tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post4927684755888973766..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: 4-population test and East Eurasian-like ancestry in Northern EuropeDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-8351371235851141332012-08-24T06:12:51.101+03:002012-08-24T06:12:51.101+03:00" And those Chukchis and Koryaks are recent a..." And those Chukchis and Koryaks are recent arrivals than Amerindian exodus from Asia". <br /><br />Yes. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-64967234787300637122012-08-23T10:22:49.411+03:002012-08-23T10:22:49.411+03:00"The connection is not with West Eurasians bu..."The connection is not with West Eurasians but with early Central Asians. Those Southern Amerindians have been cut off from their Central Asian origins by the expansion of that same East Asian element that reached Northern Europe"<br /><br />Looks like that. And those Chukchis and Koryaks are recent arrivals than Amerindian exodus from Asia.Valikhanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13866507134402028463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-87268975327921187952012-08-22T22:38:41.860+03:002012-08-22T22:38:41.860+03:00What's up with the Irish? Why do they have mor...What's up with the Irish? Why do they have more East Eurasian admixture than other continental Europeans?<br /><br />Also, according to the first f4 values, Southern Europeans have considerably less sub-Saharan admixture than Northern Europeans have with East Asian admixture. Is it because you used the San as the representative of sub-Saharan Africa?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-56473569668107733832012-08-22T17:07:15.659+03:002012-08-22T17:07:15.659+03:00The first (Sardinian related) set of estimates see...The first (Sardinian related) set of estimates seem wildly incongruent with physical anthropology. Near 20% Mongoloid admixture in Finns and Russians? Unless there were an incredible deselection of Asiatic traits in these populations over the generations, or this admixture predates the evolution of West Eurasian features (which is unlikely given the Sardinians' lack of it), then we'd be better off with the first set's estimates and the usual ADMIXTURE findings of around 10% for Finns and Russians. <br /><br />Also, the levels between physically Mongoloid-absent groups, such as Kent and Cornwall, and physically Mongoloid-present groups, such as Poles, expressed one a proportion of the other, again seem extremely incongruent with any reasonable physical observation. <br /><br />It seems probable that Siberians and Native Americans have a hefty dose of West Eurasian. Even on simple ADMIXTURE tests, when only European, East Asian and African components are offered, a large chunk of Native American DNA prefers to associate with the European component. And as for Siberians/inner Asians, even the most physically extreme Mongoloids have a considerable W. Eurasian component, as can be seen on any Dodecad spreadsheet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-70403560735978436872012-08-22T10:49:54.984+03:002012-08-22T10:49:54.984+03:00Also, zero African in Portuguese does not say much...<i>Also, zero African in Portuguese does not say much for the calibration of your admixture estimates.</i><br /><br />Not sure where you are getting "zero African" from. The relevant entry is:<br /><br />Sardinian,Portuguese_D;Han,San 0.000201745 0.000130417 1.54692<br /><br />Which indicates that the Portuguese have a small San-shift relative to Sardinians.<br /><br />As a mainland European population, the Portuguse have a negative San-shift, but because of their African admixture, a positive one. In the palimpsest of influences, the two add together to 0.000201745 (Z=1.54692).<br /><br />A SW European devoid of African influence, the French_Basque have:<br /><br />Sardinian,French_Basque;Han,San -0.000912335 (z=-7.59318)<br /><br />So, these results ARE consistent with the presence of African ancestry in the Portuguese.<br /><br />Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-36771854409954626532012-08-22T07:22:02.587+03:002012-08-22T07:22:02.587+03:00"It seems much more likely to me that North E..."It seems much more likely to me that North European and Siberian hunters met and mixed to a small extent in the boreal forest zone which they shared with some dispersal of genes to either end of the zone". <br /><br />That is likely to be so. But the Siberians of that time did not contain the full complement of East Asia. For example Amerindians do not have the most common East Asian haplogroups (N and O), most easily explained as these haplogroups having moved north some time after the Central Asians had arrived in America. <br /><br />"the presence of X haplogroup mtDNA amongst some groups of Native Americans has caused some to wonder about the prospects of Europeans crossing the Atlantic in prehistoric times" <br /><br />To my way of thinking X was one of the early mt-DNA haplogroups to accompany Y-DNA Q out of Central Asia. Along the way that particular haplogroup became diluted through the addition of East Asian mt-DNA haplogroups. <br /><br />"So what's your theory why Southern Amerindians are closer to West Eurasians than Arctic populations because of this admixture?". <br /><br />This is my theory. Dienekes can speak for himself. The connection is not with West Eurasians but with early Central Asians. Those Southern Amerindians have been cut off from their Central Asian origins by the expansion of that same East Asian element that reached Northern Europe. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-67521883101750530462012-08-22T07:18:45.992+03:002012-08-22T07:18:45.992+03:00"No, because the pattern is the same with the..."No, because the pattern is the same with the Dai people of S China."<br /><br />So what? There's plenty of archaeological and physical anthropological evidence for pre-LGM West/Central Eurasian influence on East Eurasians. Deeper genetic analyses give indications of the same. This is likely the predominant driver of any increased affinity between Northern Europeans and Amerindians / E. Asians. <br /><br />Also, zero African in Portuguese does not say much for the calibration of your admixture estimates.<br />n/ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02378473351485233448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-39326001106361411492012-08-22T06:42:30.136+03:002012-08-22T06:42:30.136+03:00"Have you also considered the reverse idea, t..."Have you also considered the reverse idea, the possibility of Northern European admixture in Siberian East Eurasians?"<br /><br />"No, because the pattern is the same with the Dai people of S China."<br /><br />But I recall that this tree-builder software, you once tried, suggested something like that.<br /><br />As far as I recall it sugested:<br /><br />1. Northern Euro branches off the other Caucasian elements.<br /><br />2. Other Caucasian Elements (except North Euro) recieve fresh East_African DNA. (is this actually the reason for Caucasians who are out of reach to recieve that infusion to "branch off"?<br /><br />3. North-East Asian recieves Northern Euro DNA <---------------There<br /><br />4. Southern Asian branches off the Caucasian craddle.<br /><br />5. Remaining Caucasians recieve more fresh East African DNA. (Again? Does the extra East African infusion seperate the craddle from South Asia?<br /><br />6. West_Asian branches off.<br /><br />7. Remaining Caucasians recieve even more East-African DNA. (again)<br /><br />8. Mediteranean branches away from South-West Asian.<br /><br />9. South-West Asian recieves another load of East African DNA. (and again....)<br /><br />10. Northern Euro recieves DNA from Mediteranean.<br /><br />....<br /><br />That tree building thing actually suggested a very early contact of Northern Euro with NE Asian. But it suggested N.Euro TOWARDS NE Asian as the direction of Geneflow.<br /><br />Well, in any case, it suggests a very early contact, no matter the direction.<br /><br />That Spanish HG pull stronger towards East Asia than modern Fin and Russians do, is another hint of an very early contact.Fantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07969348276219179258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-47322213942022760022012-08-22T03:32:09.298+03:002012-08-22T03:32:09.298+03:00Whatever, you know what I mean.
So what's you...Whatever, you know what I mean.<br /><br />So what's your theory why Southern Amerindians are closer to West Eurasians than Arctic populations because of this admixture?<br /><br />There had to be two migrations from the same source in East Asia about 15,000 years ago - one going to Europe, and another to the Americas.<br /><br />The only other option is that the proto-South Amerindian ancestry was somehow preserved in Central Asia, and then came to Europe about 10,000 years later than crossing the Bering Strait. Doesn't sound plausible.<br /><br />Any thoughts?Davidskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04637918905430604850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-63921805963691400652012-08-22T03:24:54.027+03:002012-08-22T03:24:54.027+03:00Also, I still think the Sub-Saharan f4 percentages...<i>Also, I still think the Sub-Saharan f4 percentages from that last study were fine. You’re just ideologically opposed to the outcome. Time to get over it.</i><br /><br />You don't understand math. Time to learn.<br /><br />Also the f4 statistics are not "percentages"Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-81841903048595464862012-08-22T03:10:58.613+03:002012-08-22T03:10:58.613+03:00Nice work. I don't think you nailed it though....Nice work. I don't think you nailed it though. <br /><br />We'll have to wait for that study to see what the real story is, both with the percentages and age of East Eurasian admixture.<br /><br />I see no reason why it should be recent, if non-Arctic Amerindians are closer to West Eurasians because of it (vs. Chukchi and Koryak even!). If it was recent, then we'd see Arctic Amerindians and Siberians being closer.<br /><br />Also, I still think the Sub-Saharan f4 percentages from that last study were fine. You’re just ideologically opposed to the outcome. Time to get over it.Davidskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04637918905430604850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-17541026796982032602012-08-22T02:34:28.168+03:002012-08-22T02:34:28.168+03:00Have you also considered the reverse idea, the pos...<i>Have you also considered the reverse idea, the possibility of Northern European admixture in Siberian East Eurasians?</i><br /><br />No, because the pattern is the same with the Dai people of S China.<br />Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-51731040865352290062012-08-22T02:26:35.912+03:002012-08-22T02:26:35.912+03:00Have you also considered the reverse idea, the pos...Have you also considered the reverse idea, the possibility of Northern European admixture in Siberian East Eurasians? I ask this because I know that the presence of X haplogroup mtDNA amongst some groups of Native Americans has caused some to wonder about the prospects of Europeans crossing the Atlantic in prehistoric times, including Brian Sykes in his latest book "DNA USA". <br /><br />It seems much more likely to me that North European and Siberian hunters met and mixed to a small extent in the boreal forest zone which they shared with some dispersal of genes to either end of the zone.Amanda Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05997180528147657311noreply@blogger.com