| Forum | Europe Travel Guide | Ecology | Facts & Trivia | Genetics | History | Linguistics |
| Austria | France | Germany | Ireland | Italy | Portugal | Spain | Switzerland |
 Eupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
|
The long awaited Ust-Ishim genome has been published. It's DNA is more related to East-Asians than Europeans but equidistant to East-Asians and WHG and MA-1. Y-DNA is K, mtDNA is R*.
http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/10/...5000-year.html
The supplementary information show an admixture K=10 run.
It's probably more related to all Eurasians who aren't west Eurasian, because of "basal Eurasian" ancestry in West Eurasians.
What does that mean?The finding that the Ust’-Ishim individual is equally closely related to present-day Asians and to 8,000- to 24,000-year-old individuals from western Eurasia, but not to present-day Europeans, is compatible with the hypothesis that present-day Europeans derive some of their ancestry from a population that did not participate in the initial dispersals of modern humans into Europe and Asia11
Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.
R1b/R1a ancestor is closest to modern east asians and heavily admixed with neanderthal. Tough day R1 pals I still love you.
It just means that modern Europeans have EEF ancestry.Originally Posted by LeBrok
They can keep their "higher resistance to AIDs" and "lower heart disease rates," because we've got patrilineal European ancientness!
R1b/R1a ancestor is closest to modern east asians and heavily admixed with neanderthal. Tough day R1 pals I still love you.
It is slightly closer to East Eurasian than modern West Eurasians, but that also just because modern West Eurasians have additional Basal Eurasian ancestry. But taking ancient West Eurasians like WHG for comparison than it is equal close to them and East Eurasians. Basically Ust-Ishim is the Proto Eurasian before they diverged into West and East Eurasians.
No the study says he is equally as related to MODERN EAST ASIANS as he is to Malta Boy (Who was Mongoloid) and LaBrana. This means he has the same amount of basal Eurasian ancestry as he does modern East Asian. You are 100% incorrect in saying that he was a Proto Eurasian, he was a Proto East Asian.
I think you need to read the paper again. Even Dienekes commented on that. And how the heck did you come to the conclusion that Mal'ta Boy was Mongoloid if he had only some percentage of East Eurasian related genes and was mostly West Eurasian like? Heck even the populations with the highest modern frequency of ANE are South_Central Asians followed by North Caucasians and Northeast Europeans.
So on what do you base your statement that "Mal ta was Mongoloid"?
Also just in case you didn't knew. LaBrana is WHG sample from West Europe.
http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2014/10/...5000-year.htmlHowever, when an ~8,000-year-old genome from western Europe (La Braña)9 or a 24,000-year-old genome from Siberia (Mal’ta 1)10 were analysed, there is no evidence that the Ust’-Ishim genome shares more derived alleles with present-day East Asians than with these prehistoric individuals (|Z| < 2). 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.
Ust'-Ishim is basically a Proto_Eurasian.
马耳他男孩有蒙古人种的头骨，你能 解这更好的中国佬？
You're trying to argue that Y DNA K (x L T), the ancestor of Y DNA O, the dominant Chinese haplogroup, was not proto Chinese? Even though he plots closest to Han Chinese of any population? You are delusional, embrace the fact that your ancestor is East Asian. The facts are here.
Oh boy you just don't make sense.
Haplogroup K* is the ancestor of R*, L*, T* (West Eurasian), M (Ancestral South Indians) and sibling of IJ* (West Eurasian) too. So you*re telling me that they were all Proto East Eurasians
What on the Words ANE is mostly West Eurasian, and peaks in South_Central Asians , North Caucasians and Northeast Europeans, is so hard to understand.
Mister the only one who is delusional and should first learn more about genetics is you. I personally would have no problems if my ancestors were East Eurasian, in fact I admire their culture, but I read a "superiority complex" out of your lines and your "arguments" just don't make sense.
In fact I have this theory that the ancestors of Proto Eurasians were some Australoid like people. Just face it Ust'Ishim was Proto Eurasian. Thats how the professionals on genetics label him. Good Night!
Wrong. He was related to ANE/WHG as well as East Asians. The reason he's related to both Mal'ta Boy and La Brana but not that closely related to modern Europeans is because he doesn't have basal Eurasian (ancient Middle Eastern) ancestry. He's a proto-Eurasian from about the time proto-Eurasian was starting to branch off, so there where no "Mongoloid" or "proto-Chinese" people at that point.
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.
These deserve their own thread, looks like groups are a older than we previously thought.
and for reference
Thanks for posting.Motzart: These deserve their own thread, looks like groups are a older than we previously thought.
But look at the ones dominant now...look how young they are.
Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci
Not too far from other estimates I've seen, although C seems younger than normal and IJ seems older than normal. What's the methodology?
Doesn't look East Asian, though. Looks sort of like a Central/South Asian with an Oceanian grandparent.
correct is ( karafet 2014) basal R-M207 is in south-east Asia and R1 is central asia ( if this represent west-asian, then ok)
Haplogroup K* is the ancestor of R*, L*, T* (West Eurasian), M (Ancestral South Indians) and sibling of IJ* (West Eurasian) too. So you*re telling me that they were all Proto East Eurasians
What on the Words ANE is mostly West Eurasian, and peaks in South_Central Asians , North Caucasians and Northeast Europeans, is so hard to understand.
Mister the only one who is delusional and should first learn more about genetics is you. I personally would have no problems if my ancestors were East Eurasian, in fact I admire their culture, but I read a "superiority complex" out of your lines and your "arguments" just don't make sense.
In fact I have this theory that the ancestors of Proto Eurasians were some Australoid like people. Just face it Ust'Ishim was Proto Eurasian. Thats how the professionals on genetics label him. Good Night!
có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo
when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.
Of course he's more related to east than to west, he is K(xLT). If he were IJK he would be equaly related to both.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.
But he is not an ancestor to any present population, his tribe was replaced by P1-M45 and probably got extinct.
How old is this chart........you don't even have X ydna between NO and KThese deserve their own thread, looks like groups are a older than we previously thought.
and for reference
You dont even have Tand L splitting before X formed
link to new proper June 2014 tree
http://www.phylotree.org/Y/Y_tree_skeleton.pdf
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.
I haven't updated this chart since 2009 or 2010.
My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.
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...ad_page_js.htm
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...tation_map.png
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
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).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
