Over 50 ancient R1a samples in the context of archaeological cultures

Tomenable said:
We are only something like 2% - 3% Neanderthal.


If humans could only barely produce fertile offspring with Neanderthals, then I don't think that they could with Erectus. I don't doubt that humans had sex with Erectus (today there are on this planet numerous zoophiles who like having sex with far more distant mammal species, such as sheep!), but it's almost certain that they couldn't produce offspring, or at least fertile offspring.
Click to expand...

I see here you don't read my more serious posts: in a thread about human mutants I spoke about some monsters with elephant noses, squale tails and others surprising features; in fact they are not mutants, but old crossings showing we can have descendants even with very different species!
To be seriously serious I agree with you for very far cousins like Homo Erectus, even if I've no proof. Concerning Neanderthal and us, it recalls me the same question with tigers, lions, panthers, or horses and donkeys or zebres.
 
MOESAN said:
I have some doubts ober the accuracy of this kind of affirmations before proofs; simulations are simulations, only simulations, produced by our theories;
and others ligneages shared DNA are not by themselves a proof of efficient interbreeding. Always the question of very ancient common ancestors.
Click to expand...

so do I
I just refer to the article as it is
afaik there is even no homo erectus DNA available
I suppose they are just comparing certain strings in modern human DNA which may have been inserted at some time and then further being chopped with each consecutive generation
as I mentioned, the article is rather vague in details
 
bicicleur said:
I found this article today :

http://www.thewire.com/technology/2...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

it is rather vague in details
Click to expand...
Lacking actual DNA, Hammer and his team did what any modern scientist would do: they wrote a computer program. Using modern human DNA, Hammer says, they were able to "simulate history" and sort of reverse-engineer human DNA. In doing so, they found evidence that Homo sapiens not only had sex with Neanderthals, they also interbred with Homo erectus, the "upright walking man," Homo habilis, the "tool-using man," and possibly others. Hammer says that despite earlier skepticism about interbreeding between human species and despite the belief that humans were an exception to certain laws of evolution, our DNA shows otherwise.
Click to expand...
That's why I think we should be able to find some Chinese looking Home Erectus. Some men can find sheep attractive, so sex with other hominids was a sure thing.
 
it is very likely homo erectus was extinct before modern humans arrived in northern/central China

on the other hand modern humans were in the Levant and the Persian Gulf 125000 years ago while Neanderthal was in the Levant 200000 years ago and in the Zagros Mountains 80000 years ago
in both areas Neanderthal went extinct 40-50000 years ago
modern human tribes that still survive today - descendants of haplo CT - left the Middle Eastern area only 55-45.000 years ago

so they had a very long time to interact
why then is there so little Neanderthal DNA left in modern humans?

why then there is so little Neanderthal DNA ?

From the archeological record, it's inferred that Neanderthals evolved in Europe or western Asia and spread out from there, stopping when they reached water or some other significant obstacle. (During the ice ages, sea levels were a lot lower than they are now, so there was no English Channel to cross.) This is one of the most basic ways modern humans differ from Neanderthals and, in Pääbo's view, also one of the most intriguing. By about forty-five thousand years ago, modern humans had already reached Australia, a journey that, even mid-ice age, meant crossing open water. Archaic humans likeHomo erectus "spread like many other mammals in the Old World," Pääbo told me. "They never came to Madagascar, never to Australia. Neither did Neanderthals. It's only fully modern humans who start this thing of venturing out on the ocean where you don't see land. Part of that is technology, of course; you have to have ships to do it. But there is also, I like to think or say, some madness there. You know? How many people must have sailed out and vanished on the Pacific before you found Easter Island? I mean, it’s ridiculous. And why do you do that? Is it for the glory? For immortality? For curiosity? And now we go to Mars. We never stop."

I find this explanation rather vague. Maybe it's an element, but there is more to it.
50.000 years ago modern humans develloped a technology based on stone blades, that is when expansion from SW Asia started
why was Neanderthal not part of it?

there is also the human who mixed with Neanderthals in Europe some 40.000 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peștera_cu_Oase
but it looks like this branch went extinct

somehow branches with to much Neanderthal DNA couldn't compete with the modern humans that had stone blades


flint tools Eclat_Levallois_retouché_-_Grotte_du_Placard_MHNT_PRE_2009.0.205.5_(2).jpg

levallois tool , Neanderthals and modern humans

upper paleolithic Lame_MHNT_PRE.2009.0.209.1.jpg

blade tools as develloped by modern humans in the Middle East +/- 50.000 years ago
 
I had understood your point
 
bicicleur said:
it is very likely homo erectus was extinct before modern humans arrived in northern/central China
Click to expand...
Actually Neandertals, Denisovans, and who know what home sapines, could have mixed with home erectus of Asia 500-200 years ago. Erectus got extinct the same Neanderthal did, passing only few genes from mating.
This is the main idea of this article, that hominids mixed whenever they met.

so they had a very long time to interact
why then is there so little Neanderthal DNA left in modern humans?
Click to expand...
Actually it is estimated that up to 40% of Neanderthal genes circulate in humans. It is just that in one person there is about 2-4% of it. For example my 3% Neanderthal might be completely different than your 3%.
I find this explanation rather vague. Maybe it's an element, but there is more to it.
50.000 years ago modern humans develloped a technology based on stone blades, that is when expansion from SW Asia started
why was Neanderthal not part of it?

there is also the human who mixed with Neanderthals in Europe some 40.000 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peștera_cu_Oase
but it looks like this branch went extinct

somehow branches with to much Neanderthal DNA couldn't compete with the modern humans that had stone blades
Click to expand...
Surly human's technology was more advanced, but it might have been our social side that gave humans the top advantage. Humans shared ideas across Europe, while Neanderthal groups were very isolated.
 
MOESAN said:
I'm OK with your feeling
Click to expand...

I made a clown of myself: I was speaking about the picture of some "australoid" man (Tomenable post # 26) and not the reconstitution of the true "old" Peking man (700000 BP?);
I show no evident ressemblance in any modern human category of current days concerning this last. Sorry.
 
LeBrok said:
Actually Neandertals, Denisovans, and who know what home sapines, could have mixed with home erectus of Asia 500-200 years ago. Erectus got extinct the same Neanderthal did, passing only few genes from mating.
This is the main idea of this article, that hominids mixed whenever they met.

Actually it is estimated that up to 40% of Neanderthal genes circulate in humans. It is just that in one person there is about 2-4% of it. For example my 3% Neanderthal might be completely different than your 3

If true it undermines my reserves about ancien DNA sharings: in this case it is rather the proof of relatively recent crossings and not only remote ancestral community or we would be obliged to imagine Neanderthal was our direct ancestor ligneage - what a quick lost of DNA!!! - or that we are different modern ligneages with a very more remote ancestor shared with Neanderthal - but our relative homogeneity as modern humans is too great then -
Click to expand...
 
MOESAN said:
I made a clown of myself: I was speaking about the picture of some "australoid" man (Tomenable post # 26) and not the reconstitution of the true "old" Peking man (700000 BP?);
I show no evident ressemblance in any modern human category of current days concerning this last. Sorry.
Click to expand...
I understood correctly and took it as acknowledgment of my sarcastic remark. :)
 
MOESAN said:
Actually Neandertals, Denisovans, and who know what home sapines, could have mixed with home erectus of Asia 500-200 years ago. Erectus got extinct the same Neanderthal did, passing only few genes from mating.
This is the main idea of this article, that hominids mixed whenever they met.

Actually it is estimated that up to 40% of Neanderthal genes circulate in humans. It is just that in one person there is about 2-4% of it. For example my 3% Neanderthal might be completely different than your 3

If true it undermines my reserves about ancien DNA sharings: in this case it is rather the proof of relatively recent crossings and not only remote ancestral community or we would be obliged to imagine Neanderthal was our direct ancestor ligneage - what a quick lost of DNA!!! - or that we are different modern ligneages with a very more remote ancestor shared with Neanderthal - but our relative homogeneity as modern humans is too great then -
Click to expand...
Yes, the only great homogeneity I can see is when watching Amazon or Inuit tribes. They all look like brother and sisters. For the rest of us we are quite mixed, and still carrying snippets of genetic material belonging to many lines of hominids. Well Amazon and Inuits still carry the same ancestral material from Neanderthals and who knows who, but at least they look homologous. ;)
 
Approximate dating of R1a (and suspected R1a) samples from Europe.

Sample from Tanais kurgan is at least 3000 years old (at least 1000 BC).

All dates in BC, except for Medieval Usedom sample (n.e. = AD):

Map + dates

Datowanie_R1a.png
 
Tomenable said:
Zhizhitskaya was a culture contemporary with Corded Ware (it was surrounded by Corded Ware cultures from all sides):

They practiced agriculture, and they were also lake fishermen. Both N1c and R1a were found in that culture:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...c-Sea-region&p=3622337&viewfull=1#post3622337



http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...-from-Allentoft-2015/page25&highlight=RISE493



It is possible that Zhizhitskaya were originally N1c and R1a entered that population from neighbouring Corded Ware.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I wonder if the CombCeramic culture did not already know Y-N1c and "old" northern Y-R1a speaking neither I-Ean nor Uralic speaking (maybe their language had some far links with proto-Uralic, nevertheless? I 'm tempted to think Y-R1b of the times had a less large territory than the Y-R1a ones, territory I sea rather East the Caspian; these R1b would have carried more 'gedrosia'-like auDNA"tribes"; at contrario, the ancient North N1c and R1a would have had very little of 'gedrosia'; their later "balticization" plus some Uralic imputs at the mergins would explain the poor presence of 'gedrosia' among today Balts? this deserves a very precise surveys of R1a and N1c phylogeny among ancient and current population of the region, here I have a short knowledge...
 
No, all ancient Baltic samples had Gedrosia. Only modern ones lack.
 
I visualise it this way for Baltic region. As constant streams from two sources:
1) from South/West - possibly I people, after Neolithic some other people G?joined in.
2) from East - first R1a folk archaic clades, then 'R1a folk + N' folk appears, probably during Comb Ceramic

And then comes Corded Ware and eats almost everything.
 
arvistro said:
No, all ancient Baltic samples had Gedrosia. Only modern ones lack.
Click to expand...


OK but which samples (dates and supposed culture)? I 've only K15 for ancient DNA, without 'gedrosia' in it (only 'westasian').
 
Karelia EHG, Samara EHG, Corded Ware, had Gedrosia.
Actually need to check Estonian CW and Lithuanian late BA samples specifically.
 
arvistro said:
Karelia EHG, Samara EHG, Corded Ware, had Gedrosia.
Actually need to check Estonian CW and Lithuanian late BA samples specifically.
Click to expand...

Karelia and Samara EHGs had surely high enough ANE in them, and the northern 'gedrosia' found in ancient DNA was part of this ANE element; we have to search for relic populations, descendants of postmagdalenian WHG arrived in some Northeast Europe proper region, and weakly mixed with early EEF neolithic people (more female mediated), I think... hyptothesis of mine needing more basis, I fear...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 37091 times.

Back
Top