Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Patrilineal migrational theories...
Topic Started: Dec 29 2006, 04:58:46 AM (314 Views)
Maju
Member Avatar
sorgina
[ *  *  * ]
Very interesting, thanks. Again it would look like India (or South Asia) was at the origins of K macrogroup, the same it was of F.

So we have:

0. CR (Eurasian grandfather) migrates to somewhere in West Asia and, soon after three branches split:

1. C follows the coastal route to Oceania, East Asia and America

2. DE, soon split in
2.1. D, reaching through Central Asia into East Asia
2.2. E, eventually migrating back to Africa (and the Mediterranean)

3. F goes to South Asia:
3.1. G, migrates back to West Eurasia
3.2. H, remains in South Asia
3.3. IJ, migrates back to West Eurasia. Split:
3.3.1. I colonizes Europe, specially the SE
3.3.2. J remains in West Asia, expanding with Neolithic and Islam

3.4. K, remains in South Asia (by the moment):
3.4.1. K1, migrates to Polynesia (route?)
3.4.2. K2, migrates to West Eurasia
3.4.3. K5, migrates to Papua
3.4.4. K6 and K7 migrate to Melanesia
3.4.5. L, remains in South Asia
3.4.6. NO, migrates to somewhere in East Asia. Split:
3.4.6.1. N colonizes the subarctic regions of Eurasia
3.4.6.2. dominates East and SE Asia (Neolithic?)

3.4.7. P, remains in South Asia and splits:
3.4.7.1. Q, migrates to Central Asia, NE Asia and America
3.4.7.2. R, remains in South Asia. Split:
3.4.7.2.1. R1, migrates to Central Asia. Split:
3.4.7.2.1.1. R1a, remains in Central Eurasia, expanding mostly later, with IEs.
3.4.7.2.1.2. R1b, colonizes Europe (Aurignacian)
3.4.7.2.2. R2 remains in South Asia

It's very curious because South Asia would seem the focus for three succesive waves and branchings: F, K and P. And I'm following the data you just posted in this.

Major female (mtDNA) lineages would also follow a simmilar logic with South Asia (maybe expanded to Central and SE Asia) as focus for all macrogroups (M, N and R).

Quote:
 
But the selection of male lineages might not have been as rigid as in civilised regions because weaker men could still withdraw into more remote regions. This raises the chances of rare lineages of not having died out.


Paraphrasing Darwin: it's not the strongest one who survives but the best adapted or more flexible one. So it's not only about strength but specially about success itself.

You cannot ignore either founding effects in remote regions such as these either. If the Papuan's founders were of only few lineages, it wouldn't matter much if they were strong or adaptative... what matters is that they were practically isolated for milennia.

Also it's really impossible to make a link between haplogroups and particular adaptability of individuals or groups. Even if selection can play a greater role among male than among female lineages (logically), it's impossible to say if a person or family from any given haplogroup would be more or less adaptative to this particular form of pressure.

There could have been some sort of this male-oriented selection in Afirca (haplogroup E) and America (hg Q), though this latter one could well be a founder effect as well. The African case seems rather clear instead, because Africa was populated long before Es arrived from Asia and nevertheless they clearly outcompeted the local males, specially in West Africa. Yet the advantage could have been cultural. Also, I may be wrong and West Africa was not populated before the back-migration of E people, who "triumphed" because they took a leading role in the colonization of West Africa maybe (and then it would be a founder effect as well).
Chaos never died,
the Empire was never founded.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ren
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
2. DE, soon split in
2.1. D, reaching through Central Asia into East Asia
2.2. E, eventually migrating back to Africa (and the Mediterranean)


-Many researchers think DE never migrated back into Africa but developed there. A paragroup of DE found in W. Africa would seem to support that. If DE was already in Africa, then during the initial migration out it would've followed the coastal route, since further inland in SW Asia and Central Asia would've been desert.

-I wonder what makes you keep assuming D comes via Central Asia (Ainu?) If D did indeed reach to Asia via Central Asia, it's difficult to explain why there are no "West Eurasian" or even "Central Asian" branches of D while there are D carriers among the Andaman pygmies ("negritos"). In fact as far as I know D's presence is stronger in Indo-China than it is in Central Asia.

D in Andamanese:
“Genetic Affinities of the Andaman Islanders, a Vanishing Human Population”, PDF

Quote:
 
It's very curious because South Asia would seem the focus for three succesive waves and branchings: F, K and P. And I'm following the data you just posted in this.
Major female (mtDNA) lineages would also follow a simmilar logic with South Asia (maybe expanded to Central and SE Asia) as focus for all macrogroups (M, N and R).

This corresponds to the coastal route that would've brought migrants to South Asia where population expanded while deserts blocked off further migrations inland into SW Asia and Central Asia until further on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Maju
Member Avatar
sorgina
[ *  *  * ]
Never mind: only my ignorance was the reason I thought of D as Central Asian. I was not considering geographic limitations such as deserts and I was based mainly in the presence of D in Central Asia and specially Tibet. But I forgot (or just ignored, not sure) about the presence of D in Andaman and Philippines.

So you think that these peoples migrated jointly, or succesive waves from South Asia (maybe different locations there) are also possible?
Chaos never died,
the Empire was never founded.
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