Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Age of major haplogroups
Topic Started: Feb 14 2014, 11:52:52 PM (23 Views)
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Please do not forget that, regardless of the phylogenetic relationships among the various subclades of K-M9, all of K-M9 must have come from somewhere -- they must have been descended from someone, not magically conjured out of thin air.

According to the same Supplementary Figure 3b, proto-K, proto-F3'H, and proto-I'J all coalesce to a MRCA between 43,000 and 44,000 YBP. In other words, TMRCA {F3'H'I'J'K} is about 125% of TMRCA {N'O'Q'R}, or TMRCA {N'O'Q'R} is about 80% of TMRCA {F3'H'I'J'K}. Furthermore, TMRCA F (i.e. {F2'G'F3'H'I'J'K}) is about 47,000 YBP, or only about 3,000 to 4,000 years before the MRCA of {F3'H'I'J'K}. That means that TMRCA {N'O'Q'R} is about 75% or three quarters of the TMRCA of all extant haplogroup F-M89 Y-chromosomes. (This is reminiscent of a tidbit that I recall having derived from a figure of Shi Yan et al. 2013: the variance of extant O3-M122 Y-chromosomes is about 70% of the variance of all {G'H'I'J'K} Y-chromosomes.)

If you want to link the initial Upper Palaeolithic of Central Asia and Siberia with certain subclades of C-M130 and D-M174, then you must be prepared to accept that these early Central/North Asians were subsequently overrun by carriers of F-M89, wherever they may have come from: South Asia? The Middle East?

An alternative hypothesis is that the bearers of the initial Upper Palaeolithic of Central Asia and Siberia were F-M89 or proto-F; they got bottlenecked somewhere in Central Asia or Siberia, and subsequently spread over most of the world. This might agree with the recent reevaluation of modern human settlement in the Levant, according to which extant modern human populations of the Levant have not settled the region directly from Africa, but rather via Central Asia.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
skywalker
Feb 15 2014, 01:05:40 AM
It's of a bunch of sites with shared characteristics and limited to a narrow stretch of the western side of Tianshan mountains from eastern Uzbekistan up to the Altai, then hugging southern Siberia to Baikal, bending into the Loess Plateau and possibly the Korean peninsula via a eastern inner Mongolia path.

There is no evidence that this loose collection of sites is ancestral to SW Asian or European Upper Paleolithic cultures, and F would not be a good fit for obvious reasons. I also don't understand why F would be overunning previous peoples in Oceania and Asia but that is another matter and your personal sentiment, which I don't want to get involved with.
Judging from the OP, it is your personal sentiment, assuming that you understand that most human males in modern Central Asia and Siberia belong to Y-DNA haplogroup R, N, Q, or O (alongside some members of G, J, L, I, etc.), all of which belong to haplogroup F-M89.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
TMRCA ABCDEF: approx. 102,500 YBP
TMRCA A: approx. 88,000 YBP
TMRCA BCDEF: approx. 77,500 YBP
TMRCA B: approx. 70,500 YBP
TMRCA CDEF: approx. 61,500 YBP
TMRCA DE: approx. 54,000 YBP
TMRCA F: approx. 47,000 YBP
TMRCA C: approx. 45,000 YBP
TMRCA E: approx. 42,000 YBP
TMRCA C(xC3): approx. 41,500 YBP
TMRCA K: approx. 39,000 YBP
TMRCA {F3+H}: approx. 38,500 YBP
TMRCA {I+J}: approx. 36,000 YBP
TMRCA NOP: approx. 35,000 YBP
TMRCA D2'1'3: approx. 34,000 YBP

TMRCA NO: approx. 31,500 YBP
TMRCA H: approx. 31,000 YBP
TMRCA G: approx. 29,000 YBP
TMRCA P: approx. 28,500 YBP
TMRCA Q: approx. 28,000 YBP
TMRCA O: approx. 27,500 YBP
TMRCA C3: approx. 25,000 YBP
TMRCA E2: approx. 23,500 YBP
TMRCA J: approx. 22,500 YBP
TMRCA O3: approx. 21,000 YBP
TMRCA R: approx. 21,000 YBP
TMRCA E1b1b: approx. 19,500 YBP
TMRCA {R1a+R1b}: approx. 18,000 YBP
TMRCA I: approx. 17,500 YBP
TMRCA D2: approx. 17,000 YBP
TMRCA NO(xO): approx. 16,500 YBP
TMRCA R1b1: approx. 16,000 YBP
TMRCA L: approx. 15,500 YBP
TMRCA H1: approx. 12,500 YBP
TMRCA E1b1a: approx. 11,500 YBP
TMRCA {R2 + R*}: approx. 11,000 YBP
TMRCA {R1b1b1 + R1b1b2}: approx. 11,000 YBP
TMRCA M: approx. 10,500 YBP
TMRCA R1a1: approx. 8,000 YBP
TMRCA R1b1b2: approx. 8,000 YBP
TMRCA R2: approx. 6,000 YBP
TMRCA F2 (Lahu x 5): approx. 3,000 YBP

Note that IJ, NOP, and D2'1'3 each coalesces at around the same time (approximately 35,000 years +/- 1,000 years ago according to this study).

Haplogroup C (TMRCA approx. 45,000 YBP) appears to be about 1.3 times that age. However, extant C3-M217 appears to be much younger (TMRCA approx. 25,000 YBP). C1a1-M8 (Japanese 0758) coalesces with C1b-M356 (Brahui 0029) at about 39,000 YBP.

It is possible that the ancestor of any of C3-M217, C1a1-M8, or D2'1'3 might have been present in the early Central Asian/Siberian population that you have mentioned, but all modern representatives of each of these clades coalesce to a common ancestor more recently than the common ancestor of NO and P.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Also, despite this study's lack of reporting of results for many well-known SNPs, such as M217 (C3) or M176 (O2b), their positions in the phylogenetic trees can be inferred in most cases.

For example, consider Supplementary Figure 5 (Bayesian tree for NRY haplogroup C sequences):

Split 1 (approx. 45,000 YBP): C3-M217 vs. {Dai C* + {Papuan C2 + {Japanese C1a1 + Brahui C1b}}}

Split 2 (approx. 42,000 YBP): Dai C* vs. {Papuan C2 + {Japanese C1a1 + Brahui C1b}}

Split 3 (approx. 40,000 YBP): Papuan C2 vs. {Japanese C1a1 + Brahui C1b}

Split 4 (approx. 39,000 YBP): Japanese C1a1 vs. Brahui C1b

Split 5 (approx. 25,000 YBP): "Exclusively Northern" C3 vs. "Ubiquitous" C3

Split 6 (approx. 22,500 YBP): Dai C3 vs. the rest of "Ubiquitous" C3

Split 7 (approx. 15,000 YBP): Xibe-Oroqen-Uyghur branch vs. the rest of "Exclusively Northern" C3

Split 8 (approx. 13,000 YBP): Japanese branch vs. the rest of "Exclusively Northern" C3

Split 9 (approx. 12,500 YBP): Xibe-Hezhen-Han (Tungusic?) branch vs. Hazara-Daur-Mongol-Oroqen (Mongolic?) branch of "Exclusively Northern" C3

Split 10a (approx. 8,500 YBP): Oroqen-Japanese-Tujia branch vs. Burusho-Hazara-Hezhen-Yakut-Han branch of "Ubiquitous" C3

Split 10b (approx. 8,500 YBP): Papuan C (probably C2) vs. Papuan C (probably C2)


In regard to the obviously O2b section of the haplogroup NO tree (Supplementary Figure 11), note that the Hezhen O2b individual shares a common ancestor with a Japanese O2b individual about 500 YBP according to this tree. The {Hezhen+Japanese} pair coalesces with another Japanese O2b individual about 1,500 YBP. This means either that the HGDP Hezhen (Nanai) sample from the PRC contains some recent Japanese genetic influence, or else that the HGDP Japanese sample contains some individuals who are not of ethnic Japanese ancestry (in this case, if not authentically Japanese, probably Korean). This fact weighs against the hypothesis that the sporadic cases of O2b in Nanai (and perhaps also those in Daur, Xibe, etc.) represent remnants of the ancient source of O2b, and favors the alternative hypothesis that they reflect gene flow from the Japanese Archipelago (or perhaps from the Korean Peninsula in some cases).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Y-chromosome: CF · Next Topic »
Add Reply