Association of more northern (pre-)Jomon mtDNA N9b with yDNA D-M174 bearers (unlike mtDNA N9a)

[Oasis]

Diversity in matrilineages among the Jomon individuals of Japan
Fuzuki Mizuno,Yasuhiro Taniguchi,Osamu Kondo,Michiko Hayashi,Kunihiko Kurosaki &Shintaroh Ueda

In the article above it is stated that:

”Haplogroup M7a is widely distributed throughout the Japanese archipelago.”

”Haplogroup N9b is widely distributed throughout the Japanese archipelago, except in Kyushu and southwards.”

Indeed, while the most ancient cases of mtDNA M7a were observed in the southern Ryukyu Islands, it has long been suggested that mtDNA N9b might have appeared in the Japanese Archipelago due to a more northern dispersal.

Recently, one more Japanese article appeared:

Cold adaptation in Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherers of eastern Eurasia

Previous genomic studies understanding the dispersal of Homo sapiens have suggested that present-day East Eurasians and Native Americans can trace their ancestry to migrations from Southeast Asia. However, ineluctable adaptations during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) remain unclear. By analyzing 42 genomes of up to 30-fold coverage from prehistoric hunter-gatherers, Jomon, we reveal their descent from Upper Paleolithic (UP) foragers who migrated to and isolated in the Japanese archipelago during Late Pleistocene. We provide compelling evidence suggesting that these UP people underwent positive selection for cold environments, aiding their survival through the LGM facilitated by non-shivering thermogenesis and detecting it polygenically across multiple loci in the Jomon lineage. Our study pioneers the close estimation of the physiological adaptation of ancient humans by the paleogenomic approach.

This article suggested the population replacement in the Japanese Archipelago after the appearance of the first ancient Japanese inhabitants ca. 38000 years ago, who used trapezoid small flake-based assemblages (that is, small flake-based assemblages (trapezoid ones) of the first inhabitants of the Japanese Archipelago 38000 years should be different from small flake-based assemblages, used by yDNA NO-M214 populations, unless the Japanese researchers try to mix their trapezoid small flake-based assemblages with mainstream non-trapezoid small flake based assemblages of yDNA NO-M214 populations from mainland China).

”Cold adaptation in Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherers of eastern Eurasia”: “Following the initial appearance of modern human at 38,000 yr cal BP, drastic change in the chronological distribution of radiocarbon dates were observed by the Kernel Density Estimate model (8, 58, 59) around 30,000 yr cal BP, both on P-Honshu and PSHK during Middle UP(60). These technological changes and the fluctuation of cultural occupation patterns align with the hypothesis of the population replacement(s) occurred between the early and middle UP periods on P-Honshu and PSHK. Moreover, they suggest that the middle UP foragers adopted to the colder landscape of the northern Asia before colonized into P-Honshu.

Consequently, since the Japanese authors evasively support the southern origin of the Eastern Eurasians in the main text, the new populations, coming to the Japanese Archipelago 30,000 years ago, should have already started to adapt to the colder environment.

Whereas mtDNA N9b is the female lineage, accompanied by yDNA D-M174, showing a more northerly distribution in the Japanese Archipelago in “Diversity in matrilineages among the Jomon individuals of Japan”, which is sometimes thought to be incompatible with any southern entry of mtDNA N9b to the Japanese Archipelago, the history of mtDNA N9a and mtDNA N9b is complicated. Different views were suggested for the timing of the split of these lineages, strarting from 50000-55000 years ago and much less.

Indeed, while it can be seen from the materials of “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” that mtDNA N9a used to be a representative of the “Tianyuan-like” population, whose members should have belonged to yDNA O-M175*, the ancient Japanese individual, belonging to the potentially deeply diverged mtDNA N9b, formed a cline in the way, different from mtDNA N9a bearers:

In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the ancient Japanese individual, belonging to the potentially deeply diverged mtDNA N9b, formed a cline with individuals belonging to the northern Himalayan branch of yDNA D-M174, that is, the one that split from its brother branch about 50000 years ago. Basal branches, marked as yDNA D-M174*, have also been reported from that region. Consequently, while mtDNA N9a started to distribute in the yDNA O-M175*-related population, its sister mtDNA N9b joined the yDNA D-M174-related population at some point.

In 2022, the article “A genetic history of migration, diversification, and admixture in Asia” by Melinda Yang showed the directionality of the ancient migration from the Himalayan-related Tibetan region in the direction of inhabitants of Mongolia and Amur (Heilongjiang) region, where adaptation to the cold environment might have taken place.

Even before, in 2020, the article “Ancient DNA indicates human population shifts and admixture in northern and southern China” suggested the possibility to model in the same way the deep Jomon ancestry and deep ancestry of the Himalayas (from where some differing 50000-year-old clades of yDNA D-M174 individuals had distributed). It should be helpful to understand the migration of at least some early yDNA D-M174-related populations, which at a certain stage were likely to get in touch with the mtDNA N9b (as opposed to the yDNA O-M175*-related mtDNA N9a lineage) to comply with the findings of “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”. It should be seen whether yDNA D-M64 was the original yDNA D-M174 branch to accompany mtDNA N9b bearers.

[Oasis]

Ranking of haplogroup C2 among Han Chinese by administrative division according to the data of Tao Yichen et al. (2023)
Liaoning 92/558 = 16.49%
Heilongjiang 58/371 = 15.63%
Neimenggu 30/212 = 14.15%
Gansu 36/259 = 13.90%
Shandong 206/1526 = 13.50%
Ningxia 7/53 = 13.21%
Qinghai 13.04%
Henan 111/903 = 12.29%
Shanxi 62/534 = 11.61%
Jilin 40/350 = 11.43%
Beijing 111/986 = 11.26%
Shaanxi 61/550 = 11.09%
Taiwan 11/101 = 10.89%
Jiangsu 188/1906 = 9.86%
Hebei 84/875 = 9.60%
Hainan 5/55 = 9.09%
Xinjiang 5/56 = 8.93%
Hongkong 8.70%
Guizhou 10/124 = 8.06%
Tianjin 23/286 = 8.04%
Sichuan 84/1055 = 7.96%
Shanghai 77/972 = 7.92%
Yunnan 16/208 = 7.69%
Anhui 42/615 = 6.83%
Zhejiang 101/1523 = 6.63%
Hubei 52/841 = 6.18%
Guangdong 67/1366 = 4.90%
Chongqing 22/457 = 4.81%
Fujian 26/548 = 4.74%
Hunan 28/666 = 4.20%
Jiangxi 15/430 = 3.49%
Guangxi 6/184 = 3.26%

Median value: 9.01%

According to 23mofang, haplogroup C-M217 should account for 9.10% of all Y-DNA in present-day China.

The distribution of C-M217 in China exhibits roughly the opposite pattern as O1a-M119 in China, with most administrative divisions in Northern China having greater than average proportion of C-M217 and most administrative divisions in Southern China having less than average proportion of C-M217. However, the pattern is less perfect for C-M217 than it is for O-M119. Furthermore, there are a few administrative divisions that have relatively great proportions of both C-M217 and O-M119 for their region (e.g. Jiangsu, Liaoning).

“Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China” and “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” offered the following data, suitable to explain the appearance of a Tai-Kadai language, which clustered with the most “Austroasiatic-related” Otomanguean languages in Jager, 2017:

The ancestor of yDNA C2-F1067>C2-CTS4660 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/C-CTS4660/ ) migrated, while yDNA C2-F2613 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/C-F2613/ ) remained in their homeland. The ancestor of yDNA C2-F1067>C2-CTS4660 settled in the area of North China, where microblades were not distributed, but where deep branches of mtDNA D4 (being accompanied by basal yDNA O-M175*, “akin to Tianyuan”) lived. On the one hand, some ancestors of yDNA C2-F1067>C2-CTS4660 migrated in the direction of Korea, where mtDNA D4f is found and to where yDNA O1b2 had been also distributing:
https://www.yfull.com/mtree/D4-b/ Kazakhstan
https://www.yfull.com/mtree/D4f/ Korea

On the other hand, some more direct ancestors of yDNA C2-F1067>C2-CTS4660 migrated to the south and mixed with one of Proto-Austroasiatic populations at first, and later modern yDNA C2-F1067>C2-CTS4660 joined some Tai-Kadai populations from such an Austroasiatic population.

Approximately, it is sufficient to explain the “appearance” of a Tai-Kadai language, which clustered with the most “Austroasiatic-related” Otomanguean languages in Jager, 2017. Consequently, the “second part” should have lived somewhere closer to Korea.

What is absent in Korea should not be searched for in Hainan.


UPDATE: In the mentioned works (and, additionally, in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago"), it is pointed to the interaction of mtDNA D4h*-related population with yDNA C1a population (the Japanese C1a-M8 is geographically the closest one to mtDNA D4h*-related population) for explaining the Native American Cacaopera, Miskito languages’ affinities to selected Austronesian languages (in Jager, 2017). mtDNA D4h* should have once separated from the mainstream ancient East Asian population. Indeed, the Cacaopera people fought with the Nahua population, in which mtDNA D4h3 is observed, and the war also presupposes captives and, thus, population contacts between the Cacaopera and Nahua and acquiring mtDNA D4h3 by the Nahua from the Cacaopera. The wide scope of the distribution of yDNA C1a should be helpful in explaining farther African connections from Jager, 2017. On the other hand, mtDNA D4h reached as far as Htin, Khamu and Khon Mueang (Thailand), which presupposes the coastal migration as well, which is testified by other mtDNA D4 lineages, which were likely to accompany mtDNA D4h migrants, and got to some Austronesian populations. In this case, the focus is on mtDNA D4h* in order to differentiate the potential influence of its population from the potential influence of mtDNA D4h3a population.

[Oasis]

The allele frequencies of the wild-type (WT; Gly180) and 538G > A (Arg180) variant of human ABCC11 among different ethnic populations


It is useful to search for a genetic difference between the Han Chinese and the Koreans in order to understand the appearance of Mongoloid traits.

The article “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history” showed that modern Han Chinese have more “Papuan-like” autosomal component, which is to a considerably smaller degree present in modern Koreans. Similarly, South East Asians, who have a higher frequency of allele G(Gly180), have a higher amount of the “Papuan-like component” as well. Consequently, the presence of allele G(Gly180) is not the Western Eurasian trait in East Asians, but rather a shared common trait between Eastern Eurasians and Western Eurasians.

The article “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history” pointed that Australians, unlike Papuans, have a certain amount of “East Asian-like” ancestry (the traces of genetic contacts of Australians with Eurasians are known from other scientific articles). Moreover, in “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history”, virtually all “Australasian-like” ancestry in Koreans should be attributed to this more recent “East Asian-like” ancestry in Australians. Consequently, it is possible to suggest that the distribution of East Asian-specific allele A(Arg180) mainly started after the separation of the ancient Papuan ancestry from the ancient East Asian ancestry.

Moreover, in “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history”, it appeared that two Korean females, showing connections to various mtDNA D4 individuals, virtually lack any Papuan component, but instead have a larger amount of “East Asian-like” Australian component. The article "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" showed that such a component of two “mtDNA D4-affiliated” Korean females had been getting into an ancient agricultural population of the Fujianese coast, which is close to the place of the formation of the Austronesians, which was a source for several pre-Austronesian and proto-Austronesian dispersals from the vicinity of East Asia, and at least some of such dispersals should have reached ancient Australians.

The relevant mtDNA mutation should have been present in the population, to which two “mtDNA D4-affiliated” Korean females were akin to. In China, such mutation appears in an mtDNA M80’D, which is a deep ancestor of mtDNA D4. The ancient mtDNA M80’D* from China was found in ancient Shimao_LN population of the Middle Yellow River basin. Consequently, it is possible to suggest that the presence of such an allele A(Arg180) was in an mtDNA M80’D populations, and later it mainly distributed along with some mtDNA D4-related populations. Alternatively, some other mtDNA D branches, such as branches of mtDNA D6, share mutations with relevant mtDNA D4 branches. In general, the Koreans have more cases of mtDNA D4 than the Han Chinese, who have the South China’s population, where mtDNA D4 is not so frequent, but the “mainstream Papuan affinity” is stronger.


In “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, the East Asian ancestry of the Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen contributed to the appearance of a small amount of the Papuan component in this DA247 specimen at a certain value of K, but not in other Shamanka_EN specimens. However, in “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history”, Shamanka_EN yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 did not have the above-mentioned “mainstream Papuan” component of later East Asians and it did not have the above-mentioned “mainstream “late East Asia to Australia”” component of later East Asians, especially of two “mtDNA D4-affiliated” Korean females. Consequently, Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen’s specific component, derived from some sort of the ancient East Asian ancestry and getting into at least some of the Papuans, is something different from two above-mentioned Australasia-affiliated components in modern northern East Asians and other modern East Asians. In case ancient yDNA N-M231 individuals had East Asian-specific allele A(Arg180), it might have been mediated by the bearers of a basal mtDNA M80’D branch, whose ancestry did not contribute to the Australians.



In "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", on the territory of the future Guangxi Province of China, deep “Dushan Cave” ancestries were present, related to the basal yDNA NO/N*, expanding 11.9±2.5 to 12.6±3.1 thousand years ago in Rootsi et al, and separating from ancient East Asians 38100 years ago (NO) and somewhat less than 38000 years ago, whereas ancestors of modern yDNA N remained with ancient East Asians for some time. In the older layer of the Dushan Cave, small flake tools, made out of medium-sized cobbles, were observed, which was also preserved as a feature of yDNA N-M231-related Bianbian-related population, much later settling in the Yi river basin from the Huai river system, where the Bianbian Cave was located.

The Japanese Archipelago was being peopled starting from 38000 years ago, consequently, the 38100-year-old yDNA NO-M214 population could have managed to deliver mainstream small flake tools there, while the main industry of the Japanese Archipelago was dominated by stone trapezoid tools and/or denticulates.

Unlike this, the more modern yDNA N-M231 Boshan did not have the distinct 38100-year-old yDNA NO-M214-related component and did not have somewhat less than 38000-year-old component of the Dushan Cave, consequently, the more modern yDNA N-M231-related Boshan-related population started to separately migrate from the ancient East Asian homeland in the eastern part of the Yangtze River basin as an ancient East Asian population after the migration of its more distant yDNA N* relative, who contributed somewhat less than 38000-year-old component to the Dushan Cave individual and whose population was expanding 11.9±2.5 to 12.6±3.1 thousand years ago in Rootsi et al. Similarly, the bearers of the separate Boshan’s component stayed with yDNA O-M175 relatives for a longer period than its more distant yDNA N* relative, who moved to the ancient Youjiang River basin, of which the Nanpan River basin is a part (see the map above), and contributed somewhat less than 38000-year-old component to the Dushan Cave individual of Guangxi, having become the Dushan’s substratum. Since the TMRCA of this yDNA N*, related to the Dushan substratum, is 11.9±2.5 to 12.6±3.1 thousand years ago in Rootsi et al, in case of joining the yDNA O-M188-related population, such a lineage could participate in the agricultural developments in China or could migrate along with yDNA O-M175 members to the second Eastern Eurasin peninsular/insular center of agricultural development, shown in ”Ancient genomes and the evolutionary path of modern humans” (E. Andrew Bennett, Qiaomei Fu https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2024.01.047 )



According to the article “The oldest Hoabinhian technocomplex in Asia (43.5 ka) at Xiaodong rockshelter, Yunnan Province, southwest China”, co-authored by researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, small flake tools joined the Hoabinhian technocomplex at a certain period, which is a feature of yDNA NO-M214-related populations. Similarly, the ancestry, observed in the yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals and partially shared with other ancient East Asian Yangtze-derived individuals, also appeared in the died-out ancient Maludong individual of the Yunnan Province, living relatively close to the Hoabinhian-related Xiaodong Cave, though in a different river basin. Consequently, up to at least 25000 years ago (the effect of the Last Glacial Maximum) ancestors of yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals had to circulate in the area between the Yunnan Province’s southern river basins on the one hand and (on the other hand) territories of the western part of the Yangtze River basin, which were at first limited by being occupied by arriving yDNA O-M175* individuals and were later limited by being occupied by individuals, belonging to deep subclades of modern clades of yDNA O-M175. The neighbours of ancestors of yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals were the “Chinese” Hoabinhians, the nearest ones living in the Xiaodong Rockshelter in the Lancang (Mekong) River basin. Though the contribution from Australasians (Onge-related or Hoabinhian-related) to yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals was not found in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", the Burmese individuals, sharing some ancient ancestry with yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals and with their yDNA N-M231 relatives, clustered much closer to the Laotian Hoabinhian LA368 (a southern neighbour of Xiaodong Hoabinhians) than to the 33000-year-old AR33K individual, related to mtDNA A* population and to yDNA O-M175* population, “akin to Tianyuan”, while mtDNA C2-M217>C2-L1373 should have joined somewhat later the “mtDNA pre-A2-related” population in accordance with the materials “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”. Additionally, the mentioned Burmese individuals, sharing some ancient ancestry with yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals and their yDNA N-M231 relatives, clustered dissimilarly and extremely far from yDNA C1b-B65-related ancient Kra-Dai individuals, whose yDNA C1b-B65 separated from Kostenki14 46700 years ago, but all Kra-Dai languages clustered with Eastern Eurasian languages in Jager, 2017, meaning that the Kra-Dai overcame the Western Eurasian influence of the Kostenki14-related yDNA C1b-B65 population. Consequently, since there was no apparent gene flow from Hoabinhians to yDNA NO-M214 populations, but the LA368 Hoabinhian and relevant yDNA NO-M214 members clustered close to each other in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", it should be viewed that yDNA NO-M214-related populations, including ancestors of yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals, contributed some ancestry to the neighbouring Xiaodong Hoabinhians, who had yDNA NO-M214 population-related small flake tools, and such an ancestry had been independently contributed to the ancestors of the Onge (most likely via the ancient Baojianshan-related population, which was additionally influenced by yDNA O-M122-related population), since there were different additional ethogenetic processes in the past). In the model from “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, the yDNA N-M231-related Bianbian and yDNA N-M231-related Zongri5.1K “share” the “male” 49% DNA with the Onge after the split from the Hoabinhian LA368 (it should be added that LA368 does not have any Kostenki14 component, including DNA for his uniparenthals, in the models of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago"):



The possibility to model in such a way means that some of the Onge ancestors became bearers of such a “49% DNA” component, which can also be observed in the above ancient East Asian populations. Additionally, in “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, when the Onge_New ancestry forms a 100% Onge_New component, yDNA N-M231 ancient individuals show the presence of the small amounts of the Onge_New component, formed out of the ancient East Asian ancestry, but not out of the Australasian ancestry. In another work, co-authored by researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, one case of yDNA N* of an Uighur from the China Altay clustered as a divergent side branch in the network of cases of basal yDNA N* from Southern China. In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen participated in a cline on the PCA, which included the ancient female sample from Thailand (Ban Chiang). In the less known article from year 2001 ("Genetic study of the Paleolithic and Neolithic Southeast Asians" (H Oota 1, K Kurosaki, S Pookajorn, T Ishida, S Ueda DOI: 10.1353/hub.2001.0023)), the ancient sample from the Moh Khiew Cave (MKC-1) of the Crabi Province of Thailand, dated to 25800 years ago, produced the DNA sequence, observed in mtDNA of some Papuans. It was already mentioned, that in “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, the East Asian ancestry of the Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen contributed to the appearance of a small amount of the Papuan component in this DA247 specimen at a certain value of K, but not in other specimens. In principle, the smaller river systems of Thailand are adjacent to the Mekong (Lancang) river basin, whose Lancang part originates in China not too far from the origin of the Yangtze River, that is, not too far from the Upper Yangtze river basin. It should be the explanation behind the Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen-specific component of the East Asian origin, contributed to the selected Papuans via Thailand.

At least 25000 years ago, during the Last Glacial Maximum, the Paleolithic Myanmar’s populations started to migrate to the modern territory of China , crossing the Lancang river basin (“Ancient inland human dispersals from Myanmar into interior East Asia since the Late Pleistocene”). This migration should have started to press the ancestors of Boshan and Bianbian from their area of habitation. On the other hand, the eastern part of the Yangtze River basin should have had the decreased population density due to the partial exodus of the yDNA O-M175 to the areas south of the Yangtze River basin because of the Last Glacial Maximum. Consequently, the migration to the east down the flow of the Yangtze river basin to the still relatively inhabitable partially vacated areas should have become the easiest option for the ancestors of Boshan and Bianbian as opposed to the migration through even more cold Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau during the Last Glacial Maximum or as opposed to the migration to the Huanghe River basin, where “yDNA O-M175* populations, akin to Tianyuan” had been slowly dying out during the Last Glacial Maximum and where there was an incursion of microblade-making populations. It is already known that “male” ca.49% of ancestry of the Boshan individual were modeled using the Yangtze River’s Hubei Province’s population in “Ancient DNA indicates human population shifts and admixture in northern and southern China”, which means that ancestors of Boshan bypassed the territory of the Hubei Province, when migrating to the east. When the yDNA O-M122-related population reexpanded after the Last Glacial Maximum by 19000 years ago, the y chromosome branches, ancestral to Boshan, should have already lived in the Yangtze-related area to the east of the area of yDNA O-M122-related population. Additionally, it is considered that yDNA O-M122-related population, when migrating, caused the decline of the indigenous local Paleolithic cultures, and the resurgence of more southern indigenous populations only happened when the yDNA O-M122-related population was inhabiting the more northern Yellow River Basin, preserving its relatively “unadmixed” autosomal component.



The Onge connection means that languages of such individuals, as Bianbian/Boshan-related yDNA NO-M214 populations, contributing to some ancestors of Xiaodong Hoabinhians and showing the presence of the Onge_New component, would not have clustered with Native American-related languages, since the language of the Onge tribe does not have an immediate Native American “relative” in his microcluster in Jager, 2017 (http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~gja...slidesHITS.pdf), but instead the language of the Onge tribe clusters at least with some Caucasian languages, but not with Kartvelian languages. There is an old hypothesis by the American linguist Swadesh, in the materials for which he had been trying to find rather rare shared lexical correspondences between Caucasian, Tibeto-Burman, Chinese, “Ural-Altaic”, Japanese and many more Asian languages, potentially including lexical commonalities with Indo-European languages and even language isolates, which means that small isolated language families or isolated languages had been lexically influenced by other languages. In accordance with “Genetic Continuity of Bronze Age Ancestry with Increased Steppe-Related Ancestry in Late Iron Age Uzbekistan”, one of the ways of the Onge-related ancestry, being mediated by the AASI-related individuals, should have been as far as the geographic area of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, from where it could be contributed to some bearers of Caucasian languages (most likely via the died out Hattic language, whereas the Hattic language had ambiguous comparisons with the Caucasian languages (some ancestors of the Hattic speakers should have included the yDNA lineage of the Eastern Eurasian type, which even reached Africa) and the Hattic language "interacted" with the Sumerian language isolate (some ancestors of the Hattic speakers should have included the yDNA lineage of the Eastern Eurasian type, which was even reported from different Near Eastern specimens and populations)).

One medieval inscription is the Szarvas inscription of the Avar elite, which can be tentatively “read” either in ancient Hungarian or in a Turkic language and which is applicable to the language, spoken by distant relatives of the Bianbian and Boshan individuals.
One more ancient inscription, the Myazedi Pyu inscription, which may be relevant for determining the initial language of such individuals as Bianbian and Boshan, exists in Asia.

Surprisingly, a non-negligible amount of more distant relatives of Boshan (their y chromosomes constitute 5-7% out of the total number of male individuals in Tibeto-Burman-speaking Chakma and Tripura populations) appeared in the coastal Chittagong area of Bangladesh, bordering Myanmar (“Genetic Structure of Tibeto-Burman Populations of Bangladesh: Evaluating the Gene Flow along the Sides of Bay-of-Bengal”). However, in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, relatives of such individuals formed a cline, leading to the individuals of the Himalayan region, which included the Hongshan culture’s related individual as an intermediary. It is known from archaeology, that the earlier Houli culture, to which Boshan belonged, contributed to some of its neighbouring cultures, which later also contributed to the Hongshan culture. In “Genetic Structure of Tibeto-Burman Populations of Bangladesh: Evaluating the Gene Flow along the Sides of Bay-of-Bengal”, a more close relative of Boshan appeared in neighbours of Tibeto-Burman-speaking Chakma and Tripura populations, that is, he appeared in the Tibeto-Burman-speaking Marma population. The ancient/medieval Pyu civilization of Myanmar left partially undeciphered inscriptions. A set of inscriptions from the Myazedi Pagoda of the Pagan area of Myanmar contains an inscription, in which only a few dozens of words can be deciphered as belonging to the Tibeto-Burman Marma (Mranma) language, whose speakers arrived at the end of the Pyu civilization, while the linguistic affinity of the remaining words is unknown ("A preliminary reassessment of the PYU faces of the Myazedi inscriptions at Pagan"), therefore, it is speculated that they may belong to the language of one of the Pyu populations, interacting with the incoming Mranma/Marma speakers. After arriving to the territory of Myanmar, Mranma/Marma speakers continued to distribute as far as modern Bangladesh, and one of their modern populations is attested in “Genetic Structure of Tibeto-Burman Populations of Bangladesh: Evaluating the Gene Flow along the Sides of Bay-of-Bengal”. Consequently, the sampled Mranma/Marma population may also include individuals, whose ancestors joined the ancestors of the sampled Mranma/Marma population after its arrival to the area of the Pyu civilization. All male lineages of the sampled Mranma/Marma belong to populations, which speak clearly definable languages: Tibeto-Burman languages, Austroasiatic languages, Dravidian languages, Indo-Aryan languages. Therefore, the y chromosome relative of Boshan may be a candidate to be a descendant of speakers of the language, whose words in one of the Myazedi Pyu inscriptions cannot find the clear correspondence in the well-known languages (Tibeto-Burman languages, Austroasiatic languages, Dravidian languages, Indo-Aryan languages). The researcher of the Japanese descent Marc Miyake is also trying to decipher this Myazedi Pyu inscription. When musing on the language of this Pyu civilization’s Myazedi inscription, which appears to be related to a less distributed and less known substratum of Tibeto-Burmans, one may combine the results of Marc Miyake‘s attempts with the fact that the ancestors of the Japanese interacted with the Houli culture in the past, and this culture indirectly contributed the part of its population to the ancestors of founders of the Hongshan culture, whose representatives are considered to migrate as far as the Southern Himalayas in accordance with the materials of “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” and thus should have become bearers of the substratum language for Tibeto-Burman languages there.

In “Ancient DNA indicates human population shifts and admixture in northern and southern China”, ancient Boshan, though he belonged to yDNA N-M231, a distant brother branch of the Avar elite’s yDNA, was called “ancient Chinese”, though he does not belong to yDNA O-M134 or even yDNA O-M122 of actual initial speakers of Sino-Tibetan languages.

In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, there exists the yDNA N-M231 individual, clustering in the “Himalayan section” of the PCA and, on the one hand, forming a cline with the Hongshan culture individual and the “Zuojiashan area-affiliated” individual, but, on the other hand, forming a cline with the Naxi individuals (Naxi groups can yield from 41,7% yDNA N-M231 till 77,8% yDNA N-M231 in different studies (the known Naxi subclades belong to yDNA N-F2930), which has the deep 24000-year-old “Para-Austroasiatic” Naxi sample as its close neighbor and which proceeds via the Yi population and proceeds to the relevant Burmese individual, who did not cluster the closest to the “indigenous” Burmese individuals, sharing some ancient ancestry with yDNA N-M231-related Boshan and Bianbian individuals and their yDNA N-M231 relatives, meaning that the “Pyu civilization”-related population and the Paleolithic “Boshan/Bianbian-related” contribution to the population, which became the substratum of the Burmese, were different contributions. Additionally, the basal yDNA N-M128(N1a) HGDP01293 individual, clustering not far from Anhui and Jiangsu individuals, formed a cline with non-yDNA N Naxi individuals, clustering with the Yi individuals, and one of these non-yDNA N Naxi individuals (who also does not belong to yDNA Q-M242) participated in the aformentioned cline, comprising the aformentioned “Hongshan-affiliated” Himalayan-related yDNA N individual, some other Naxi individuals, and the aforementioned cline proceded to the relevant Burmese individual. What is also relevant for the Bangladesh- and Burmese-related individuals from “Genetic Structure of Tibeto-Burman Populations of Bangladesh: Evaluating the Gene Flow along the Sides of Bay-of-Bengal”, possibly related to the population, having contributed non-Austroasiatic, non-Indo-Aryan, non-Tibeto-Burman, non-Dravidian dominating lexicon and other linguistic elements to the undeciphered Myazedi Pyu inscription is that, in “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, it was shown that yDNA N1a ancient individual, producing a call for yDNA NO, had an increased “Onge_New” component.

In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the quite “basal” specimen Boshan (yDNA N1b), the "basal" yDNA N1c yDNA N-Y23747 specimen (https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-Y23747/) and the basal yDNA N-M128(N1a) HGDP01293 individual did not have the destiny to participate in clines, involving the individual, who probably spoke the language isolate. The linguistic elements of the Myazedi Pyu inscription mainly bear resemblance to several different languages of rather southern or moderate regions of Eurasia, which means that the language, in which this inscription was written, does not contain elements of the entirely isolated language, but instead contains elements of the language, whose bearers had ancestors and relatives, contributing to other populations.

[Oasis]

There exists an interesting example from the Myazedi Pyu inscription from Burma (Myanmar), which can represent the combination of the clearly Tibeto-Burman linguistic elements (due to which the language of the inscription is considered Tibeto-Burman by researchers despite the fact that most words of the Myazedi Pyu inscription cannot be easily found in Tibeto-Burman languages) and some other linguistic elements.

At the beginning, one has to consider the Myazedi Pyu word Ḅaṃḥ, which means “Lord”.

Marc Miyake, a researcher of the Japanese descent from the American State of Hawaii, proposes a new way to read Ḅaṃḥ as “bäj”, which is already approaching to the Turkic word *beg “master”, moreover, it would resemble the form /bej/, which seems to be not so ancient and does not fit the formation of the “Pyu civilization” in Burma, dawning from the beginning of the first millennium AD (Anno Domini).

However, the following earlier work on the Myazedi Pyu inscription indeed presents much more detailed views, which are in line with deriving the Myazedi Pyu word Ḅaṃḥ (“Lord”) and other relevant words from languages of China and Southeast Asia, of which Burma is a part:

A Preliminary Reassessment of the Pyu Faces of the Myazedi Inscriptions at Pagan
Uwe Krech
Technische Universität Berlin
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...tions_at_Pagan
The quote from Uwe Krech:
As mentioned, the Pyu writing system also employs diacritics, viz.
(1) a subscript dot ( –̥ ) -'-,
(2) a superscript dot ( ) -ṃ (traditionally called anusvāra),
and (3) a pair of postscript dots ( ) -ḥ (traditionally called visarga).

Consequently, the letter ṃ in the modern transliteration of the Myazedi Pyu word Ḅaṃḥ (“Lord”) stands for an anusvāra diacritic of the original Pyu text, and the letter ḥ in the modern transliteration of the Myazedi Pyu word Ḅaṃḥ (“Lord”) stands for a visarga diacritic of the original Pyu text.

Though thinking of a more complicated meaning for those Pyu diacritics, Uwe Krech favourably described the guess of the earlier researcher Robert Shafer that:
[1] the falling tone was denoted by the visarga diacritic (this diacritic is denoted as the letter ḥ in modern writing);
[2] A falling tone terminated with a glottal stop was denoted by the combination of the anusvāra diacritic (this diacritic is denoted as the letter ṃ in modern writing) and the visarga diacritic (this diacritic is denoted as the letter ḥ in modern writing).

Rober Shafer noted that “A falling tone terminated with a glottal stop” was not observed in Tibeto-Burman languages, and only the word pek’ “give” of the Tibeto-Burman Kukish language, which turned into pek’ from the ancestral Tibeto-Burman word pi “give”, may be associated with the existence of such “a falling tone terminated with a glottal stop”. [For better understanding, the glottal stop [ʔ] is a sound, which can be observed in the emphatic English “I am” [ʔaɪ ʔæm] or in American uh-oh [ˈʌʔoʊ].]

In his another article “Reassessment of the “Pyu” face of the Myazedi Inscriptions of Pagan, with comparative notes on Mon, Burmese, and Tibetan palaeography”, Uwe Krech presents the view that “Final ḥ [that is, a visarga] seems to have symbolised a prosodic aspect within the rhyme or the syllable: glottal and/or pitch-related”. This statement suggests that at least some speakers of the Pyu language should have spoken a variety of the Pyu language, characterized by the presence of the pitch accent (as it is in the Japanese language, for example).

In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, there are two PCAs. On one PCA, the yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals clustered quite far from yDNA Q-M242 individuals, but participated in a cline, which led to the samples, which can be associated with the Pyu speakers of Burma, and the yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals approached the Kukish-related individuals, but did not coincide with them, meaning that yDNA N-N231 Naxi were from the population, separate from the Kukish-related individuals. On another PCA, the yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals, participating in a cline, which led to the samples, which can be associated with the Pyu speakers of Burma, almost coincided with the Kukish-related individuals, which, when combined with the previous fact of the separate existence of Naxi ancestors, should lead to the conclusion that the ancestors of the yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals mixed with the ancestors of the Kukish-related individuals in the past.

According to Uwe Krech’s compilement of his own hypotheses and hypotheses by other earlier western researchers, the Tibeto-Burman linguistic materials of the Myazedi Pyu inscription mainly contain some elements, resembling Tibeto-Burman Yipho-Naxi-Burmese languages, but they also contain some elements, resembling Tibeto-Burman Kuki-Chin languages. The Tibeto-Burman Kuki-Chin languages are spoken in northeastern India, western Myanmar and southeastern Bangladesh. Since ancestors of the yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals should have contacted Kuki-Chin-speaking populations in accordance with “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the ancestors of the yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals should have been present in Southeast Asia as speakers of their native “language of the yDNA N-M231-related population” prior to the spread of the Tibeto-Burman Yipho-Naxi-Burmese languages, which modern yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals should have adopted later. Since yDNA D-M174 individuals should have already been mixed with the speakers of the Tibeto-Burman Yipho-Naxi-Burmese languages prior to the adoption of such languages by ancestors of modern yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals, it means that the prosodic system of the initial native “language of the yDNA N-M231-related population” of ancestors of yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals was not related to the prosodic system of West African languages. [Moreover, according to the IVPP materials, some prosodic and phonetic elements, which are shared by some Indo-European languages, the Miao language of South China, some Southeast Asian languages and some languages of the American Continent, should have appeared in one of the most ancient mtDNA M* Homo Sapiens population, which means the responsibility for the distribution of such features, laid upon mtDNA M* and possibly yDNA C1a individuals, who also contributed to the Western Eurasians and to the Western Eurasian ancestry of ancient Americans, having as a relative the ancient Japanese Minatogawa’s mtDNA M* (clustering with the ancient European mtDNA M* in “Population dynamics in the Japanese Archipelago since the Pleistocene revealed by the complete mitochondrial genome sequences”), who in their turn should have had the Japanese branch, such as yDNA C1a-M8, as a descendant relative, remaining in Northeast Asia.


When combined with the data from “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, implying the contacts and mixing of the ancestors of yDNA N-M231-related Naxi with the Tibeto-Burman Kuki-Chin-related populations, the early idea of Robert Shafer, (also inspired by the piece of data from the Tibeto-Burman Kukish language), to connect the diacritics, such as the visarga (ḥ) and anusvāra (ṃ), of the Myazedi Pyu language’s writing to the written depiction of the conditioned glottalization, falling tone and their combination, should become in line with the later suggestion of Uwe Krech about the diacritic’s connection to the depiction of the conditioned glottalization and the depiction of the pitch accent in the Myazedi Pyu writing.

Indeed, among their other tones, the Tibeto-Burman Kuki-Chin languages are characterized by the presence of the falling tone, which is especially characteristic of certain word classes, which perform certain syntactic functions in the sentence. When the initial native “language of the yDNA N-M231-related population” of ancestors of yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals was characterized by the pitch accent (traces of which were possibly preserved in the most western Finnish language:“A Pitch Accent Analysis of Intonation in Finnish” by Riitta Välimaa-Blum (1993) https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ion_in_Finnish), the influx of the ancient Kuki-Chin speakers to the population of the ancestors of yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals should have modified the overall prosodic situation, and additional cases for the use of the falling tone (initially occasional and non-phonemic) should have appeared in the speech of ancestors of yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals. In the pitch accent language, the prominent syllable is usually highlighted by a high tone. It is know from studies on prosody that when individuals, speaking languages, characterized by the high tone pitch accent, have to revert to the falling tone, the insertion of the glottal stop in the affected syllable is possible. According to Robert Shafer, such a “glottal insertion” should not normally happen in Tibeto-Burman languages, but since the speech of ancestors of yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals was characterized by the pitch accent, the increase in use of the falling tone by ancestors of yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals due to the linguistic contacts with the Tibeto-Burman Kuki-Chin should have resulted in such insertions of the glottal stop, especially in word classes with specialized syntactic functions, in which the Kuki-Chin speakers preferred to use the falling tone.

As for the phonetic value of the letter Ḅ in the discussed Myazedi Pyu word Ḅaṃḥ (“Lord”), Uwe Krech suggested that the Pyu sign, rendered in the modern transliteration as the letter Ḅ, was pronounced as [w] in the Myazedi Pyu language.

Summing up the above data, if one phonetically read the discussed Myazedi Pyu word Ḅaṃḥ (“Lord”), one would get the following “glottalized” result: [WÁʔ]. Despite the similarity to the Chinese name of Japan (倭 Wa), this Myazedi Pyu [WÁʔ] may only bear similarity to the medieval Chinese pronunciation of the hieroglyph 倭 Wa as [ʔWA], but not to the most ancient Old Chinese pronunciation of this hieroglyph 倭, though this Myazedi Pyu [WÁʔ] may still have been resemblant of the hieroglyph’s pronunciation during transitional stages from Old Chinese to medieval Chinese.

Since in the Kukish language ( whose bearers could have acquired the described Pre-Naxi members as speakers in the past), the variant pek’ “give”, which formed out of Tibeto-Burman pi “give” due to the supposed glottalization (and the further change of the glottal stop into k’), appeared according to Robert Shafer’s data, it is also possible that if bearers of the language, more distantly related to the language of ancestors of yDNA N-M231 Naxi individuals, similarly contacted ethnic groups, having the falling tone in their language, then their word, distantly related to the discussed Myazedi Pyu word Ḅaṃḥ (“Lord”), might have yielded a slightly different result, such as [bák] as a possible example.

Finally, one can get to one of interesting phrases from the Myazedi Pyu inscription:

Ḅaṃḥ Ḅavdha ʔa chaḥ bo bradima
Literally, “Lord Buddha’s likeness-forming image”

[1] /Ḅaṃḥ Ḅavdha/ means “Lord Buddha”, or it means ”exalted Buddha”/“lordly Buddha”, since the word Ḅaṃḥ was used in the position of the modifier of the following noun.

[2] /ʔa/ is a possessive marker for Lord Buddha (/Ḅaṃḥ Ḅavdha ʔa/ means “Lord Buddha’s”), which occupied the grammatically similar place to the Japanese particle /no/ in this case. In this case, the glottal stop ʔ was rendered as a distinct special letter in the Myazedi Pyu inscription, which implies the independent fully phonemic status of the glottal stop ʔ. The presence of the independent glottal stop (ʔ), influencing meanings of words in the language, should promote the good listening perception of the glottal stop and thus should strengthen the desire of the language’s speakers to mark in writing other “unimportant for the word’s meaning” prosodically conditioned glottal stops (as the one in the word Ḅaṃḥ [WÁʔ]). As an example, when there is no independent glottal stop ʔ in English, the presence or absence of which would cause the difference in meaning between two words, there is no desire to mark any other glottal stops in writing, e.g. the glottal stop in the emphatic English “I am” [ʔaɪ ʔæm] is not marked in writing.

[3]/chaḥ bo bradima/. /bradima/ is considered to be a loanword from Sanskrit, meaning “image”. /chaḥ/ was compared to the Old Burmese/Mranma word /achan/ from the Old Burmese part of the Myazedi inscription and was translated as “likeness”. The most interesting is the value of the word /bo/. Four researchers (Blagden, Shafer, Than Tun and Krech) from the beginning of the 20th century till today supported the independent meaning of /bo/. In their opinion, /bo/ means “form”. /chaḥ bo bradima/ “likeness form image” or “likeness-forming image”. Surprisingly, /bo/ is phonetically very similar to the Proto-Japanese word *bo, which evolved by today into the accusative particle wo/o of the Japanese language, and /bo/ is slightly less similar to *ba, which is reconstructed as an accusative case marker basing on some Tungusic languages, implying that it should be treated as a Proto-Tungusic accusative case marker. However, the Proto-Tungusic language, whose reconstruction is based upon surviving Tungusic languages is considered to be not much older than 2000+ years, which is by far younger than any of the West Liao River basin’s well-known archaeological cultures. Surprisingly, the placement of /bo/ between /chaḥ/ and /bradima/ occurred in the same position as the placement of the accusative /wo/ (from *bo) in the Japanese language not only between the object and the following noun, if the noun is formed out of the transitive verb, requiring the use of /wo/ for its object (for example, /gakkoo wo sotsugyoo suru/ “to graduate from school” (literally, “to graduate the school”) = > /gakkoo wo sotsugyoo/ “graduation from school”), but also between two nouns in such situations, which are difficult to explain morphologically, for example, /waga ai wo hoshi/ “the star of my love”, where the possible verb “to express” is only semantically implied (“the star [expressing] my love” or literally “my love-(expressing) star”, where the word “expressing” is omitted). Quite a few particles of the Japanese language, having the function, which resembles “case endings” in noun-inflecting languages, have already been proposed to derive from formerly independent words, which once had the meanings of their own, only preserved today in “fossilized” expressions (it was claimed very recently, basing on the Uralic Khanty language, that the same situation might alledgedly be observed in the formation of the most recent “case endings” in Uralic languages). Is it possible that the word /bo/ “form” of the language, spoken by people, distantly related to the Myazedi Pyu speakers (for example, a language of the Houli culture of Shandong of China or a language of other even more southerly related cultures) became the basis for the formation of the Proto-Japanese particle *bo (modern wo)? This initial meaning (/bo/ “form”) is capable of explaining the possibility to “automatically” form such expressions as /waga ai wo hoshi/ “the star of my love”.

It is a meaning of one of interesting “not-so-Tibeto-Burman” phrases of the Myazedi Pyu inscription from medieval Myanmar

[Oasis]

In accordance with the materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", the basal yDNA N* of Japan (mentioned in Rootsi et al and having a relative in the Fiji islands), should have developed from a substratum for a Hmong-Mien population into the lineage, which contributed to the Tai-Kadai population during the Neolithic period: in general, the basal yDNA N* of Japan should have had the affinity to the mtDNA M7bc-related population, with which bearers of this y chromosome lineage interacted. Similarly, the materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" and “Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China” imply that the Japanese yDNA N-Y23747-related population, which separated first from its China’s branch and thus had the possibility to reach the area of the Liangzhu civilization before its collapse and backmigrate as far as Japan, was characterized by the interaction with the mtDNA M7b-related lineage, which is observed in the Tai-Kadai and which was claimed to be present in Japan. Consequently, the basal yDNA N* of Japan was likely to join the population (which later migrated to Japan) from the Tai-Kadai-related side, but this basal yDNA N* lineage probably could not influence the Tai-Kadai in any other way than the way this lineage had interacted with the ancestors of the Hmong-Mien.

Consequently,
[1] in accordance with the materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" and “Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China”, the basal yDNA N* of Japan as well as the Japanese yDNA N-Y23747-related population interacted with mtDNA lineages, which did not have the mtDNA mutation, which might be connected by some to the hypothetical ancient population of cannibals (“demons” in mythology), who might have been terrifying the ancestors of the Khoikhoi, when still living in Africa before reaching Eurasia, consequently, yDNA N-M231-related populations in general were also unrelated to such “cannibal”/”demon” populations.

[2] Because of changing of populations from the Hmong-Mien to Tai-Kadai (in accordance with the materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago") by the basal yDNA N* individuals of Japan, it could not be assigned any “Hmong-Mien-like” or “Tai-Kadai-like” Native American languages from Jager, 2017;

[3] It is the ancient Tai-Kadai population that is hypothesized to be one of bearers of the myth deriving human beings from celestial beings, consequently, the basal yDNA N* of Japan, having come via a Tai-Kadai-related population, should have been associated with the celestial beings’ layer of mythology during the ancient period or at least with the “aboveground” layer of mythology;

[4] The appearance of the allegedly “Finnish-like” sauna kamaburo (where salt water is evaporated), in the central region of ancient and medieval Japan should not be attributed to the basal yDNA N* of Japan as well as to the Japanese yDNA N-Y23747-related population, since both these haplogroups should have had a rather southern “rice-farming” distribution in the past in accordance with the materials of both "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" and “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”. Since "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" showed the later connection of the basal yDNA N* of Japan as well as the Japanese yDNA N-Y23747-related population to the Late Neolithic population of the Pingliangtai ancient settlement, it should be mentioned that one of Pingliangtai’s female individuals belonged to mtDNA D4b1a3 (which was reported from the “rather sea coastal” and thus “full of salt” ancient Beiqian settlement, from which yDNA O1b2-BY45877 (a lineage of yDNA O1b2-47z) likely distributed to China from the area closer to Korea), and it is this particular female mtDNA D4b1a3 ancient individual (but not other ancient D4b1a specimens) that formed a cline with mtDNA D4b1c-related specimens in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", whereas a branch of mtDNA D4b1c (https://www.yfull.com/mtree/D4b1c1/) should have reached the population, contributing to the Finnish ancestors, since the Pingliangtai settlement showed the evidence for the presence of the wheeled transportation, according to the archaeological data.

The materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" and “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” are useful for discerning the past of many populations.

[Oasis]

The "I" words rather resemble Austronesian first-person singular personal pronouns.

In the Myazedi Pyu inscription (see the penultimate message and its previous message in this topic about the Myazedi Pyu inscription’s connection to the “Pre-Naxi” yDNA N-M231 individuals, who were, in accordance with “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, likely influenced by the Houli- and Hogshan-related yDNA N-M231 population, contacting the yDNA N-M1819-related population, reaching the Himalayas, as well as by an yDNA N-M128 population interacting with the ancestors of the Yi people, as well as by the proper speakers of Yipho-Naxi-Burmese and Kuki-Chin Tibeto-Burman languages ), in the Myazedi Pyu inscription, the first-person singular pronoun /gaṃḥ/ “I”, being read as [gáʔ], likely reflects the linguistic component, related to the Tibeto-Burmans, because the change of the first-person singular pronoun of Tibeto-Burman *ŋ(a) “I” into *ga “I” is attested in some Tibeto-Burman languages of “the Yipho-Naxi-Burmese branch” (the first-person singular pronoun has the form *ŋǝ “I” in Chinese dialects). Since such a pronoun (*ŋ(a) “I”) contains a velar nasal phonetic element ([ŋ]), and [k] and [g] are also velar sounds (velar stops, having the same place of articulation as the velar nasal [ŋ]), then the Proto-Tibeto-Burman *ŋ(a) “I” (which also has the variant *ŋu in some Tibeto-Burman languages), if originating from the more ancient variants (for example, *n-ka or *n-ku), might have been very distantly related to the Proto-Austronesian first-person singular pronoun *i-aku “I”.

Unlike this, at least according to the western linguist Mate Kapovic, the most basic Proto-Indo-European first-person singular pronoun was, perhaps, /éǵ/ “I” (“*éǵ as attested in Old Lithuanian eš, and eǵh₂óm as attested in Slavic jazъ or in Vedic ahám”), which is not so similar even to the deepest reconstructions for Tibeto-Burman and Austronesian pronouns. Since Proto-Tibeto-Burman, Proto-Austronesian and Proto-Indo-European first-person singular pronouns only share the feature of velarity in one sound (one stop), it is only possible to think of the extremely deep Paleolithic relationship between eastern and western pronouns (perhaps, from the period of the split between yDNA K2a and yDNA K2b).

There are some eerie similarities among the personal pronouns of many languages of northern Eurasia (Indo-European, Uralic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Yukaghir). However, for the first-person singular personal pronouns, the similarity only holds for the oblique cases; I do not recall finding anything like Indo-European "I" (German ich, Latin ego, etc.) in those other language families of northern Eurasia. The "I" words rather resemble Austronesian first-person singular personal pronouns.

The eerie similarities among the personal pronouns of many languages of northern Eurasia (Indo-European, Uralic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Yukaghir) is the feature of “M-T pronouns” (see the linguistic feature 136A “M-T Pronouns” in wals.info).

The linguistic feature 136A means that the pronoun in the first person singular in those languages contained a phoneme/sound [M], and the pronoun in the second person singular in those languages contained a phoneme/sound [T].

Kartvelian languages from Caucasus should be added should be added as the “M-T Pronouns” language family to Ebizur’s list.

In the Georgians of the now-small Kartvelian language family, the frequency of Western Eurasian mtDNA T is the highest (https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-8...2%3E3.0.CO;2-Z)

Since the reconstructed “M-T Pronouns” in Indo-European, Uralic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Yukaghir, Kartvelian bear at least some resemblance to each other, and, additionally, the Yukaghir language clustered in the same group as the Kartvelian languages in Jager, 2017 ( type in names of languages: http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~gja...slidesHITS.pdf), the shared “M-T Pronouns” in these languages might be attributed to the linguistic influence from Western Eurasian populations, containing mtDNA T representatives.

However, the feature of “M-T Pronouns” is not limited to Indo-European, Uralic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Yukaghir, Kartvelian languages. The linguistic feature 136A “M-T Pronouns” includes Eskaleut languages, Lakhota language (Native American Siouan languages), Chukotko-Kamchatkan languages, a Fulfulde language (Niger-Congo language family), a Grebo language (Niger-Congo language family), a Salt-Yui language (Papuan Chimbu-Wahgi language family), Yimas language (Papuan Ramu-Lower Sepic language family), Waskia language (Papuan Madang language family), Usan language (Papuan Madang language family) and especially a Native American Miwok language, and, in Jager, 2017, the Miwok language clustered with the Japanese language, which nonetheless does not have “M-T Pronouns”, and there should have been other “automatically reconstructed” lexical similarities between the Japanese language and the Native American Miwok language.

The IVPP researchers found the ancient mtDNA D4h3a/yDNA C2-M217 specimen AR14K from the Amur (Heilongjiang) river basin. It shares a mutation A16241G with a few branches of mtDNA T2. Today the mtDNA D4h3a is distributed in America.The mutation A16241G is quite ancient in Eurasia, since it appeared in mtDNA Q of the Papuans. Indeed, the Papuan languages, having “M-T pronouns”, clustered with Papuan languages, spoken by mtDNA Q-rich Papuan populations. Unlike this, the mutation A16241G is rare in Africa, which may explain the rarity of “M-T pronouns” languages in Africa. In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, one of the Chukotko-Kamchatkan individuals formed a cline with the ancient mtDNA D4h3a/yDNA C2-M217 specimen AR14K from the Amur (Heilongjiang) river basin and with the mtDNA U4 specimen, which should have derived from the ancient population, which was already admixed with the members of mtDNA T-related population. Nonetheless, the Chukotko-Kamchatkan individual clustered on the cline closer to the mtDNA D4h3a/yDNA C2-M217 specimen AR14K, having the mutation A16241G, which is shared with mtDNA T, and farther from the mtDNA U4 specimen, which should have derived from the ancient population, which should have been admixed with a much more modern mtDNA T population. It means that mtDNA D4h3a-related population contacted the Paleolithic branch of mtDNA T related population, which would explains why Chukotko-Kamchatkan, Eskaleut and Native American individuals, having “M-T pronouns” in their languages, virtually only have the derivatives of the sound [M] and the sound [T] left in their “M-T pronouns” left, while “M-T pronouns” in Indo-European, Uralic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Yukaghir, Kartvelian languages share more similarities, which betrays the more recent Western Eurasian origin of these pronouns.

A16241G T2b4-a5
A16241G T2b52
A16241G T2g3b2a

A16241G D4h3a America
A16241G B2aa1 America
A16241G D4h1b2 Japan https://www.yfull.com/mtree/D4h1b2/
A16241G C4c1a America

A16241G L1c1b Africa

A16241G Q Papua

A16241G M66b1b
A16241G H1-f2d1a
A16241G H1m6
A16241G H109a
A16241G J1d9a
A16241G J2a2b
A16241G F4b1d1
A16241G U5a1d2b1a4
A16241G U5a2e1a1