! They complement each other. Yes, we cannot be sure that Afontova Gora was Q, but we can still conclude that autosomally 0% East Asian or Siberian Afontova Gora individuals had sinodont dental pattern, as Christy G. Turner II and G. Richard Scott describe in their recent book (2007) that “two sites west of Lake Baikal have physical anthropological signs of Mongoloid or Sinodonty. These are the Late Pleistocene Yenisei River sites in and near Krasnoyarsk. In the city is Afontova Gora ... “.

My hunch is that racial traits usually predate successful yDNA’s. It seems that yDNA P was first negrito. When it ended up in India, it probably became ASI-like, when it ended up in Siberia, it acquired Siberian traits and when it finally arrived in Europe, it became Caucasoid. Probably, this same pattern is shared by all successful yDNA haplogroups.

Ainu do not share any yDNA or mtDNA with Caucasoids. As for Kennewick man, Anthropologist Joseph Powell concluded that Kennewick man "is clearly not a Caucasoid unless Ainu and Polynesians are considered Caucasoid." Kennewick man is not particularly old, it dates from 7300 to 7600 B.C. Anzick is remarkably older. Kennewick man may well represent a small group of people who managed to settle in the Northwest U.S. from or north of Japan and who became extinct.
 
Fire Haired14, genetic ancestry cannot supersede skeletal morphological traits as an indicator of race! They complement each other. Yes, we cannot be sure that Afontova Gora was Q, but we can still conclude that autosomally 0% East Asian or Siberian Afontova Gora individuals had sinodont dental pattern, as Christy G. Turner II and G. Richard Scott describe in their recent book (2007) that “two sites west of Lake Baikal have physical anthropological signs of Mongoloid or Sinodonty. These are the Late Pleistocene Yenisei River sites in and near Krasnoyarsk. In the city is Afontova Gora ... “.

My hunch is that racial traits usually predate successful yDNA’s. It seems that yDNA P was first negrito. When it ended up in India, it probably became ASI-like, when it ended up in Siberia, it acquired Siberian traits and when it finally arrived in Europe, it became Caucasoid. Probably, this same pattern is shared by all successful yDNA haplogroups.

Ainu do not share any yDNA or mtDNA with Caucasoids. As for Kennewick man, Anthropologist Joseph Powell concluded that Kennewick man "is clearly not a Caucasoid unless Ainu and Polynesians are considered Caucasoid." Kennewick man is not particularly old, it dates from 7300 to 7600 B.C. Anzick is remarkably older. Kennewick man may well represent a small group of people who managed to settle in the Northwest U.S. from or north of Japan and who became extinct.

That exact same passage that you quote mentions that Mal'ta does not display sinodonty but European-like teeth. Furthermore if you read the actual passage you'll notice that it mentions that Afontova is considered mongolid not because of sinodonty but due to nasal bones.

..there only a few sites in Siberia with Late Pleistocene human remains. One, near Lake Baikal, called Mal'ta, seems to have European- rather than Asian-like teeth (Turner 1990b). Two sites west of Lake Baikal have physical anthropological signs of Mongoloid or Sinodonty. These are the Late Pleistocene Yenisei River sites in and near Krasnoyarsk. In the city is Afontova Gora, the riverbank section from which came a fragment of a subadult frontal bone that the late Russian physical antropologist Alekseev (1998) believed to have been Mongolid because of the size and the form of the adhering nasal bones.

http://tinyurl.com/lh7383n


 
Last edited:
My hunch is that racial traits usually predate successful yDNA’s.
I fully share this opinion. Y chromosome is just tiny fraction of genome, while racial traits are determined by many genes.
Ainu do not share any yDNA or mtDNA with Caucasoids. As for Kennewick man, Anthropologist Joseph Powell concluded that Kennewick man "is clearly not a Caucasoid unless Ainu and Polynesians are considered Caucasoid." Kennewick man is not particularly old, it dates from 7300 to 7600 B.C. Anzick is remarkably older. Kennewick man may well represent a small group of people who managed to settle in the Northwest U.S. from or north of Japan and who became extinct.
1. Ainu are pure east Asians genetically and they haven't mongoloid features. I just described them as caucasian like race to make link between them Kets and Native Americans, last two groups have the highest percentage of haplogroup Q, while similar to them Ainu have none. Ainus and Polynesians are eastern most version of western Eurasian phenotype. It doesn't mean the they are caucasoid, but they resembles them much more in comparison to surrounding mongoloids, negritos and australoids.
2. Kennewick man is younger, but it is just enough to prove that non mongoloids lived in Siberia prior to their migration to North America.:wink:
3. Prove that this first wave of immigration to America had become extinct. In my opinion they contributed to modern Native Americans to create racial picture distinct from eastern Asian one.
Here are some materials to comparison racial makeup of some nations considered to be mongoloid:
1. Mongoloid - Yakuts (Russian Wikipedia) eastern Siberia
%D0%AF%D0%BA%D1%83%D1%82%D1%8B_%28%D0%A1%D0%B0%D1%85%D0%B0%29.JPG

2. Mongoloid - Buriats (Wikipedia) central-south Siberia
Buryat_Notable_People.png

3. Mongoloid - Nentes (Wikipedia) north-western Siberia
Ru200008050079.jpg

4. Mongoloid? - Ket people: Russian video
pictures from Wikipedia:
Ket_man_1914.jpg
Ket_boy_1914.jpg

5. Ainuid? - Ainu people (source)
ainu-elder-japan_13991.jpg

6. Mongoloid - Cree (Wikipedia)
Bobtail.jpg


I guess that in Paleolithic there were more races then we know today.
 

Attachments

  • Bobtail.jpg
    Bobtail.jpg
    43.6 KB · Views: 63

This thread has been viewed 61285 times.

Back
Top