Need help interpreting this (note this is a 2014 paper, and already could be out-of-date, so fast are the developments in the field of aDNA)
http://biology-web.nmsu.edu/~houde/1-s2.0-S004724841400253X-main.pdf
Human paleogenetics of Europe
The known knowns and the known unknowns
Guido Brandt, Anna Szecs-enyi-Nagy, Christina Roth, Kurt Werner Alt, Wolfgang Haak
http://biology-web.nmsu.edu/~houde/1-s2.0-S004724841400253X-main.pdf
Human paleogenetics of Europe
The known knowns and the known unknowns
Guido Brandt, Anna Szecs-enyi-Nagy, Christina Roth, Kurt Werner Alt, Wolfgang Haak
While the presence of haplogroup I in Neolithic contexts could be interpreted as a signal of hunter-gatherer introgression in farming communities, and therefore represents a Paleolithic legacy, the precise way in which modern-day European Y-chromosome diversity was formed remains elusive. To date, the only other Y-haplogroups observed in early farming sites are haplogroup F in Germany and Hungary (Haak et al., 2010; Szecsenyi-Nagy et al., 2014), and E1b in one individual in Spain ( Lacan et al., 2011b). The presence of haplogroup F is very surprising, as it is very rare in modern-day European populations and therefore not well studied. It has been reported at a low frequency in Southeast Europe and the Near East (Underhill and Kivisild, 2007), whereas subgroups of F have been primarily found in India (Kivisild et al., 2003).PS: per Wiki, if one sorts the first table by the F haplogroup, the highest frequency of the F haplogroup in the populations of the Indian subcontinent are the Koya (26.8%), the Sinhalese (20.7%), unspecified South Indian tribals (18.1%), Himachal Brahmins (15.8%) and so on. The Koya speak a Dravidian language, the Sinhalese speak an Indo-European language, the South Indian tribals speak Dravidian languages, the Himachal Brahmins speak an Indo-European language.
10 comments:
It's also found in some frequencies in South East Asia and the neat east. South Asia or South East Asia is indeed considered at this time as the progenitor of F but the time period would be more than 50 ,000 years which has no cultural significance at least to the spread of agriculture or language. So, OOI folks can't link it to indo-european migration. Consider this - F gave birth to GHIJK, out of which K gave birth to P (most likely in South-east Asia) which gave birth to R which gave birth to R1a and R1b -- ones associated with proto-indo European language. We already know R was formed at least 20,000 years ago because a 20,000 year old skeleton in South Russia had it ( Malta Buret boy or MA_SG ).
The only way to know whether F indeed originated in South Asia would be to get aDNA from South asia and check whether their autosomal component and Y-DNA are the same wrt to the ones found in Europe. Imo, there is a high probability for this. With that being said,I don't think R1a-M17 originated in Western India now that we have expanded the R1a tree and found that R1a in India is just a sub-branch of R1a-Z93.
A bird told me that even Dr Gyaneshwar chaubey is a closest believer in R1a arrival to India somewhere near 2500 BC to 5000 BC :).
Oh one more thing - http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/annotation/8663819b-5ff0-4133-b70a-2d686dfb0a44
This paper lists Y-chromosome haplogroups in different communities of Tamil Nadu and found F-M89 to be the dominant haplogroup in some of the hill tribes of Tamil Nadu. Do read the paper if you haven't and make sure to use the correct table
Oh one more thing - http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/annotation/8663819b-5ff0-4133-b70a-2d686dfb0a44
This paper lists Y-chromosome haplogroups in different communities of Tamil Nadu and found F-M89 to be the dominant haplogroup in some of the hill tribes of Tamil Nadu. Do read the paper if you haven't and make sure to use the correct table
^^^
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707623532
"The pattern of clustering does not support the model that the primary source of the R1a1-M17 chromosomes in India was Central Asia or the Indus Valley via Indo-European speakers."
Thanks for the reply ,I am a noob myself but i will try a reply here.
If we see the following line from sengupta's paper (which precedes the line you quoted), he writes this " A principal-components plot of R1a1-M17 Y-microsatellite data (fig. 6) shows several interesting features: (a) one tight population cluster comprising southern Pakistan, Turkey, Greece, Oman, and West Europe;(b) one loose cluster comprising all the Indian tribal and
caste populations, with the tribal populations occupying an edge of this cluster; and (c) Central Asia and Turkey occupy intermediate positions. " -- This is the figure http://www.cell.com/action/showFullTextImages?pii=S0002-9297%2807%2962353-2 . Looking at this figure,one would get the idea that the current indian R1a-M17 and current European R1a-M17(which strangely includes some southern pakistan groups) diverged off separately but
on an other note, Underhill's 2015 paper does the PCA of R1a chromosomes and found the Indian/Pakistan R1a cluster together away from western europe contrary to the above paper (me confused here :/, Underhill in his 2015 paper concluded the initial R1a diversification MIGHT have taken somewhere near present day Iran based on modern R1a distributions.) but the point is that now since the R1a-M17 tree has been studied at a higher resolution since 2012 , we now know that the indian R1a-M17 only contains the branches under Z-93. So, it's incorrect to say that R1a-M17 went to europe from india as for that to happen we need to find the R1a branches ancestral to the ones present in Europe. So far, it has not been reported ( May be people might find it in aDNA but it's improbable imo) . See this diagram https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5418327/figure/Fig7/. As you see , the ancestral branch to the South-Asian R1a has been found bronze-age aDNA samples from Samara,Central Europe etc. One could argue that R1a-M780 branch is indian and it might be present in IVC but to say that the whole of European/Central Asian is derived from Indian branch is far-fetched imo.
FYI, if R1a signifies "Aryans", 5000-2500 BC still overthrows the conventional 1500 BC date, which is what I object to. If Indo-European languages arrived from outside, they had to have arrived before North India had (ancient) urban-sized populations.
I'd like to also point this out - the mixture of steppe and Middle Eastern and European hunger gatherer that the modern European is supposed to be made of was around 36,000 years ago - the Kostenki man.
https://anthropology.net/2014/11/07/kostenki-14-a-36000-year-old-european/
"FYI, if R1a signifies "Aryans", 5000-2500 BC still overthrows the conventional 1500 BC date, which is what I object to" --- True, anything earlier than 2000 BC is a win. My guess is that we will already find R1a-M780 from aDNA during the mature phase of IVC(2600 BC - 2000 BC). Anything earlier is cherry on the cake. Personally, I don't think there would be much ASI like component during mature IVC phase. If the jagran link quoting Dr Niraj Rai is true then it might we'll be a possibility.
Besides, David Reich in his new book (you can find that on the Amazon ,it was released 2 days ago) is of the view now that PIE Homeland lies South of the Caucasus :).
Regarding Kostenski, what you say is true but Reich said that in case of Western Europe, the combo of all three components arose only after influx of steppe dudes.
https://i.cubeupload.com/mTFkyU.png
Besides, in the above link I shared, check the second sample MA_SG. This is the boy
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mal%27ta%E2%80%93Buret%27_culture
He(the skeleton is around 15k year old I think so younger than Kostenski) happens to carry Y haplogroup R* i.e descendent of R which is neither R1 nor R2 and if the calculation in the above image is correct,he happens to have ~19% ASI. How cool is that :) ?
https://njsaryablog.blogspot.in/2016/05/rakhigarhi-more-important-than-mohenjo.html?m=1 --- plz see the comment by user @Inigo
Post a Comment