East asian admixture in europeans really ancient north eurasian?

[TheForeigner]

So the east eurasian admixture that was said by genetic bloggers and some researchers to be at 10% in northern europeans and lower levels in southern europeans is really this distinct ancient north eurasian component? How big is it in europeans and how different and how can it be classed? Was it proto-mongoloid or what?

[Kale]

Not sure what to make of the situation. It's not East Asian mixture they are detecting, but rather something akin to part of the ancestry of Native Americans. I think what they were saying is this part of the ancestry of Native Americans is actually West Eurasian, meaning that 10% too is West Eurasian.

[TheForeigner]

Didn't quite get what ancient north eurasian was supposed to be and how it might have been confused first with East Eurasian. They said it was siberian and related with ancient siberians. So were these people also proto-mongoloid or something else? And how much is in europeans and what groups have more or less?

[Kale]

I'm pretty sure they are basing the entire ANE group off of 1 (2?) individuals. Malta Boy and (Afontova Gora?). I'm pretty sure the debate is still out on whether Malta was even admixed with or an ancestor of his autosomal components. I honestly wouldn't spend too much time developing any theories based around the concept right now. Next discovery will probably rewrite the entirety of the ANE concept anyways.

[TheForeigner]

So they gave up claiming that 10 percent mongoloid. Razib khan and even dienekes were verry happy when it seemed that way. Especially razib khan actually.

[TheForeigner]

They can't say what race this siberian boy was? The mongoloid and caucasian races existed allready, right? I thought in cold climate siberia is were mongoloids were formed. They don't know what happened to this group ane? Other modern descendant in asia?

[Kale]

Here's what Mal'ta and Afontova Gora come up as when put into typical autosomal calculators.

http://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/05/01/more-analyses-of-the-malta-and-afontova-gora-genomes/

[TheForeigner]

I don't think that he really did have that admixture, because it's too varied and even includes african. Likely there is another explication for the fact he carried those genes. I am thinking this whole archeogenetics is a bit falty and not very trustworthy yet.

[Insuperable]

Based on my very limited understanding it is not an East Asian admixture per se, but a genetic drift due to some of the shared prehistoric ancestry.

[Kale]

I don't think that he really did have that admixture, because it's too varied and even includes african. Likely there is another explication for the fact he carried those genes. I am thinking this whole archeogenetics is a bit falty and not very trustworthy yet.

Well keep in mind in some of those calculators, whenever they get a segment of DNA they don't have a match for, they have to assign it to something, and that something is usually Sub-Saharan African. Not all ancient specimens will be ancestors of modern people, they may have been their own unique population, isolated for a while, and accumulated their own unique mutations. These mutations would not be cataloged as they are not present in (many) modern populations; as such these ancient specimens would be likely to score a small percentage of African even with no actual African ancestry.

[Äijä]

Best part that now it is labeled as an Indo-European component that peaks with Finnic people, the irony.

[Fire Haired]

Best part that now it is labeled as an Indo-European component that peaks with Finnic people, the irony.

The theory is not that proto-Indo Europeans were the only Europeans with ANE ancestry. The theory is that ANE ancestry was very high in eastern Europe in general when the genetic makeup of proto-Indo Europeans was forming, so it makes perfect sense Finno-Urgics have a high amount since they also originated in eastern Europe.

[Äijä]

The theory is not that proto-Indo Europeans were the only Europeans with ANE ancestry. The theory is that ANE ancestry was very high in eastern Europe in general when the genetic makeup of proto-Indo Europeans was forming, so it makes perfect sense Finno-Urgics have a high amount since they also originated in eastern Europe.

Many here claim Finns where mongoloids arriving in the Baltic, it is total bulshit.

[Austrvegr]

Many here claim Finns where mongoloids arriving in the Baltic, it is total bulshit.

Finno-Ugrian speakers were originally Uralids like the present-day Khanty/Mansi but they became more Northern European as they expanded into North-East Europe from their West Siberian homeland.

Just like Turkic speakers became less Mongoloid and more Europoid as they expanded westwards.

[Raven_]

They can't say what race this siberian boy was? The mongoloid and caucasian races existed allready, right? I thought in cold climate siberia is were mongoloids were formed. They don't know what happened to this group ane? Other modern descendant in asia?

I've read Russian anthropoligists consider Mal'ta boy European. Also, Native Americans probably didn't acquire their European like features through mixing with East Asians. It would make no sense.

[Hexachordia]

They call out of place human race neanderthals or denisovans, out of place east asians australoids, amerinds west asians, only europeans can be right anywhere they appear, you decide.

[Äijä]

Finno-Ugrian speakers were originally Uralids like the present-day Khanty/Mansi but they became more Northern European as they expanded into North-East Europe from their West Siberian homeland.

Just like Turkic speakers became less Mongoloid and more Europoid as they expanded westwards.



Uralics where born in the Volga region, is that West Siberia? You should look in to the linguistic and genetic timeline before talking about the subject.

[Austrvegr]

Uralics where born in the Volga region, is that West Siberia? You should look in to the linguistic and genetic timeline before talking about the subject.

I trust the concensus of Finnish linguists:


Uralic loanword layers in Yukaghir show us that Pre-Proto-Uralic was still spoken near Pre-Proto-Yukaghir. Uralic languages have never been spoken east of Upper Yenisei, and there is no arguments to draw Pre-Proto-Yukaghir west of it. Therefore the contact zone must have been around the Upper Yenisei. From there Pre-Proto-Uralic spread/moved to the European side of Urals as late as around 3000 BC.
http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust264/sust264_hakkinenj.pdf (in English)

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/41147-Uralic-urheimat

[Gaston]

It seems there is BOTH genuine East Asian and Ancient North Eurasian admixture in Europe, not just in the north by the way.
With the Southeast Asian origin of y-DNA R, the dichotomy between West and East Eurasia is now instead a Basal Eurasian VS Derived Eurasian. y-DNA R may be linked to derived Eurasian ancestry (together with cousin N, although N being brother of O makes it an East Asian marker).


Which means there is no real West Eurasian component anymore: insead West Eurasians are some kind of mongrels with a Basal Eurasian base and various amounts of derived Eurasian (ANE, East Asian, ASI) and African ancestry.

[Insuperable]

It seems there is BOTH genuine East Asian and Ancient North Eurasian admixture in Europe, not just in the north by the way.
With the Southeast Asian origin of y-DNA R, the dichotomy between West and East Eurasia is now instead a Basal Eurasian VS Derived Eurasian. y-DNA R may be linked to derived Eurasian ancestry (together with cousin N, although N being brother of O makes it an East Asian marker).


Which means there is no real West Eurasian component anymore: insead West Eurasians are some kind of mongrels with a Basal Eurasian base and various amounts of derived Eurasian (ANE, East Asian, ASI) and African ancestry.

First time I hear about Southeast Asian origin of R and on what basis do you say there is a genuine East Asian admixture? Can you provide some info? Chwarae, why do some people claim you are a Morrocan immigrant in France?

[Äijä]

I trust the concensus of Finnish linguists:

Pre-Proto-Uralic so not what I was talking about, I was talking about the proto-Finnic that arrived in the Baltic around 1000-500BC, where they mongoloids in you opinion?

Finnic and Ugric are not the same thing and you propably know it.

[Gaston]

First time I hear about Southeast Asian origin of R and on what basis do you say there is a genuine East Asian admixture? Can you provide some info?

Being objective is not always promoted in this forum. Oftentimes, academic papers are ignored for instance.


R originating in Southeast Asia:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg2014106a.html

Tree of y-dna K:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xIyCVSPSm3I/U5LqVD5nawI/AAAAAAAACsM/TEjs1OTRu7k/s1600/Karafet-Y-DNA-K-tree-annotated.png


As for East Asian ancestry, I think it's minor and sometimes nil in Europe but it's not restricted to Northeast Europe (where it is substantial). The Balkans, Hungary and even France seem to show some minor East Asian affinity.

[Insuperable]

Being objective is not always promoted in this forum. Oftentimes, academic papers are ignored for instance.

R didn't originate in Southeast Asia nor is that written there. R's ancestreal K-M526 group, possibly yes. Descendents of K moved westwards and that is where R originated, basically outside Southeast Asia. Then again, K-M526 descended from K-M9 which originated in either South Asian or West Asia. No need to go back and attribute some things there otherwise we could claim that R originated in Africa. But, I understand what you were trying to say. Your focus is on ancestors, I think.


As for East Asian ancestry, I think it's minor and sometimes nil in Europe but it's not restricted to Northeast Europe (where it is substantial). The Balkans, Hungary and even France seem to show some minor East Asian affinity.

And the age of arrival?

[Proto-Shaman]

I trust the concensus of Finnish linguists:
There is not even a concensus about Uralic family, not even Finno-Ugric.