Wednesday, February 22, 2017
Rumors & leaks thread
Nothing much is happening, so I'm putting up this temporary thread for rumors and leaks about upcoming ancient DNA papers. Feel free to post your rumor or leak anonymously. Here's my somewhat cryptic contribution. Make of it what you will.
203 comments:
Read the rules before posting.
Comments by people with the nick "Unknown" are no longer allowed.
See also...
New rules for comments
Banned commentators list
Burn this post .
ReplyDeleteNah, it'll be up for a while.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere's no R1a in the Harappan remains. You know that right?
ReplyDeleteWell, I know that either you or the guys you are hearing this from , are in some kind of distress.
ReplyDeleteYou'll be in distress when the ancient DNA from South Asia is published. Expect no R1a in Harappa but a lot of ASI.
ReplyDeleteThe L-M20 connection to the Indus Valley Civilization has been speculated about for many years. It will be nice to see it either confirmed, or denied. I am guessing confirmed.
ReplyDeleteI guess you just wanted to pass time with some gibberish , its good for health you know :D .
ReplyDeleteAsk your sources if what I just said is gibberish.
ReplyDeleteI just check my magic 8 ball.
ReplyDelete"My Sources say No"
So... gonna have to agree with Nirjhar007 on this one.
Poor Nirjhar. OM is next.
ReplyDeleteROFL !.
ReplyDeleteStop making yourselves such a loon . I understand , that some of you here are afraid of it, I don't know why . But its coming .
L-M20 and R2. You'll come to terms with it soon.
ReplyDeleteWhat is this internet brain washing ? :D , hehehehehehe .
ReplyDeleteIt also depends of what they found, the biggest evidence will be if these people had no EHG but plenty of Iran Neolithic admixture, that could also tell us a lot about the elamo-dravidian expansion in the indian subcontinent.
ReplyDeleteFinally some one spoke something worth debating . Although, I must say, that Ulug Tepe was already coined yamnaya like, in the late bronze age . I think similarity with EBA groups can't be ruled out for N India as well , buts its just a speculation .
ReplyDeleteWhat will be really interesting to see if they show uniformity , the expanse of the mature phase was huge and it of course had a big population .
Yeah, bullshit, Harappans are like Iranian Neolithic farmers with a lot of South Asian admix. They will all turn out like that, more or less.
ReplyDeleteI heard that Attila the Hun spread L-M20 into this area. That's just what I heard. This IS a rumours post. My sources have been teling me.
ReplyDeleteLOL.
ReplyDeleteSorry bro (Dave) , not gonna happen .
But it has already happened.
ReplyDeleteIf you two start kissing, I am going to switch to another channel.
ReplyDeleteIt's over, Nirjhar. We'll be here to help you through the denial stage.
ReplyDeleteBe interesting to see if there's any LP there since it's now a hotspot
ReplyDeleteser nam,
ReplyDeleteThat area where the highest concentration is showed , is close to kalash .
They show good % of L .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalash_people#Genetic_origins
Its all possible , frankly . Lets just wait and see :) . But persons aware of Indian history , know what to expect .
Expect plenty of ASI in Harappans, because that's what they have.
ReplyDeleteI thought you hated Krause ;) . Anyway , Dr.Krause also thinks IEs to be there in Mature Period ! . But again that map was pure speculation as turned out . Though the location of PIE was more sensible.
ReplyDeleteOver at Anthrogenica, there's now two members who say they've heard from people associated with the Rakhigarhi investigation that the Rakhigarhi aDNA samples were overwhelmingly L-M20.
ReplyDelete02-03-2017, 07:35 AM #379
khanabadoshi
Posts 1,555
Sex ♂
Location USA
Ethnicity BalochKashmirUzbekKhowar
Nationality USA
Y-DNA R-Y17491 > R-YP4858
mtDNA A8a
Pakistan Azad Kashmir Afghanistan Iran India United States of America
So I don't know if this has been discussed, but I heard from somebody who knows an archeologist at the Rakhigarhi site.
They are going to release a paper later in the year and 80-90% of the samples were y-HG L-M20.
I will inquire for more details. I can't verify the authenticity of the man's claims.
The following was in response,
Yesterday, 02:54 AM #442
Generalissimo
Senior Member
Posts 1,637
Sex ♂
I've heard the same.
(Just remembered. Earlier at anthrogenica I had come across a discussion where Generalissimo was indicated to be Davidski. That would explain the subject of today's blog post here.)
Khanabadoshi's choice of expression has got me confused. Eurogenes had mentioned 12 ancient samples were genotyped from the Rakhigarhi site. Neither 80% nor 90% thereof produce very round figures, at 9.6 to 10.8 ancient persons. Does it imply the remaining 10-20% samples were female, so that all ancient males were L-M20. Or does it mean that oddly all of the samples are exclusively male, with the remaining 1-2 ancient people being some other Y haplogroup? (Since Chad Rohlfsen has said L and R2 above, though it's not clear if the R2 is meant predictively or based on a rumour or leak. Razib Khan had predicted H and L a couple of years back.)
@Nirjhar007,
Was any information of the same investigation leaked to you and was what you heard different from the above, since you're denying it so vehemently? Or are you merely expecting something else? Admittedly, 12 samples from one burial site may be too small and localised to be completely representative of such an expansive civilisation with such a large demography. So maybe you're reasoning for greater diversity overall, based on those grounds and based on what you've read about the archaeology and anthropology, but I think today's blog post is talking about the actual aDNA sampled.
The only thing that I find interesting from khanabadoshi is that he belongs to R1a-Z282 ;).
ReplyDeleteYes we need more samples .
@Nirjhar
ReplyDeleteHarappans have a lot of ASI, which is something you thought not possible. Obviously you need some time for that to sink in.
But if I am not wrong ,Chad can surely tell us about those Swat Culture samples , which are in libraries at Harvard (IIRC) . Come on Chad stop wasting your time and give some updates...
ReplyDeleteSwat will have Z93 and steppe admixture, as expected. So what?
ReplyDeleteNirjhar I recognize it as a lactase persistence hotspot and to an extent the gradient of the L M20 David posted mimics part of the LP map from Itan et al 2010
ReplyDeleteser nam,
ReplyDeleteAbout LP , yes S Asia has a long history of cattle domestication (Zebu) . But we are more interested in the y-dna,mtdna and autosome . This aDNA combined with Greek one is going to be massive.
But lets see what Chad tells about Swat .
I don't think majority of Rakhigarhi ydna will be L1a. From what I've read, it appears that the skeletons belong to different strata with the earliest going as far back as 5500 BC.
ReplyDeleteLet us also remember that Rakhigarhi is in Haryana, the homeland of Jatts and from what I know Jatts show the maximum NE Euro component in the Harappan calculator.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/what-the-harappa-ancestry-project-has-resolved/#.WK2LxDyXf7o
How does this happen ? That a region (Haryana) with the largest concentration of pre-Harappan and early Harappan sites and with the largest known Harappan site (Rakhigarhi) also ends up receiving the maximum steppe input ! It looks highly improbable.
Let us also not forget the recent Balanovsky paper. With the earliest split of Q3 likely happening in South Central Asia and also the presence of Q1 & Q2 lineages, along with the presence of R2 as well as very basal lineages of R1b and the likely presence of basal R1a lineages in South Central Asia ( Sharma et al 2009 ) and also in Iran, it is difficult to deny a very real possibility that ANE ancestry is very old in South Asia.
Once we realise this, it is just dogmatic to keep denying that Rakhigarhi could have presence of R1 lineages.
Jaydeep,
ReplyDeleteOnce we realise this, it is just dogmatic to keep denying that Rakhigarhi could have presence of R1 lineages.
Indeed ... In dogma the Kurgan theorists trust .
;) .
Although not al of them . Mallory has changed to be more practical , getting out of the la la land ;) .
Indeed, but it is also quite mischievous to try to imply that they have some insider info about Rakhigarhi aDNA which conforms to their biases, when infact they haven't a clue.
DeleteYou guys are going to need psychiatric help in a few months.
ReplyDeleteBut under which psychiatrist you are now mate?. As his diagnosis is not working! :P .
ReplyDelete@Jaydeep
ReplyDelete"How does this happen ? That a region (Haryana) with the largest concentration of pre-Harappan and early Harappan sites and with the largest known Harappan site (Rakhigarhi) also ends up receiving the maximum steppe input ! It looks highly improbable. "
I am having a very difficult time understanding why this couldn't be perfectly true. Please explain. Densely populated areas are very likely to have been influenced much more by immigration than rural areas. This is even true today.
Karl_K,
ReplyDeleteDensely populated areas are unlikely to attract immigrants unless these areas are seen as places of opportunity. In India, for example, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar are two most densely populated states, yet there is hardly any immigration to these regions from other states of India because these 2 states are seen as backward and less developed.
It is hypothesised that the reason Indo-Aryans managed to overwhelm the native Harappans, linguistically, religiously and culturally was because the Harappans were in decline. In such a scenario it looks very unlikely that incoming Indo-Aryans will have some strong motive to move into Haryana which is also at the eastern end of the Harappan world.
Also, the likelihood of an immigrant group being able to make a significant demographic impact on the native population is very less if the native population is quite high to begin with. Unless the native population comes in the grip of an epidemic that decimates their numbers.
@jaydeep
ReplyDelete"as far back as 5500 BC"
Is that correct? I think tis only 5500 BP
Lets look at the modern Q3 samples. Its is like a tree ring or stratified fluid flow. If you superimpose the green and red you get a trajectory spanning 7000 bp to 5000 bp. the green mutations are isolated lower incidence zombies but red descendants hint at what links them.
David your argument about q3 not bringing ASI to europe does not hold. we are talking about an obscure sub branch of Q3 that never had high numbers and moved out of india before 5000 BP. they simply could not have carried any ASI even if they had it originally. Also ASI is a modern construct. We have no clue about the autosome of people of a region of south asia that is 6000 years before ASI and 2000 km away from where ASI is concentrated.
for this lineage at least there is no migration to india from the steppe since the downstream mutations simply don't exist. They are only found in europe
ASI is not a modern construct, it's an ancient component representing indigenous South Asian foragers.
ReplyDeleteHarappans have a significant amount of this component.
So any migration originating in North India and surrounds at any time would be expected to spread ASI.
@Karl k, jaydeep
ReplyDelete" Densely populated areas are very likely to have been influenced much more by immigration than rural areas. This is even true today."
Here I agree with karl k. todays status of UP is less than a entury old. It cannot super imposed to IVC
Based on the little evidence from Kenoyer from strauntium analysis. Harappan populations are more heterogenous than similar cities in iraq syria etc. It could have been a population magnet with exotic neighbors.
ASI is not a modern construct, it's an ancient component representing indigenous South Asian foragers.
ReplyDeleteReally? you sampled the said "South Asian foragers". What age are these samples from?
They're from the Mesolithic.
ReplyDeletePostneo,
ReplyDeletehttp://m.tatkalnews.com/news/mainpage.aspx?name=news%5C110060-Rakhigarhi-gets-scientists-from-Cambridge-Harvard
https://www.google.co.in/amp/m.timesofindia.com/city/chandigarh/Descendants-of-Harappans-still-living-in-Rakhigarhi/amp_articleshow/53609286.cms
@ Jaydeep
ReplyDelete"Densely populated areas are unlikely to attract immigrants unless these areas are seen as places of opportunity."
Then they must have been seen as places of opportunity because it happened. The history of what exactly happened is unknown to anyone as of yet. There is absolutely no way that R1a-Z93 originated in the Indus Valley, yet it has a very high occurrence there today.
I don't have to imagine that some of the most densely populated areas of ancient Europe and the Americas today have a majority of R1a and R1b haplogroups.
@jaydeep
ReplyDeleteI already know the settlement is old.
The articles only show the settlement is old but I think the skeletons are not from the oldest level and more like 4500 BP.
@David
do you have a reference of the mesolithic south asian forager site? where is it? Has it been dated. Have they tested DNA?
How do you know that the skeletons are not that old. Did you read the following ?
Delete'The DNA test results may even alter the chronology of the Harappan civilization.“There is some new data and the dates are going back quite earlier than it was previously thought. This will have an important implication on the beginning of the Harappan civilization and its development.Some of the dates are like 5,000 to 5,500 BC or even earlier. So far, such early dates have not been reported from either Mohenjo-daro or Harappa. There is a possibility of some tribes which may have gone back that long but nothing else,“ says Shinde'
The above implies that some of the DNA maybe from the early levels. I wonder what makes you think otherwise.
DeleteI don't know anything. I'm waiting like to you.
ReplyDelete@Chad
ReplyDeleteWe already know that you don't know anything. Make something up so people have something to discuss besides R1b is from Italy.
haha
ReplyDeleteWell postneo, our Z-282 friend is talking about this , I think :
ReplyDeletehttp://eurogenes.blogspot.in/2016/10/the-peopling-of-south-asia-illustrated.html
Chad,
I don't know anything. I'm waiting like to you.
No you are not waiting like me , you are cooking nonsense to pass the time, perhaps the wait is providing you guys some tension . Anyway, truth will come out , no matter what....
I don't spout nonsense. BTW, I don't know what Harvard is testing more than anyone else.
Delete@Chad
ReplyDelete"No you are not waiting like me , you are cooking nonsense to pass the time"
That is crazy
Nobody has ever asked him to make things up.
Trash talking before the big game.Not many rumors but still entertaining.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post. But let me say something about the map. Map is very wrong. In western asia especialy in levant and Northern anatolia it has high frequency. Highest in north east of Turkey which is between %20-30 in Trabzon and Rize. But diversity is low there at least for now. On the other hand diversity of L1 in Levant and mesopotamia is too high. Many sbsclades of L1a- L1c and almost all subsclades of L1b found along mesopotamian and levant populations. In south and central asia only L1a and L1c is found and maximum TMRCA is 7900 years. Which points pre IVC. Thus it seems David you will be right that IVC would be something mixture of Iran Neolethic and ASI but also maybe some Levant Neolethic too. And we should not forget aDNA in armenian Chalcholethic were L1a.
ReplyDeleteDave could you ask your source which subsclade were they? Most probably L-M2398(downstream of L1c) or L-M27 (L1a). L1b would be great suprise.
The Indus Valley Civilization remains will all be Y-haplogroup Q. Secret Inuit. You heard it here first. ( ͡° ͜Ê– ͡°)
ReplyDeleteIf the rumored numbers are right, for Y-DNA L then there has been something like a two-thirds dilution relative to the Harappan era (or more). This is far more than most Indo-Aryan demic contribution scenarios suggest.
ReplyDeleteIf Harappan is mostly L the distribution of this Y-DNA also favors discontinuity between Harappans and Dravidians and suggests that the Harappan language may have had nothing to do with the Dravidian one.
@Gökhan Agreed this map is very inaccurate. Actually L1b was found in Northern Afghanistan(2 samples) and few Samples in the Makrani Baloch(but it's fully absent in other balochis from Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. Possibly because the Makranis have recent west asian admix). Other than that, it's pretty absent in the whole region. Iran has a pretty intreseting Y-DNA L diverstiy as well.
ReplyDelete-
The Wiki - L-M20 page is much more accurate than the picture they're using(regarding frequencies).
Ironically L is found in an elite hunnic burial and possibly in IVC. The huns avenged their long forgotten IVC cousins.
ReplyDelete@andrew
ReplyDeleteIf Harappan is mostly L the distribution of this Y-DNA also favors discontinuity between Harappans and Dravidians and suggests that the Harappan language may have had nothing to do with the Dravidian one.
I think you might be surprised how Dravidian-like the Harappans come out genetically (in the modern sense).
Dr. McLeaksmuch told me Harappan had R1a Z93.
ReplyDeleteDavidski the Minoan and Mycenean samples are being being processed any guess on when an actual paper or papers come out?
ReplyDelete@Al Bundy
ReplyDeleteI'm guessing the next big paper will be the Bell Beaker behemoth, and then the one after that will probably be about South Asia, with the Harappan and Swat samples.
Rumor has it, the Bell Beaker paper won't just have samples from Western and Central Europe, but also from Eastern Europe and West Asia.
As far as I can see, the Greek samples don't really fit into those two papers, so they might be in a paper specifically about Greece and Anatolia, if there is one on the way.
the maps are awesome. This hindu dude believing in indigenous Indian aryans clearly is another retarded moron.
ReplyDeleteThanks Davidski.
ReplyDeleteThe BB behemoth is obviously interesting but for PIE Anatolia and India are more important correct?
ReplyDeleteHas there been any word on the 81 sample Baltic DNA paper? I belive it was mentioned here with the EAA abstracts last year.
ReplyDeleteI haven't heard anything about a publication date.
ReplyDeleteThe results look similar those from the Jones et al. Baltic paper, except there's apparently no sign of EHG before Corded Ware, which might be because most of the samples are from more southerly Baltic sites.
Thanks for the update! Still pre Corded Ware R1 without any EHG.... is that expected? Also do you know of any Comb Ware samples?
DeleteI don't know if there's any R1 in these Baltic samples dated to before Corded Ware. Might not be. R1a apparently shows up with Corded Ware and Balto-Slavic R1a subclades are apparently found in subsequent Kurgan cultures in the region.
ReplyDeleteHaven't seen or heard anything about more Comb Ware samples getting published.
I hate to distract you guys from your "important' warrior-genetic IE discussions, but what do do think of the finding of mtDNA B2 lineages in Chaco Canyon among the Pueblo? The study demonstrates a matrilineal elite and, IMO, the pueblo folks are closest to the Neolithic farmers of Europe with similar pottery to the Dimini of Greece, agglomerative housing like Catal Hoyuk and horticulture.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean? B2 is one of the five major markers of Americans.
DeleteI'm not familiar with Amerindian uniparental markers. Maybe someone else can chime in?
ReplyDelete@jaydeep
ReplyDeleteThe above implies that some of the DNA maybe from the early levels. I wonder what makes you think otherwise.
I don't recall perhaps an early article when the korean team was working with the remains. There were 4 skeletons then, the count has increased.
They need to study other details too, strautium analysis. Are they truly representative of the local population etc.
@postneo
ReplyDeleteYou should get in touch with the archaeologists from the Rakhigarhi site. They might not be aware that testing isotopes might be useful, or that they may have stumbled upon a couple of burials with recent migrants.
"the maps are awesome. This hindu dude believing in indigenous Indian aryans clearly is another retarded moron."
ReplyDeleteJust for the sake of argument, if R1a-M417 was found in the ancient samples there (perhaps with anything like ANE), it will reopen the question. And until we actually know, rather than depend on rumoured leaks that can't yet be verified, it's only possible to carefully speculate about what might or might not be found.
After reading the comments here, I want to make a more general remark. If people are 100% sure that no R1a-M417 will be found in the ancient Rakhigarhi samples or the earlier ones in South (Central) Asia, then the kind of responses here can be understood as merely intending to snap those in denial out of the inevitable.
But if there's not 100% certainty, so that there's any chance at all that the ancient Rakhigarhi or earlier S(C) Asian samples can turn out some kind of R1a-M417 for example, then if any of this does turn up, the responses here would be rightly construed as racist taunts and no one will ever hear the end of it. Because denying that some non-European ethnic group can't possibly have had some haplogroups claimed for Europe early on, and insisting that these are exclusively European, would become a patently racist position if the first ethnic group turned out to have long had the haplogroup after all. I'm not saying the samples will turn out that way, of course, I'm just stating the inevitable consequences of current behaviour if wrong. I don't know about others, but I'm not privy to any unpublished aDNA information, so I'm being very consciously careful.
@ak2014b
ReplyDeleteIt's a more complex question.
Could there be old R1a-M417 in Rakhigarhi? Of course that could be true. Small groups of people certainly did lots of things in the Bronze Age. They moved around a lot, and over huge distances.
In all of the Indus Valley Civilization, there are very few burials that could contain ancient DNA. This fact alone should make everyone skeptical of far reaching conclusions. Perhaps these people did not actually represent the general population. We do not know.
But as for the big picture, there was obviously a migration of Indo-Europeans into South Asia. They are most likely to have brought the bulk of the R1a1 haplogroup and associated autosomal markers.
No one said anything about Q3 to me, and I didn't see it mentioned in other leaks about Harappa.
ReplyDeleteThe message we're all getting, one way or another, is that L-M20 is by far the dominant marker in these Harappan remains. No one seems to know anything about any R1a in them, but R2 is a possibility.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI will be surprised if there's Q, since no one has said anything about Q being there. Like I say though, R2 is a possibility at this stage.
ReplyDelete"Chad Rohlfsen said...
ReplyDeleteL-M20 and R2. You'll come to terms with it soon.
February 22, 2017 at 3:48 AM"
Not sure if the above was a guess or was also from a leak. But if it was a guess, then it conforms perfectly to the following, which appeared I think around 6 hours later at anthrogenica:
Yesterday, 05:37 PM #478
khanabadoshi
A second unrelated source says, majority are L-M20, and the remaining subclades are R2.
Again, I can't verify the claims. My initial source doesn't seem to want to tell me more haha.
Great investigative work there. Well done.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@David
ReplyDelete"Great investigative work there. Well done."
It was no more than an act of copying across a rumoured leak, as befits this page. Like everyone, I'd like to have advance news on every aDNA paper out there too, but rather from official sources than hearsay. And at present, khanabadoshi's reveals still fall under hearsay, even if they could turn out to be right.
I have heard from a couple of interested Indians who had requested information on the Rakhigarhi aDNA (from Indian researchers, I think) that they were told to wait until it was made public. It's strange and a little troubling that the same information is readily leaked to everyone else, if true. (It's to be hoped that Indian national security is not dealt with in the same manner.)
Either no one is leaking it or it is indeed being selectively leaked. And if selectively, then I'm surprised that the people involved on the research end aren't fired and blacklisted for it, they ought to be. I should say that I've read online that the South Korean researchers involved seem to be indiscriminately honouring the confidentiality of the research, where aware, so they're not suspect.
Surely you don't think that it's possible to hide all the details in such a large international multidisciplinary project?
ReplyDeleteNot everyone who one way or another gets access to the results has signed confidentiality papers, or is even aware that they can't reveal the results.
But it makes no difference whether the information here is convincing. The paper is in all likelihood coming out this year, maybe in 5-6 months. And then you'll know the truth.
Any word on that North Africa paper you mentioned last year?
ReplyDeleteI find the larger amount of WHG in North Africans than other MENA people much more interesting than confirming already near bullet proof theories like PIE homeland.
Apparently soon, whatever that means. Maybe next year.
ReplyDeleteI'd assume there'd be a fair amount of J2 as well, no?
ReplyDeleteWhile there is no direct sampling in Chechnyia itself, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that L-M20 is very common there:
ReplyDelete"L-M20 was found in 51% of Syrians from Raqqa, a northern Syrian city in which its previous inhabitants have been wiped out by the Mongol genocides and repopulated in recent times by local Bedouin populations and Chechen war refugees from Russia (El-Sibai 2009)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L-M20#Europe
The Bedouins would have been almost all Y-DNA J1 with a smattering of J2, so the Chechen war refugees must have had considerably more than 51% L-M20, which would give it the highest concentration in the world or very nearly so.
@RoyKing
ReplyDeleteOne good source for New World mtDNA is Erika Tamm, et al., "Beringian Standstill and Spread of Native American Founders" (PLOS One 2007) (this is a third generation cut and paste so some of the following may be paraphrase and summary while other parts not so designated may be direct quotes):
"Tamm notes three minor mtDNA clades found in North America but not South America (X2a, D2 and D3) in addition to the four ubiquitous founding mtDNA clades (A2, B2, C1 and D1) and discusses alternative viable scenarios for First American migration.
Two new founding mtDNA clades also present in South America C4c and D4h3 are identified, and C1b, C1c and C1d are identified as founding subclades while C1a is Asian. Tamm hypothesizes that A2a and C1a in Asia are back migrations from the New World and that the D2 (found in Inuits and the Na-Dene) and D3 (fond only in Inuits) are subsequent late circumpolar arrivals in the New World.
X2a is envisioned as part of the founding population despite its lack of a South American presence. Thus, the study imagines nine founding mtDNA lineages in the Native American founding population, all of which, except X2a, are found on both continents.
Specifically, haplogroup D2 consists of two sister clades, one found only in Siberia (D2b) and the other found in northernmost Eskimos, Chukchi, Aleut, and Athapaskans (D2a). While sub-haplogroup D2a is shared between ethno-historically close related Beringian Aleuts and Eskimos, its sister clade D2b is spread among populations from distantly related linguistic groups (Tungusic, Turkic, Mongolic). A close relationship of matrilineal ancestry between individuals from different linguistic groups may be due to an overlap of geographic range of their ancestors approximately at the time of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary. Alternatively, some populations may have received the D2b variant through more recent gene flow. It is also worthwhile to note the absence of D2 in all other Native American populations, suggesting that D2 diversified in Beringia after the initial migration into the Americas had occurred. Haplogroup D3 may have also reached America through more recent genetic exchange. It is spread in Nganasans, Mansi, Evenks, Ulchi, Tuvas, Chukchi and Siberian Eskimos and recently reported in Greenland and Canadian Inuit populations, but absent in other Native Americans.
Surprisingly, the study also found a Native American sub-type of haplogroup A2 among Evenks and Selkups in southern and western Siberia. Previously, this HVS I motif is reported in one Yakut-speaking Evenk in northwestern Siberia. A novel demographic scenario of relatively recent gene flow from Beringia to deep into western Siberia (Samoyedic-speaking Selkups) is the most likely explanation for the phylogeography of haplogroup A2a, which is nested within an otherwise exclusively Native American A2 phylogeny."
For mtDNA in the Southwest U.S. a blog post that sums up the relevant information in one place as well as any other source can be found at https://gamblershouse.wordpress.com/2014/11/30/the-evidence-from-dna-in-the-southwest/ mtDNA B2 is by far the most common in ancient Puebloans (about 69% in one sample), with mtDNA A2 and D relative uncommon and X almost absent.
Haven't heard about a North Africa autosomal paper. I know there are supposed to be mtdna links between Upper Paleolithic North Africa and Europe. If there was a WHG variant there, I wonder if it will have any importance at all for Iberia_MN and Iberia_EN, as there are some PCA tests in which they look off from a straightforward Anatolia_N->WHG cline.
ReplyDeleteThe Anatolians we have aren't ancestral to European farmers, but closely related.
Delete@RoyKing
ReplyDelete"I hate to distract you guys from your "important' warrior-genetic IE discussions, but what do do think of the finding of mtDNA B2 lineages in Chaco Canyon among the Pueblo? The study demonstrates a matrilineal elite and, IMO, the pueblo folks are closest to the Neolithic farmers of Europe with similar pottery to the Dimini of Greece, agglomerative housing like Catal Hoyuk and horticulture."
B2 is a subtype of B4 (which is found mostly in East and Southeast Asia) and B2 is exclusively found in the Americas. Living in Colorado, I've visited Pueblo culture remains and agree that their material culture is very similar to early Neolithic Europe in the instances you mention. Indeed, some very subtle points, like construction techniques used in Neolithic SW Europe and West Asia and SW Asia that are no longer used are found in ancient Pueblo construction. But, there is virtually no possibility that this is anything other than convergent technological development. Every culture that has contacted the Americas pre-Columbian, such as the Inuit and the Paleo-Eskimos and the Vikings and the Easter Island people would have had no knowledge of the Neolithic-like aspects of early Fertile Crescent Neolithic material culture, and there are no genetic traces of early Neolithic related populations in the American SW. There is good reason to think that matrilineal v. patrilineal societies flow from the nature of the food production technologies involved and these similarities may drive the parallel material culture and astronomy and social organization similarities.
B2 and matrilinearity is not surprising, but it could have turned out otherwise. It is impressive that this elite matriline persisted for some 300 years.
ReplyDeleteThere was a study of the Neolithic Dawenkou culture in eastern China which found evidence of matrilocality there. Neolithic European aDNA doesn't look particularly matrilocal to me, but I don't think I've seen a detailed analysis of that question.
@andrew
ReplyDeleteI certainly wasn't arguing that B2/Pueblo culture had a genetic relationship with Neolithic Europe! I agree that the similarities are cultural convergence rather than migration/diffusion. I brought up the article for its methodological and analogical virtues; namely, that a surfeit of B2 in Chaco Canyon is analogous to the elevation of G2 in Neolithic Treilles cave for example. It also suggests that Neolithic Europe was patrilineal--few Y lineages with broader array of mtDNA lineages, the opposite, presumably, from the pattern at Chaco Canyon. I think that the demographic tension between the European Neolithic and the Bronze Age steppe cultures was an struggle between two patrilineal societies.
The B2 Pueblo study is nice, but the conclusions are a big stretch. We have no idea who these people were. They were buried with riches and jewelry, and they shared the same mitochondrial line, and some were mother/daughter, that's about it.
ReplyDeleteWe have no idea if they were leaders, or priests, or what their place in society was.
To clarify, for anyone wondering, what I posted was hearsay. ie. my source has a personal relationship with one of the archeologists at the site, and he told me what he was told. I have no idea if the source is reliable or telling the truth. However, I can't think of a reason why he'd lie about it -- I didn't solicit it, nor did that person know I'd have any interest in the information. I certainly have no reason to make it up -- I don't have some preference of what haplogroup "should" be there; I leave that talk to the great thinkers and hypothesis-formulators commenting here. This is the reason why I posted on AG, to see if anyone else has heard the same. Evidently, other people have heard the same as well. So I suppose either there is merit to the claim, or someone is spreading consistent misinformation.
ReplyDeleteEither way, from what I can tell anyone who claims to have any knowledge or relation to the study has said "L-M20". I haven't heard anyone claim they have knowledge of the results and say otherwise. Has anyone heard anything counter to this from someone? I would think someone would counter my post or this blogpost right away if they had intimate knowledge that was contrary. At the very least they would say, "No, it's not L-M20".
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell if you know most of them, then you can ask them what the Y-haplogroups are.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis has nothing to do with Khana. See here...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/pakistan/comments/5rp6va/approximately_4000_yearold_swastika_seals_from/
But that's not my source.
So I guess you must mean that at least two different sources are lying, and they just happened to pick L-M20 as their haplogroup of choice by sheer coincidence.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI've messaged him again asking if he is willing to share the archeologist's name or any other details. What he responds, I'll post here. I've also asked if he knows anything of the mtDNA.
ReplyDeleteI'm not claiming anything Nirjhar007; I don't know anyone related to the study. I just presented someone's claim that they do know something about the results, and asked if anyone had heard something similar, precisely because he maybe lying. As David says, it doesn't have anything to do with me -- I just made a simple post.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteL-M20 would not be surprising. Statistically, even getting 100% L-M20 from a handful of skeletons is not unexpected. But I'd be disappointed if we didn't get some NGS sequences of G or J clades though. It's the non-L haplotypes we're interested in.
ReplyDeleteNGS data for the L individuals would still be useful.
https://yfull.com/tree/L
We've got several ethnic groups represented on this tree, figuring out where IVC individuals place would be enlightening.
Just to chime in for no good reason... This data has already been around for a while now, with large research groups on multiple continents involved. There will probably be a minimum of 50 authors, and 100% have to have read the drafts before they could submit anything. The papers are either already in review or close to that stage, so they probably also have have asked many people for comments and suggestions. I would make a conservative guess that a thousand people are very well aware of the general results by now.
ReplyDeleteYou don't need to know WHO leaked anything (unless you are Donald Trump).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Nirjhar007
ReplyDeleteI assume you are not talking to me? but how would a majority L-M20 in IVC be surprising to anyone?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteVery expected response.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of leaks, looks like Nirjhar has sprung a leak.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Nirjhar
ReplyDeleteI'm curious, do you have information contradicting the idea that it's L-M20? Not that I trust such an unsupported rumour either, but why would L be surprising?
Going by current demography, It does not support the presence of L there. May be it is making Nirjhar uncomfortable in the bigger picture.
ReplyDeleteIt has good presence in West coast of India. Kashmir is the only northern state with significant presence. Not much in north. My guess Rakhigarhi will be R2 which is widespread from South India to Chechenya, Turkey even before Romany.
Agree displacement is always possibility. Same time frame as Rakhigarhi from North Pakistan/Afghanistan will be R1a.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHow do you know it's a lie? Do you have any evidence that it is?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJournalism 101: don't reveal anonymous sources.
ReplyDeleteSo unfortunately I'll have to decline your offer. But like I say, the paper's coming out in 5-6 months, so not long to wait now.
@Davidski
ReplyDeleteJust to see if we can agree on something, let's assume the two extreme possibilities; supposing the results are L-M20 and overwhelmingly so, I have no doubt that despite the strong evidences to the contrary from other fields that I have come to understand, without a word spend in protest or rationalising the result to accommodate those long held beliefs, I would accept the direct and singular implication of the 'Harappan L'. I would also readily invest my time to reinterpret the findings from other fields to seek a consensus.
On the other hand, if the result is predominated by Z-93 with little or no ASI, what would your mature intellectual response be? Will you accept the direct and singular implication of 'Harappan R1a'?. Or will the data be brutally tortured to confess what clearly must have been false assumptions?
In short,I am curious as to what nature of result would change your current position. L would suffice for me.
@Acharya Agnimitra
ReplyDeleteYour hypothetical doesn't really work, because it postulates two things that are already impossible.
1) it's impossible for Harappans to show a predominance of Z93 because of the ancient data that we already have from Mesolithic to Bronze Age Europe showing populations that have nothing to do with South Asia packing a lot of R1a, including Z93 and related subclades at various levels of the R1a phylogeny
2) it's impossible for Harappans to show little to no ASI, because I know for a fact that they show a lot of ASI.
I don't care that you don't understand the implications of the ancient data from Europe, and thus can confuse yourself into believing that Z93 is native to India. That's your problem not mine. Nor do I care whether you believe me that Harappans carry a lot of ASI. Like I say, the paper on Rakhigarhi is coming soon.
Yep. Torture it will be.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm pretty sure this will pan out, as it's almost exactly what one would have expected.
ReplyDeleteThe paper is very close to being published, just a few more months, so we’ll find out soon enough.
Keeping that in mind, I have a feeling that these IVC samples will be exceedingly similar to people like the Chamar (or at least those current "Chamar" samples, the ones which probably hail from Uttar Pradesh).
So, for the fun of it, I decided to explore Chamar genetic affinities, and then look at the South Central Asian picture, assuming (for a moment) that the Chamar are good stand-ins for those IVC samples (the Rakhigarhi ones). Of course, this is just an intellectual exercise. And personally speaking, I don’t know, nor am I going to feign confidence in the results I've obtained.
As always, it's my standard setup. Though, I did introduce some tweaks.
Mainly, I tried it with different ASI references, to give a broad sense of where the general proportions fall.
With the Jarawa:
50.9% Iran_Neolithic
32.4% Jarawa
16.7% MA1
Distance=3.8879
With the Onge:
49.45% Iran_Neolithic
33.55% Onge
17.00% MA1
Distance=3.8884
With an Indian Austroasiatic population:
44.7% Bonda
40.3% Iran_Neolithic
15.0% MA1
Distance=3.0616
With my ASI simulation:
45.1% ASI
41.1% Iran_Neolithic
13.8% MA1
Distance=1.6645
With all possible ASI stand-ins included:
45.1% ASI
41.1% Iran_Neolithic
13.8% MA1
Distance=1.6645
(It’s the same model, 0% from Jarawa, Onge, and Bonda. This always happens; my ASI simulation is consistently preferred by both South Asians and South Central Asians)
So, the Chamar are a fusion between West Eurasian and "ASI" ancestries, and it seems that they consistently lean in a West Eurasian direction. It seems that the ASI proportion is anywhere from 30% to almost 50%.
The West Eurasian element is obviously Iran_Neolithic-related, but packing much more ANE ancestry/affinity. In this analysis, the Chamar don’t seem to have any Bronze Age steppe ancestry. If I were to guess, perhaps analyses which construe them as having steppe ancestry are being thrown off by the extra ANE (in comparison to Iran_Neolithic).
Anyway, this all makes sense to me, as I can easily see those North Indian IVC samples as being ANE-shifted Iran_Neolithic-related + ASI (anywhere from 30% to perhaps almost half).
So, for the fun of it, if we assume that these Chamar are good stand-ins for IVC, how do South Central Asian populations stack up, when it comes to IVC-related admixture?
Again, just an exercise, I’m not betting on anything.
To be continued...
Continuing from where we left off...
ReplyDeleteA few quick examples:
Pakistani Pashtun, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
29.05% Iran_Neolithic
28.75% Chamar
28.15% Yamnaya
11.55% Iran_Chalcolithic
2.50% Mongola
Distance=0.1436
Kalash
38.5% Yamnaya
36.90% Iran_Neolithic
24.55% Chamar
Distance=0.2206
Pakistani Pashtun, FATA (northerner)
33.70% Iran_Chalcolithic
20.75% Yamnaya
20.40% Chamar
11.65% Iran_Neolithic
10.35% MA1
3.15% Mongola
Distance=0.2024
Me
25.00% Iran_Chalcolithic
22.60% Iran_Neolithic
20.30% Chamar
14.05% MA1
13.35% Yamnaya
4.70% Mongola
Distance=0.2099
Afghan Pashtun, Ghazni
32.05% Yamnaya
28.40% Iran_Chalcolithic
20.10% Chamar
16.45% Iran_Neolithic
3.00% Mongola
Distance=0.2065
Pashtun_Afghanistan
34.70% Iran_Chalcolithic
32.75% Yamnaya
15.30% Chamar
10.55% Iran_Neolithic
5.80% Mongola
0.90% MA1
Distance=0.0603
Pakistani Pashtun, FATA (Waziristan)
37.30% Yamnaya
20.95% Iran_Neolithic
18.65% Iran_Chalcolithic
14.00% Chamar
4.65% Levant_Neolithic
4.35% Mongola
0.10% Srubnaya
Distance=0.2008
If we assume continuity between North Indian IVC and Chamar-like people, there isn't much IVC-related admixture in South Central Asia, a range of only 25%-15% when examining geographically diverse/ethnographically distinct Pashtuns.
Now, compared to proper South Asians, from an area of northern South Asia which was a crucial/essential part of the IVC:
Sindhi
43.35% Chamar
26.30% Iran_Neolithic
19.85% Yamnaya
10.50% Iran_Chalcolithic
Distance=0.2316
Or, UP_Brahmins:
63.00% Chamar
20.8% Yamnaya
13.9% Iran_Neolithic
1.4% Iran_Chalcolithic
Distance=0.2004
Interesting stuff, although it is odd that Yamnaya is still preferred to Srubnaya + MA1.
I won’t comment on that angle. I’ll just patiently wait for the aDNA to sort out why R1b-dominated steppe cultures are better for Central/South Asian modelling, rather than R1a-dominated steppe cultures. We’ll find out soon enough, I guess (and hope).
Over at anthrogenica, someone asked whether there was "Any input on the mtDNA" from the Rakhigarhi samples. Gravetto-Danubian responded as follows, though it's not informative other than indicating that he knows but isn't telling:
ReplyDelete02-24-2017, 02:13 AM #491
Gravetto-Danubian
They make sense
I may be misinterpreting the above statement, since 3 weeks earlier, he seemed to not know about the Y Hgs present in the Rakhigarhi samples as he showed genuine interest in his following response to khanabadoshi's 80%-90% L-M20 reveal:
02-03-2017, 11:26 AM #385
Gravetto-Danubian
That would be interesting . Weren't the Armenian Chalcolithics L ?
Another alternative may be that, in the space of the 3 weeks after khanabadoshi's post, Gravetto-Danubian had been provided information on the mtDNA found in Rakhigarhi. Presumably he would then also have heard of what its Y data. His source might be more reliable than that of khanabadoshi, since khanabadoshi appears to have heard it from someone on an internet discussion forum whose identity can't be established.
Assuming these rumours are true there'd still be a lot of questions left unanswered. The relationship between various steppe cultures and IA speakers would have to be cleared up. The exact mode by which India was Indo-Aryanised, the relationship between IAs and BMAC would also need to be determined. I'd still be skeptical about the IVC language = Dravidian theory given most modern linguists think otherwise and a linguistic reconstruction of proto-dravidian suggests a neolithic/chalcolithic rural society subsisting primarily on pastoralism
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt's in Feb that khanabadoshi's source, Davidski and Gravetto-Danubian have all mentioned hearing of the results. Is it now being leaked to whoever asks for it? Then maybe more people should request the Y and mtDNA results to confirm for themselves. At anthrogenica, khanabadoshi said his source was Indian, but there's been nothing yet to convince me that khanabadoshi's source was legitimate. Since Indian and South Korean researchers don't otherwise seem to be giving it up, it is probably the American or European institutes involved that are leaking it. And it's anyway more likely that Davidski and Gravetto-Danubian have correspondents in the American and European institutes than in the Indian or South Korean ones.
ReplyDeleteI must say, it's very unexpectedly unprofessional of Harvard, Cambridge or the Danish institute (is it Geogenetics), who only lately joined in the study, if members of one or more of them are the ones doing the leaking before the data is made public, since this seems to go against the express intentions of the original, Asian research groups. And it makes those western institutes whose members have been leaking it both unreliable and unfit for future collaboration. Official sources should make things public for everyone at the agreed time, not go behind the backs of collaborating research institutes and leak information ahead of time, nor allow any of their members to do so. At least, not when it is not their data nor their project originally. It dulls the value of the final work when it appears, which seems almost deliberate.
I know my own institute would be fuming if this happened to research we were involved in, and there's been bad blood and nasty repercussions over far less. However, I don't know how Asian research centres deal with such things. Maybe they're far more forgiving of international institutes' indiscretions, though that seems an idiotic reaction.
From a general professional perspective, I'm starting to become more interested in who leaked the results to Davidski, Gravetto Danubian and even khanabadoshi, than in the actual results. Though this may only be because we might already know the results, since Davidski strenuously vouches for the accuracy of his source and what they've told him.
@Nirjhar
On that note, I think it's unfair of you to accuse Davidski of lying when you have no proof to offer against him. Admittedly, when the data is published, if the results turn out different, then you may point to the current discussions and accuse khanabadoshi or Davidski of lying (or racism or whatever), and others will then be forced to agree. (Tell you what, if that happens, I will then agree.) I'm not saying you have to accept any of the leaks, as it's not official, but it's wrong to make accusations of deliberate mischief without proof.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Nirjhar
ReplyDelete"The rumors are NOT true ."
If you turned out right, then I'd say it's the Indian supporters of the steppe hypothesis, like Jijnasu and I believe Atrior, that stand to be embarrassed the most. It's natural for Europeans to support the steppe hypothesis, even if there's a minute chance that they're wrong (in this temporary absence of aDNA evidence from Greece and SC Asia). It's unnatural for non-Europeans to be quite as fervent in pushing for the steppe hypothesis, if there were any minute chance, as you claim, that they'll be proven wrong. I can't imagine their own people will allow them to live this down.
So now I think that, rather than accusing Davidski and others of lying (or racism, as I can envision happening in the hypothetical scenario), you all ought to become more occupied with accusing people in your own midst of selling you out, if you turned out right.
I am curious to see Rakhigarhi results also . It won't prove anything whether it is L1 or H or R2 or R1a.
ReplyDeletePeople who are talking about R1a are the two ends of racist ideology.
No R1a: European racist.
Yes R1a: Indian Racist.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNathan,
ReplyDeleteIf you will observe, no one here who has been open to even the remotest possibility that the result with be z93 has shown adamant refusal to entertain alternatives. They don't deserve the tag of racism. On the other hand, there are those who refuse to even hypothetically think of a result that contradicts them (what is the point of this thread anyway).
This result is important. The IVSC has remained condemned to obscurity for a hundred years, even though normal protocol applied everywhere else on earth would warrant identifying its inhabitants with the earliest attested population in the region UNTIL PROVEN otherwise. Finally we can have some clarity.
And yet, it is terrifying to think that there are people who would instantly undermine the results.Truly a disservice..
Sein,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your effort once again.
I think it would be safe to argue, based on these results, that the IVC people were not like the Chamars. It is extremely unlikely that the IVC people could have suffered a 50 % and higher population turnover - that too at the hands of the steppe pastoralists, whose population could not have been very much at all. At best a turnover of 20 - 25 % seems legitimate.
It is also instructive that ANE is present even in those populations that show no Yamnaya affinity. From earlier analysis, it is also clear that ANE has a pan-South Asian presence. This clearly illustrates the very ancient presence of ANE in South Asia. Certainly it appears to have likely been present even in Mesolithic South Asian Hunter Gatherers. This therefore raises the very important question - which y-dna could you associate with ANE in South Asia ? It has to be either R, Q or P.
The ANE in South Asia is also significantly higher than in Iran. This is a significant info which might turn out to be crucial.
Lastly, I have a request for you. Since we are into these intellectual exercises, could you carry out one for me ? Let us test whether the Southern population that admixed in Yamnaya could come from SC Asia. Kalash today is one of those relict populations that appear to me to most likely be like the bronze age population of SC Asia.
Now can you try for Yamnaya as a 3-way admixture between EHG, EEF & Kalash ? It would be interesting to see the results.
@Nirjhar
ReplyDeleteAha, so you have your own source and they say something different? The plot thickens.
@Nathan Paul
It won't prove anything much if it is H1/R2/L1/J2 (since it is only one site and R1a could be present elsewhere), but *if* it is R1a-Z93 it will mean that must have reached India prior to the southward spread of Andronovo. And then we would really need more Central Asian and Iranian aDNA to find the route it took (Iran-Maykop? Invisible SC Asian herders?).
More useful will be autosomal DNA (if the coverage is any good, which it likely won't be).
Capra,
ReplyDeleteYou are forgetting the samples size , its healthy and is a crucial factor :) . But I agree though that its only one site and the civilization was vast with population of millions ! .
The coverage should be good enough , the skeletons were in excellent condition .
ak2014b,
ReplyDeleteYou should note that there are two types of beliefs among Indians regarding the Indo-Europeanisation of India.
The first one is based on the historiography that follows the footsteps of colonial Indology that theorised about the Aryan Invasion Theory. A lot of Indians believe in it because it is the established view of the Western Academia and also the Marxist historians of India.
The second category consists of people like me (who are in majority in India), who base their views on traditional Indian historical tradition that explains how North India became Indo-European starting from one particular region within North India itself. This tradition also talks of migration of some groups, due to wars and conflicts, towards west into Afghanistan and from there finally north of Hindu Kush into Central Asia. Nowhere in this tradition do we find even a trifling mention of any movement from Central Asia or West Asia into South Asia. And so far, those who proposed & supported the Aryan Invasion Theory have now converted into a Migration theory since they could not prove any invasion. The Migration Theory is also , of course, without any proof. The modus operandi seems to be, propose a theory and assert it as fact. Keep repeating it for many decades and it becomes a truth - no need to actually substantiate it with hard facts. And when Indians question this theory - label them as nutty Hindu Nationalists.
@nathan Paul
ReplyDelete"It won't prove anything whether it is L1 or H or R2 or R1a."
I partially agree. It wont have any bearing as far as indo-european languages are concerned. But it will have sometjing to say about supposed Andronovo impact in 1500 BC.
Fits of UP chamars by Sein hint that andonovo impact is not likely. But this will be better proof.
@Nirjhar
Is David a liar? You can't fault a child for believing in Santa claus. He may believe his source is genuine. Perhaps it is, who knows.
But there is something he is lying about. He claims that mesolithic South asian forager DNA has been sampled
@David:
Please prove it.
@capra internetensis
ReplyDeleteYou're making two wrong assumptions.
Firstly, Nirjhar doesn't know the results. He doesn't even know the most basic results from Rakhigarhi, those that I've been able to confirm, because if he did, he would no longer be posting in this thread.
When he says he knows the "truth", he's talking about the version of reality that he's concocted for himself.
Secondly, most of the 20 samples from Rakhigarhi have already been genotyped, and there's no reason to assume that their coverage won't be any good.
@Jaydeep
Yamnaya can't be modeled as part Kalash with formal statistics, because Kalash have South Asian ancestry and Yamnaya lacks it. You should have realized this years ago, it would've saved you a lot of trouble.
This is the sort of basic stuff you need to understand, otherwise we'll continue to have pointless discussions in which I'm operating in reality and you're operating in your own version of reality, similar to the one concocted by Nirjhar.
See here...
Kalash (bad)
chisq 73.585 tail_prob 8.96427e-12 taildiff 8.96427415e-12
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQdVBacV9oQ2czd3M/view?usp=sharing
Kotias (good)
chisq 11.519 tail_prob 0.318513 taildiff 0.318513194
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQaU1ZMWljM0NTRTA/view?usp=sharing
And...
Source Test Potential_Source1 Potential_Source2 D-stat Z-score SNPs
Eastern_HG Yamnaya_Samara Kalash Kotias 0.0251 7.233 875482
Kotias Yamnaya_Samara Kalash Eastern_HG 0.0646 17.218 875482
Kalash get passed over in favor of Kotias and Eastern_HG, respectively. The Z scores are highly significant (Z>3+).
These tests are easily reproducible and not very difficult to understand.
So finally you should know that you have no argument if it turns out Mesolithic, Neolithic and Bronze Age South Asians have Ancestral South Indian (ASI) admixture, like the Kalash do. And I can tell you that the Harappans from Rakhgarhi do. That's a fact.
Jaydeep,
ReplyDeleteNo problem my friend.
I do agree that there is extra ANE admixture in South Asia. This is why one can model some Indian tribal populations as having 20% Yamnaya admixture, using formal methods! It seems to throw things off.
At the same time, even when one accounts for this possibility, it seems that South Central Asians and upper caste North Indians do receive substantial Yamnaya-related admixture, which I agree is quite puzzling.
Why they don't rather receive Sintashta or Andronovo admixture will continue to be a mystery, till we have Indo-Aryan aDNA from South Central Asia. Those Swat genomes will be very important, in this respect.
Basically, at the moment, it seems that a Yamnaya-like population did leave a substantial genetic legacy in South Central Asia + North India, and there was significant genetic fusion/replacement.
I completely understand that this doesn't gel with the archaeological facts. It is pretty amazing to think that there was 50% population turnover.
But, it is what it is, despite all the archaeological hints. All the genetic data point in one direction.
Also, there just isn't any room for claiming that Z93 is native to South Central Asia, it just wouldn't make any sense.
I mean, even without aDNA, we do have the whole R1a phylogeny, we can't just ignore it.
So, once this paper is published, it'll be pretty huge, and it will have radical implications for how we understand the prehistory of our region.
Sidenote: we might find that IVC isn't as important for Pashtuns and Tajiks as the BMAC.
That's something we've always expected though.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat am I lying about specifically?
ReplyDeletePoint out the lie.
You will not get any data from me , I can not break the code of confidentiality . Your attempt to get some data out of desperation and by manipulation will not work! .
ReplyDeleteInstead of this fuss and panicking , to face the reality , you should contact the scientists who are actually doing it .
Or perhaps you tried already , and they refused you , in that case you will just have to wait .
But please do it so like a man ...
You can keep your "data" to yourself. It's not worth anything.
ReplyDeleteI did ask you a simple question though, which you avoided. Point out the lie or shut up.
Dave ,
ReplyDeleteWhy are you so desperate , are you having some personal issue ?. The thing is you don't have any source , you also don't know who are doing what and where . You speak of your sources , perhaps they are seeing stuff from alien crystal skulls?.
Go out begging for some info on the Rakhgarhi samples. Someone might tell you something.
ReplyDeleteThen have a very hard think what this info means and whether it supports or contradicts your claims about Indian population history. A very hard think.
Then think carefully whether I'm lying about anything here, because it seems a few connections in your brain aren't functioning.
Oh shut the hell up with all your whining and tricks , all you are doing by this, is making the outcome difficult for you to accept .
ReplyDeleteIts highly obvious that the screws of you brain needs more tightening at the moment , go see a shrink or take a vacation, it will help.
Enough hogwash , let get something real and talk on :
ReplyDeleteUnderstanding ancient human population genetics of the eastern Eurasian steppe through mitochondrial DNA analysis: Central Mongolian samples from the Neolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age and Mongol Empire periods
http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/1868417323.html?FMT=ABS
Here you go sunshine.
ReplyDeletehttp://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2017/02/european-specific-mtdna-lineages-on-neo.html
Thanks love.
ReplyDelete@jaydeep
ReplyDeleteI disagree to that an AIT is entirely at odds with the Indian Historical tradition. Records of the past were subjected to oral transmission by priests and charioter bards for centuries. Harvesting useful historical information from them requires careful interpretation. Assuming a respectable degree of accuracy from dynastic lists, rig vedic kings such as sudasa is only 30 generations removed from the events of the mahabharata (assuming a reasonable 20 yrs per generation this puts it within the second millenium BCE) rather than the 3rd millenium BCE. As for the exploits of yayati's sons or pururavas' sons they were but misty figures by rig-vedic times and it seems doubtful that anything significant can be concluded reguarding AIT or OIT from their legends
The rig Veda and Avesta have a kind of tunnel vision. Their mutual animosity has to be gleaned by stray incidental references. It's like reading a few press clippings on say a ban on sports events between India and Pakistan. The Puranas may have me a lot of junk but it shows an awareness of the rivalry. It could not have gleaned it from schizophrenic Vedic references
Delete
ReplyDeleteThree major wars were involved in the break up of the Indo Europeans as per the RV; two of them were contemporaneous with the RV while one happened long before the RV was composed. The first one caused the Proto European- Indo Iranian split. The last two broke the Indo-Iranians.
People are not very receptive of this unequivocal information of named tribes and wars as it does not agree with preformed theories. And so in the last decade or so, the Kurgans have entirely excluded the RV from all scholarly consideration as they could no longer use it to demonstrate invasion/migration.
Come L-M20, I don't think I'll ever have any use for my copy of the RV. The termites will have it for misleading me.
But come Z93, I WILL be forced to open this dusty book again. Oh, and btw, it IS the oldest IE text in existence. That counts for something, right?
Acharya:
ReplyDeleteThat is the pinnacle of racism. So L makes your belief system crash.
They dont deserve your religion. Your kind of people are the cause of Indian cast system, poverty, Rapes, murders.
Why don't you all go to Pakistan and join your tribe.
Nathan,
DeleteYou sure have some creepy weird ideas about racism. And L does not make my system of 'beliefs' 'crash'. I accept what I find tenable. Those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.You would do well to remember that.
And you didn't honestly think I believe in thunder gods, did you? Please tell me you didn't. And while you're at it, also.rind me how I am responsible for rapes and murder
-_-
Touche, you even brought pak into the puddle.
Jijnasu,
Help me understand, your concern is not if the RV indeed suggests such things, but whether I read them myself and that I seem to agree with Talageri. All the while you have nothing to contribute or argue.
@acharya agnimitra "Three major wars were involved in the break up of the Indo Europeans as per the RV" I don't believe that the Veda or Purana told you that, Talageri did.
ReplyDeleteDavid and Nirjhar, I know you both are passionate about this but just tone it down a little. As things stand now, either Nirjhar is in serious denial or David's sources are false (I doubt he would deliberately lie about this). For the time being, I will go with David.
ReplyDeleteSeinundzeit: "Keeping that in mind, I have a feeling that these IVC samples will be exceedingly similar to people like the Chamar..."
If you are right, then it is indeed sad to learn that the descendants of the once great Indus Valley Civilization are today the lowest ranked in Indian society, but that's just how it works.
ak2014b: "It's unnatural for non-Europeans to be quite as fervent in pushing for the steppe hypothesis..."
ReplyDeleteWhy is it unnatural for non-Europeans to try to figure out and come to an agreement on what REALLY happened, regardless of their own ethnic background?
Sein,
ReplyDeleteWhile we await the results of your test...
The reason why SC Asians show the Yamnaya affinity that is lacking in South Indian tribals is probably because of shared ancestry between Yamnaya & SC Asians which does not include the tribals.
Let us remember that it is during the Yamnaya period that we see an admixture into the steppe of a southern population. So it is indeed instructive that these same Yamnaya people who receive this southern admixture are also the ones who show this special affinity towards SC Asians. Now the question is :- Does this affinity arise because of Yamnaya-like people moving from the steppe into SC Asia or is it because the southern population that admixed into Yamnaya might ultimately have its origins around SC Asia. A food for thought.
As far as R1a phylogeny is concerned, we should not forget that all of the steppe and and steppe related cultures that follow the Yamnaya, such as CWC, have the presence of the southern admixture. This is even true for Sintashta & Andronovo. Hence let us not discount anything. The aDNA paper is hopefully going to be very good.
----
As far as the Pashtuns and Tajiks are concerned, I feel that the Pashtuns will be closer to IVC overall but with a BMAC pull that is lacking in other South Asians. The Tajiks on the other hand may be much more like the BMAC. Here the role of Eastern Iranian bronze age cultures such as the Helmand & Halil Rud cultures also need to be taken into consideration.
@Jaydeep
ReplyDeleteThe southern, or rather Caucasian and EEF admixture, arrived on the steppe before the Yamnaya period. Note that the Eneolithic Khvalynsk population was well on the way to becoming Yamnaya-like. This is not my opinion, it's a fact.
And I've already demonstrated above that Yamnaya can't be modeled as part Kalash. You don't have to trust me, because we're not discussing faith and religion. We're discussing science, and like I said the results I posted are easily reproducible.
If you don't believe me, get in touch with the people who provided the samples and software: Broad MIT/Harvard.
As far as R1a phylogeny is concerned, we should not forget that all of the steppe and and steppe related cultures that follow the Yamnaya, such as CWC, have the presence of the southern admixture.
But you're ignoring the fact here that R1a is found in Mesolithic, Neolithic and Eneolithic Eastern European samples that have none or very little of the southern admixture.
Why do you believe then, that R1a entered Eastern Europe along with the southern admixture?
Jaydeep,
ReplyDeleteThe relationship between Tajiks and Pashtuns is quite interesting.
I have data for a bunch of Pashtuns, and for some individuals of mixed Tajik/Pashtun background. In general, what I've found is that wherever Tajiks and Pashtuns live together, they are basically almost the same people, in broad genetic terms.
For example, I know of an Afghan Tajik from Kunar. His ADMIXTURE results, and his placement on PCA plots, show him to be almost a carbon copy of myself. I'm more similar to him than I am to most fellow Pashtuns, and he is very distinct from Tajikistani Tajiks.
In addition, Pashtuns from Ghazni, or Khost/Waziristan, seem pretty similar to Panjsheri Tajiks.
In general, Pashtuns and Afghan Tajiks are very similar. Tajiks in Laghman, Kunar, and Nangrahar are basically identical to Pashtuns like myself, while the Panjsheri Tajiks are basically identical to Ghilzai Pashtuns, Khostwal Pashtuns, and Pakistani Pashtuns from Waziristan.
I mean, there are subtle differences, but nothing huge in terms of deep genetic ancestry.
By contrast, the Tajiks of Tajikistan are much more distinct from Pashtuns.
But even in their case, the HGDP "Pathan" fst distance with Tajistani Tajiks is comparable to the "Pathan" fst distance with Sindhis! And, the HGDP "Pathans" are closer to the Tajikstani Tajiks than they are to Baloch, Brahui, and Makrani.
Regardless, I'm glad you've mentioned the Helmand and Halil Rud cultures, those are going to be essential, when it comes to understanding the ethnogenesis of South Central Asians.
It would be amazing to have some aDNA from those cultures, in addition to aDNA from BMAC, aDNA from Botai, aDNA from the Swat culture, and aDNA from IVC. Everything would click together, and we'd have so much power to disentangle different genetic strands in South Central Asian prehistory. I dream of the day (lol).
Also, I'll do that model for you, in just a bit my friend.
Although, I do agree with David on this, the Kalash have too much ANE, not to mention their minor ENA admixture.
Achary:
ReplyDeleteCome L-M20, I don't think I'll ever have any use for my copy of the RV. The termites will have it for misleading me = caste-ism = Racism.
In your opinion if it is not R1a. RV is meaning less.
Listen Paul, I have a purely academic interest in the RV, while most have no interest at all. Is that difficult to understand? Taking historical information from it seriously leads to the natural conclusions that it is a technologically primitive pre- Iron age text that also describes a significantltly different riverine system that had ceased to exist by 2000 BC There is no evidence of admixture/contact with any alien tribe or population other than other IE tribes. Chronologically late books should correspond with the mature IVSC because both have spoked wheel technology. But if L turns up in predominance it would immediately mean that these inferences were flawed and that the RV is unreliable in its historical info.
ReplyDeleteI think you are religious. Most people in this thread are not.No fault! But accept that people are different.
Chary,
ReplyDeleteDefining your statement does not mean defining others dear. Academic interest can not stand for non R1a and they are the only IE eh?. That thinking is the problem. Read yourself and be true academic.
@velvetgunther
ReplyDelete"Why is it unnatural for non-Europeans to try to figure out and come to an agreement on what REALLY happened, regardless of their own ethnic background?"
That's a mix of something I didn't say and something that is the very opposite of what I said.
What I said becomes clear if you hadn't left out the all-important conditional clause on which my statement hinged. I'll repeat the pertinent part of what I wrote, note the crucial if-clause. And I'll now further also explicitly copy out the implicitly present, bracketed portion of the previous line into the 2nd line, since the two lines were intended as semi-parallels for contrast:
"It's natural for Europeans to support the steppe hypothesis, even if there's a minute chance that they're wrong (in this temporary absence of aDNA evidence from Greece and SC Asia). It's unnatural for non-Europeans to be quite as fervent in pushing for the steppe hypothesis, if (as in this temporary absence of aDNA evidence from Greece and SC Asia) there were any minute chance, as you [Nirjhar] claim, that they'll be proven wrong. I can't imagine their own people will allow them to live this down."
So I never said, as you misinterpret it, that anyone should abstain from finding out what really happened. Rather, you ought to see it's directly implied in my statements that, where a question concerns themselves, most people would naturally be predisposed to first wait for all data that is at least immediately relevant to their own situation. (Knowing that much being necessary to "figuring out what REALLY happened")
Unless I am missing something aren't both the snaps posted by Davidski from Wikipedia? How exactly are these 'leaks' (unless it's leaked to Davidski that the Y group is L-M20 and Davidski is just trying to convey where the groups were spread about.. It's also a similar case with Y-G)?
ReplyDeleteThe leak to me was that the Harappan remains from Rakhigarhi belonged to Y-HGs L and R2, and carried significant Ancestral South Asian (ASI) ancestry.
ReplyDeleteI just used the images from Wikipedia to convey this.
+Davidski: Y-HG 'G-M201' has a similar distribution w.r.t. Pakistan Afghanistan and very slight concentration in the Dravidian regions of India (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G-M201) any thoughts if it has anything to do with the IVC?
ReplyDeleteI haven't heard anything about G-M201 in ancient remains from South Asia. But sure it might turn up in IVC samples if enough of them are tested.
ReplyDelete@Davidski: So I'm no expert on this but to fulfill my amateurish interests and curiosity I began looking up the gene tree. It appears that Y HG-C and Y HG-F both arose in India which together constitute about 90% of the male population out of Africa today. Does this imply that early on during the Out of Africa migration the ancestors of Europeans (and Indians) settled in India and then radiated outwards throughout the world?
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_C-M130
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_F-M89#Origins
I also wonder what happened to the other group that supposedly went up north out of Africa instead of eastwards
No one knows where Y-HGs C and F arose. You'd need direct evidence from ancient DNA to work that out.
ReplyDeleteThere's nothing in the currently sampled ancient DNA implicating South Asia as their homeland. Modern DNA is too deceptive to be useful.
@Davidski There isn't a ton of archaeological evidence for 40-50k burials or such in south asia that I am aware of from which ancient DNA can be recorded but conclusions are drawn about their origin based on present diversity which are found to ring true with other known HGs such as G where diversity lines up with ancient DNA (atleast to within a thousand miles or so)?
ReplyDeleteMost literature seems to indicate likely origin of C and F in south east / east asia
Most scientific literature on Y-chromosome haplogroups from the last 20 years or so, based on haplogroup frequencies and STR diversity, is wrong and needs to be corrected with ancient DNA data.
ReplyDeleteSo you can claim that C and F are from India based on recent scientific literature, but this is just a stand in theory that may or may not be confirmed at some point.
@Davidski: On closer look, it appears to be more a scientific consensus(especially in the case of F and even R).
ReplyDeleteLiterally everything in science might be disproved or modified at some point and most archaeology and history is 'theory' based on available evidence, but the Indian subcontinent along with regions of the Middle East have been known based on genetic studies to be the first major settling points for the out of Africa migrants; and several early mutations have known to have developed here that are prevalent in Eurasia and even Americas today (ex. as R, C and F)
Also I think it's difficult to get DNA from specimen 50k years old
Also the Indian subcontinent among the least studied DNA clusters so saying that maximum diversity exists there is saying something. Not saying it's impossible for higher diversity to be found elsewhere of course but considering that other Eurasian groups are better covered the chance of that happening seems reduced (though of course not zero). Maybe with difficulties in extracting ancient DNA tens of thousands of years old, diversity studies are the other next best way to assess epicenter
ReplyDeleteThis has been successfully done for groups such as 'G' which have then been verified by ancient DNA
South Asians are genetically diverse because they are very mixed, and most of that mixture happened in the last 4,000 years or so.
ReplyDeleteA lot of Indian and some western scientists were working very hard until recently to force a consensus that Y-HG R1a was native to India. But advances in Y-chromosome and ancient DNA studies have debunked those efforts.
So I'm very skeptical of any claims backed by scientific papers from the last 20 years or so that South Asia is the source of much, if any, of the genetic diversity in West Eurasia.
Highest levels of LM20 is found among the Kaffiristhanis and other Hindukush groups who were supposed to be similar to NorthEurpeans and who carried with themh high levels of R1 a1as well.These are a group with lots of blond and blue eyed people who were depicted as purest ARYANS by Europeans Indoeuropeans theorists So why is this sudden U TURN also a group speaking a northwestern Iranian language Baluch are also having a high level though they came to present western Pakistan less than a thousand years back and South Indians castes among whom LM20 peaks does not have much similarities with Protoaustraloids or for that matter with australoid looking Indian tribals.Mr Davidsky what do you think which may be contributing to this anomaly in the populist theory created by you.
ReplyDeleteThese are a group with lots of blond and blue eyed people who were depicted as purest ARYANS by Europeans Indoeuropeans theorists.
ReplyDeleteThere aren't any groups in South Asia with lots of blond hair and blue eyes. You'd be lucky to find a group with 5% blond hair like in Northern Europe and 10% blue eyes.
And no one is saying that people with blond hair and blue eyes are pure anything. We have genomics now to test for admixture.
In South Asia L-M20 is a marker of Neolithic expansions by early farmers into the region from the Near East, mostly from Iran. These early farmers probably spoke Elamo-Dravidian. So L-M20 is not a marker associated with indigenous tribal South Asian ancestry.
Most of LM20 around Indus area in Pakistan is due to the presence of Baluchi group which migrated to this area from around the Caucasus and Northeastern Asia Minor less than a thousand years ago and others are agricultural caste from Gujerat to Sri Lanka This distribution also shows itt origins as India or Central Asia as Northwest Erin Iranians are related to Parthians and particular map also shows its distribution in Chinese Thurkistan where Iranians and Tocharians occupied before Thukic groups.So now you will have to revise Neareast civilizations theory as it is not abundant among Semitic in Canaan
ReplyDeleteLM20 map overlaps with that of R1A1 at the entrance to India and it coincides with areas of nomadic Iranians and as well as so called ProtoIndoeuropeans even going to the borders of classical China and Mongolia where it seems to have diluted by recent Turkic migration and settlement ..So it look also like a another spread of Saraswathi people out of the area due to another climate change than their coming in from eastern Central Asia
ReplyDeleteLM20 map overlaps with that of R1A1 at the entrance to India and it coincides with areas of nomadic Iranians and as well as so called ProtoIndoeuropeans even going to the borders of classical China and Mongolia where it seems to have diluted by recent Turkic migration and settlement ..So it look also like a another spread of Saraswathi people out of the area due to another climate change than their coming in from eastern Central Asia.
ReplyDeleteThis is not a persuasive argument.
@Davidski "A lot of Indian and some western scientists were working very hard until recently to force a consensus that Y-HG R1a was native to India. But advances in Y-chromosome and ancient DNA studies have debunked those efforts." Is it right to dismiss scientific studies by yelling 'controversy'? If later studies are conclusively against the previous position that is another issue. If what you say is the case it's difficult to believe anything
ReplyDeleteThere is almost a consensus on F, not just Indian or a group of western and Indian scientists. Similar case with C. Any study may be disproved in the future but current knowledge is all we have now to go by..
@Davidski Even if say R didn't originate in South Asia haplogroup P did. The likely scenario for multiple early haplogroups developing in India is that a major chunk of the population that came out of Africa (atleast those that form the majority of present populations in Eurasia) settled in India before spreading out elsewhere, I don't think there is anything wonderful in saying that
ReplyDeleteIt's obvious now that R1a-Z93 arrived in South Asia from the steppe during the Bronze Age. I can't see any controversy here.
ReplyDeleteI don't have much interest in the origins of the F and C mutations, but I can't see any compelling evidence at this point that they originated in South Asia.
@Davidski
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_F-M89#/media/File:Haplogroup_F_(Y-DNA).PNG
The reason 'F' is important is that 90% of the male population out of Africa today comprise of F or it's derivatives. So if F originated in India then all these people trace their male lineage ultimately to the region now called India
ReplyDeleteThere is no unambiguous evidence yet pointing to where F originated. All we have for now is ambiguous evidence and speculation. The map you posted is speculative, and, judging by recent ancient DNA evidence, probably wrong as far as R, R1a and R1b are concerned.
ReplyDeleteEven if there is a rough academic consensus that F originated in India, it's still essentially just speculation for the time being until we see unambiguous evidence on the matter from ancient DNA.
On the other hand, it's no longer speculation that India was affected profoundly by population movements from the steppe during the Bronze Age.
These population movements not only brought R1a to India, but also had a major impact on the genetics, health and culture of modern Indians. This is what's really important to me, not where F may have possibly originated.
@Davidski: I won't argue more about F or C because it's deviating slightly from the topic although I disagree with what you said; informed guesses have been formed for DNA based theories that have stood the test of time thus far such as the out of africa theory.
ReplyDeleteComing back to R1a, even according to the wiki, researchers are all over the place about it's origins including some placing it in south asia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a. I don't mean to say there wasn't an influx of nomadic tribals from the north during the mid-late bronze age into India, just that I am not sure they carried R1a in. On the other hand, evidence of rituals such as yagna, attributed to the vedic tribes, have been found along sites in the Ghaggar Hakra channel in the Indus Valley sites such as Lothal and Kalibangan
It makes no difference to me what some confused researchers think about R1a and what someone or rather posted at Wikipedia.
ReplyDeleteThe evidence is now clear that 99% of the R1a in the world today falls under M417 or even Z645, which are relatively young mutations dating to the end of the Neolithic or so, and frequently seen in ancient European DNA. Note also that European Mesolithic foragers carry more basal R1a subclades.
So the vast majority or perhaps all of the R1a in India arrived there fairly recently from the European steppes.
And you can save all that nonsense about the Aryans being native to India. I won't be listening. I have better things to do.
Obviously evidence is only evidence as long as it conforms to one's own beliefs
ReplyDeleteThe debate is already over. Your position is untenable. You're just too crazy or dimwitted to understand that.
ReplyDeleteTry to be objective and use your head more effectively. You might be surprised by what you learn.
Objectivity is why I'm beginning to have second thoughts about the Aryan Migration theory, with evidences of horse remains and rituals associated to the 'aryan' immigrants (even though that is still the most likely scenario, as I said two posts ago).
ReplyDeleteYet you said I am saying the Aryans are indigenous to India. I think all the stupid name calling you just did applies more to you than me
You don't even have the faintest clue how stupid you sound. You're essentially arguing that up is down and down is up.
ReplyDeleteI don't give a shit about horse remains. All the relevant data is in. You're either ignoring it because you don't want to understand it, or you're too stupid to understand it. Same difference, but geez, it would really suck to be you.
It's like you don't want to or can't understand the reality around you. Maybe try a little harder or get another hobby?
Most LM20 in Pakistan comes from recent migrants from Caucasus known as Baluchi not from other Indian origin people.Same applies to people from kafiristan and Gilgit areas.They are not of Indic language group .I have earlier also raised this issue earlier..You seems to connect India to your Middleeastern ancestry group J1and J2 though shows you are a European.I think you also have to modify your language Mr Davidof.
ReplyDeleteMr Davidof what do you think of Y haplogroup H of particular social classes and tribals of Sri Lanka and South India
ReplyDelete@Davidski
ReplyDeleteInstead of calling others names try to understand the point the other person is making. It's amazing how you dont get what I'm saying even after I took the effort to clearly state my position.
As far as the Aryan migration I just said I was done with having a rigid position on the theory not that it never happened.
However I am more unsure now about the effect it had on Indian culture and whether some of the supposed influences might not have been autochtonous.
Anyway this discussion with you is getting nowhere. Enjoy whatever you think and have a good day