Unified genealogy of ancient and modern genommes

[Angela]

Thanks to Iosif Lazaridis for the heads up.

See: From the Reich Lab, using HGDP, Simons, and Neanderthal and Denisovan samples.
Estimated locations of human genetic ancestors: A unified genealogy of modern and ancient genomes

Some caveats from the author:
Wilder Wohns

It's important to note that these are *estimates* based on limited genetic data, using a very simple method of inferring geographic locations. There is a great deal of uncertainty about these locations

For the paper:
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abi8264

 

[SandbagsIA]

Thanks to Iosif Lazaridis for the heads up.

See: From the Reich Lab, using HGDP, Simons, and Neanderthal and Denisovan samples.
Estimated locations of human genetic ancestors: A unified genealogy of modern and ancient genomes

Thanks for linking this, it's an interesting paper.

However a few things are very puzzling for me and I wonder if anyone else has an idea about them. First of all, that video is showing cross-continental sharing between the Americas and Eurasia only 2000 years ago, how is that possible? Same with a lot of connections between Africa and Eurasia about 15900 years ago.

In addition, I noticed in their figure S21 that Africans seem more Denisovan than South Asians and that in S7 Japanese have Afanasievo ancestry, more than Cambodians and CHB who in all other studies have been inferred as having West Eurasian ancestry. That is also hard to understand.

If anyone has any suggestions/thoughts they would be much appreciated!

 

[Angela]

Thanks for linking this, it's an interesting paper.

However a few things are very puzzling for me and I wonder if anyone else has an idea about them. First of all, that video is showing cross-continental sharing between the Americas and Eurasia only 2000 years ago, how is that possible? Same with a lot of connections between Africa and Eurasia about 15900 years ago.

In addition, I noticed in their figure S21 that Africans seem more Denisovan than South Asians and that in S7 Japanese have Afanasievo ancestry, more than Cambodians and CHB who in all other studies have been inferred as having West Eurasian ancestry. That is also hard to understand.

If anyone has any suggestions/thoughts they would be much appreciated!

Sorry, as to the Native Americans, I see the first red dots appearing around 18000 yeas ago, which seems about right.

I don't get the Afanasievo into Japanese either.

 

[SandbagsIA]

Sorry, as to the Native Americans, I see the first red dots appearing around 18000 yeas ago, which seems about right.

I don't get the Afanasievo into Japanese either.

If you notice their paper (I can't link because account has not had enough posts yet) they also show more Denisovan admixture in Africans than South Asians (Figure S21). They do claim that Native American ancestors first arrived in the Americas about 56000 years ago and if you look at their video simulation, red dots start coalescing with Eurasians already 2000 and then 3000 years ago.

 

[Stefano]

Please don't blast me but i think that the model presented in the video is oversimplified. I don't like it.
It completely ignores the stratification and mixing of ancient populations.

 

[SandbagsIA]

Please don't blast me but i think that the model presented in the video is oversimplified. I don't like it.
It completely ignores the stratification and mixing of ancient populations.

I feel that's part of the issue, for example sharing of genetics between South Asians and Europeans is not due to gene flow but common Yamnaya-related descent, for Native Americans it could be shared ANE in Europe/West Eurasia and the Americas.

Their simulations in the video do make sense but imo the timing of this sharing are off.