Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Male lineages in East Eurasia
Topic Started: Jul 19 2005, 03:00:32 PM (597 Views)
qrasy
ဥတ္တမ
[ *  *  * ]
It seems that M122 is Chinese Y-gene?

How about the other on the picture of East Asia?
iy•ɨʉ•ɯu||ɪʏ•ɪ̈ʊ̈•ʊ||eø•ɘɵ•ɤo||e̞ø̞•ə•ɤ̞o̞||ɛœ•ɜɞ•ʌɔ||æɐ||aɶ•ä•ɑɒ
m•ɱ•n̪•n••ɳ•ɲ•ŋ•ɴ
ɸβ•fv•θð•ʃʒ•ʂʐ
ŋ̍ m̩ n̩ ʰːˑ ɐ̆ɕʑ
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ren
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]


Edited by ren, Feb 15 2012, 03:16:47 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
qrasy
ဥတ္တမ
[ *  *  * ]
Posted Image

O: definitely East Asians
C: confusing in East Asian, Australian, Pacifics North Amerind? (more than half of Mongols and Australians?)
R: Dracida and Cameroon?
R1a, R1b: commonly found in Europeans?
K: Australian, Han Chinese, Uygurs?
N: Siberians?
E: Africans?

Posted Image
M119, M122, M268: Descendants of M175
M89, M45 where do they come from?
M231: another name of "N"?

Posted Image
Some of the 'others' seems K or C-type Y-chromosome. Are they really Australoids? Mongolians are more than 50% Australoid? Or does it mean Australoid and Mongoloid share same Ancestor?
Usually Y-gene of Mongoloid closer to Caucasoid or Australoid?

Posted Image
How would it be if we keep expanding upwards to "worldwide Adam"? Are there any 'direct' descendants of him? (the closest Y-gene)
iy•ɨʉ•ɯu||ɪʏ•ɪ̈ʊ̈•ʊ||eø•ɘɵ•ɤo||e̞ø̞•ə•ɤ̞o̞||ɛœ•ɜɞ•ʌɔ||æɐ||aɶ•ä•ɑɒ
m•ɱ•n̪•n••ɳ•ɲ•ŋ•ɴ
ɸβ•fv•θð•ʃʒ•ʂʐ
ŋ̍ m̩ n̩ ʰːˑ ɐ̆ɕʑ
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ren
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
qrasy
Jul 23 2005, 05:50 AM







Quote:
 
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/anthropology/WorldHaplogroupsMaps1.png

O: definitely East Asians
C: confusing in East Asian, Australian, Pacifics North Amerind? (more than half of Mongols and Australians?)
R: Dracida and Cameroon?
R1a, R1b: commonly found in Europeans?
K: Australian, Han Chinese, Uygurs?
N: Siberians?
E: Africans?

It's important not to explicitly assign lineages to populations. And one post is insufficient to explain or understand the complex phylogeny and population history that stretches over 200,000 years (~50,000 years out of Africa) of Modern human history. It's confusing but it will be clear with the acquisition of knowledge step by step slowly. Here is a phylogeny breakdown for starts:
Posted Image
Quote:
 
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/fi1/genetics/EEurasiaFNOP.jpg
M119, M122, M268: Descendants of M175
M89, M45 where do they come from?

M89/F is the ancestor of most Eurasians. It led to M45/P and M214/O. O*/M214 led to M175/O.
Quote:
 
M231: another name of "N"?

It seems, although "M231" usually would refer to only those with just the M231 mutation whereas "N" would usually refer to all of M231 and its branchings.
Quote:
 
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/fi1/genetics/EEurasiaCDK.jpg
Some of the 'others' seems K or C-type Y-chromosome. Are they really Australoids? Mongolians are more than 50% Australoid?

K is actually the ancestor of many lineages all across the world. The K you see probably is the "unchanged" version without further mutations that necessitated further nomenclature, but K most likely developed in the Middle East or India and long long time ago, before advent of modern racial differences.

Quote:
 
Or does it mean Australoid and Mongoloid share same Ancestor?

The population loosely termed "Mongoloids" would be a combination of
~a southern (Austric) wave coming up along the coast from southeastern Asia
~and a people coming up into Central Asia from southwestern Asia and then turning east into Siberia.

Quote:
 
Usually Y-gene of Mongoloid closer to Caucasoid or Australoid?

As I said, you can't really assign broad lineages to races. The K in Australia is actually the ancestor of R in Europe. The question is not really answerable for complex reasons.
Quote:
 
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/fi1/genetics/HaploO_Haplo7.jpg
How would it be if we keep expanding upwards to "worldwide Adam"? Are there any 'direct' descendants of him? (the closest Y-gene)

The most ancient lineages (A and B) are usually found in East Africa and southern Africa.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
qrasy
ဥတ္တမ
[ *  *  * ]
ren
Jul 23 2005, 01:27 PM
The population loosely termed "Mongoloids" would be a combination of
~a southern (Austric) wave coming up along the coast from southeastern Asia
~and a people coming up into Central Asia from southwestern Asia and then turning east into Siberia.

It seems that 'Mongoloid' does not mean anything at all.
Didn't you forget about the American Indians (also considered Mongoloids)?

Mongoloid1: South West Asian
Siberian etc. mostly have N-type Y-gene

Mongoloid2: South East Asian
Vietnamese etc. mostly have O-type Y-gene

C-type also common among them.

So how can they share some characteristics? Did they evolve to the same race by survive under similar condition? Or they mix to become one new race?
iy•ɨʉ•ɯu||ɪʏ•ɪ̈ʊ̈•ʊ||eø•ɘɵ•ɤo||e̞ø̞•ə•ɤ̞o̞||ɛœ•ɜɞ•ʌɔ||æɐ||aɶ•ä•ɑɒ
m•ɱ•n̪•n••ɳ•ɲ•ŋ•ɴ
ɸβ•fv•θð•ʃʒ•ʂʐ
ŋ̍ m̩ n̩ ʰːˑ ɐ̆ɕʑ
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ren
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
"Mongoloid" is a term used in physical anthropology. It refers to a physical type, actually an osteological type. It's actually the most easily definable osteological type (race), as far as I know, since it's the only population with a specialized dental complex, Sinodonty.

You shouldn't equate physical types with lineages, just as you shouldn't confuse a surname with a race. For example, an Englishman might be R1b, which is more related to O than to his cousin's E3b, which is more related to a Nigerian's E1. Lineage % in a population can become distorted, especially when we were hunter-gatherers in small numbers. It's like how so many Chinese have surnames "Wang", "Zhang", and "Li". Since a surname, like a lineage, is only passed down from a father to a son, it becomes distorted over time. It doesn't mean all of your ancestors on both sides were of "Wang".

These people you talk about were most likely a single population that expanded from Siberia. Whether and how much different waves contributed to this population is impossible to clarify at this point.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
qrasy
ဥတ္တမ
[ *  *  * ]
Single population from Siberia is the most dominant term in most of Mongoloids?

Actually are 2 waves you described are the source of mixed Mongoloids? (referring to Central Asians and Indonesians)
iy•ɨʉ•ɯu||ɪʏ•ɪ̈ʊ̈•ʊ||eø•ɘɵ•ɤo||e̞ø̞•ə•ɤ̞o̞||ɛœ•ɜɞ•ʌɔ||æɐ||aɶ•ä•ɑɒ
m•ɱ•n̪•n••ɳ•ɲ•ŋ•ɴ
ɸβ•fv•θð•ʃʒ•ʂʐ
ŋ̍ m̩ n̩ ʰːˑ ɐ̆ɕʑ
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
qrasy
ဥတ္တမ
[ *  *  * ]
OK. Let's get out of discussing paternal lineage.

How about the maternal lineages of East & Southeast Asian people?

Do you have the pictures of distributions, 'sisters' and 'mothers' of a specific mtDNA? (like the ones you have for Y-gene)?
iy•ɨʉ•ɯu||ɪʏ•ɪ̈ʊ̈•ʊ||eø•ɘɵ•ɤo||e̞ø̞•ə•ɤ̞o̞||ɛœ•ɜɞ•ʌɔ||æɐ||aɶ•ä•ɑɒ
m•ɱ•n̪•n••ɳ•ɲ•ŋ•ɴ
ɸβ•fv•θð•ʃʒ•ʂʐ
ŋ̍ m̩ n̩ ʰːˑ ɐ̆ɕʑ
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ren
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
qrasy
Jul 25 2005, 11:17 AM
Single population from Siberia is the most dominant term in most of Mongoloids?

Actually are 2 waves you described are the source of mixed Mongoloids? (referring to Central Asians and Indonesians)

No, this is way before any of this. I'm talking about the earliest presence of moderns in Siberia, which is 50,000 years ago. Modern races did not exist then. Central Asians are a "recent" phenomenon, a mix of Altaic and Indo-Europeans peoples,w hile Indonesians are also a recent phenomenon, a mixture of neolithic farmers from China with the true aboriginals of SE Asia.

Osteologically "Mongoloid" likely developed between 50,000-15,000 in very northerly climes, irregardless of what components they had, and expanded west and south to mix with others. This later "mixture" is not the first two waves I was talking about.

qrasy
Aug 3 2005, 04:28 AM
OK. Let's get out of discussing paternal lineage.

How about the maternal lineages of East & Southeast Asian people?

Do you have the pictures of distributions, 'sisters' and 'mothers' of a specific mtDNA? (like the ones you have for Y-gene)?

The first 3 pages are Y chromosome but starting from the fifth page, you'll mtDNA distribution and after, on page 6, a simplified branching:
http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf

It is very complicated and you might not see some important patterns but it's a start.

Trees:
http://www.genome.org/content/vol14/issue1...9-03f1a_1o.jpeg
http://www.genome.org/content/vol14/issue1...9-03f1b_1o.jpeg
http://www.genome.org/content/vol14/issue1...29-03f2_1o.jpeg
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
qrasy
ဥတ္တမ
[ *  *  * ]
Ok, the picture in there is analogous to this picture:
Posted Image

But I want to see shorter-ranged maps like these:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

By the way expert's explanation is often very confusing to newbies.
Quote:
 
You shouldn't equate physical types with lineages, just as you shouldn't confuse a surname with a race. For example, an Englishman might be R1b, which is more related to O than to his cousin's E3b, which is more related to a Nigerian's E1. Lineage % in a population can become distorted, especially when we were hunter-gatherers in small numbers. It's like how so many Chinese have surnames "Wang", "Zhang", and "Li". Since a surname, like a lineage, is only passed down from a father to a son, it becomes distorted over time. It doesn't mean all of your ancestors on both sides were of "Wang".

In short: mtDNA+Y-gene tests only consider female and male 'ultra ancestors', and disregard father's mother and mother's father. The 'ultra ancestors' actually only contribute a very small part of the autosomal genes (corresponds to body shape), which make lineages not reliable at all to express population/race. Is that right?
iy•ɨʉ•ɯu||ɪʏ•ɪ̈ʊ̈•ʊ||eø•ɘɵ•ɤo||e̞ø̞•ə•ɤ̞o̞||ɛœ•ɜɞ•ʌɔ||æɐ||aɶ•ä•ɑɒ
m•ɱ•n̪•n••ɳ•ɲ•ŋ•ɴ
ɸβ•fv•θð•ʃʒ•ʂʐ
ŋ̍ m̩ n̩ ʰːˑ ɐ̆ɕʑ
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Y-chromosome: CF · Next Topic »
Add Reply