The colonization of Eurasia and Australasia by African modern humans has been explained, nearly unanimously, as the result of a quick southern coastal dispersal route through the Arabian Peninsula, the Indian subcontinent, and the Indochinese Peninsula, to reach Australia around 50 kya. The phylogeny and phylogeography of the major mitochondrial DNA Eurasian haplogroups M and N have played the main role in giving molecular genetics support to that scenario. However, using the same molecular tools, a northern route across central Asia has been invoked as an alternative that is more conciliatory with the fossil record of East Asia. Here, we assess as the Eurasian macrohaplogroup R fits in the northern path.
Results
Haplogroup U, with a founder age around 50 kya, is one of the oldest clades of macrohaplogroup R in western Asia. The main branches of U expanded in successive waves across West, Central and South Asia before the Last Glacial Maximum. All these dispersions had rather overlapping ranges. Some of them, as those of U6 and U3, reached North Africa. At the other end of Asia, in Wallacea, another branch of macrohaplogroup R, haplogroup P, also independently expanded in the area around 52 kya, in this case as isolated bursts geographically well structured, with autochthonous branches in Australia, New Guinea, and the Philippines.
Conclusions
Coeval independently dispersals around 50 kya of the West Asia haplogroup U and the Wallacea haplogroup P, points to a halfway core area in southeast Asia as the most probable centre of expansion of macrohaplogroup R, what fits in the phylogeographic pattern of its ancestor, macrohaplogroup N, for which a northern route and a southeast Asian origin has been already proposed.
My personal opinion is they keep trying to force the data into a model where there was a single dispersal of humans and all populations emanate from the same single dispersal. And that causes them to keep going round in circles about how humans got where they are. Also interesting note about U yet they don't still know where the basal lineage of U actually arose. Still no direct evidence this didn't happen in Africa proper...
Also, just for bonehead Eurocentrics who don't get it. U and R are older than any human remains in Europe proper. Hence thinking that labeling these lineages as "Eurasian" means they have anything to do with modern humans in Europe today is absolutely FALSE. Europeans likely did not even exist at the time these lineages developed. For all intents and purposes all humans at this time depth were phenotypically and genetically AFRICAN at upwards of 50,000 years ago. Labeling them as Eurasian is simply mental masturbation. Those ancient basal populations have limited relationship to the genes carried in Europe today. That is the underlying point that is missed with all the speculation surrounding "basal Eurasian". Modern Europeans are the result of multiple waves of migration and diffusion of lineages from outside Europe making modern Europeans not very closely related to ancient Europeans genetically. But of course they distract folks with African back migration which is really irrelevant to modern European genetic history.
Posts: 8895 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ust'-Ishim man is the term given to the 45,000-year-old remains of one of the early modern humans to inhabit western Siberia. The remains belonged to mitochondrial DNA haplogroup R*. Before 2016 they had been classified as U*
Posts: 42930 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: U and R are older than any human remains in Europe proper. Hence thinking that labeling these lineages as "Eurasian" means they have anything to do with modern humans in Europe today is absolutely FALSE.
I agree, this paper fails because its date for the origin of haplogroup U at 50kya, dates to a time when there were no anatomically modern humans in Eurasia.
Secondly, the idea that U6, reached North Africa, from Southeast Asia is ludicrous, when we know that L3c of Watson et al. (1997) was renamed U6 by Richards et al. (1998) since it proved to constitute a part of haplogroup U , according to Richards et al.( 1998).
This reality makes it clear, that if L3c, was a U clade, other U clades are just African haplogroups, given a different nomenclature to disguise there African origin.
The fact that researchers changed Ust'-Ishim's mtDNA from R, to U, illustrates how geneticists will go to any means to name haplogroups whatever suits them to invent fake science. The so-called R and U clades are in reality subclades of L3; just given a different name to deliberately create misdirection to put us off track with the African character and origin of the R and U clades.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Also, just for bonehead Eurocentrics who don't get it. U and R are older than any human remains in Europe proper. Hence thinking that labeling these lineages as "Eurasian" means they have anything to do with modern humans in Europe today is absolutely FALSE. Europeans likely did not even exist at the time these lineages developed.
The term "Eurasia" does not mean "Europe proper" is mean anywhere in Europe + Asia.
U6 in Africa is most frequent in berber populations
The history of the North African mitochondrial DNA haplogroup U6 gene flow into the African, Eurasian and American continents 2014
Return to Africa traced by U6
As secondary branch of the Eurasian macro-haplogroup N, phylogenetically, U6 is a non-African lineage and represents a back-migration to Africa. According to haplogroup U geographic radiation, it was suggested that the most probable origin of the U6 ancestor was in western Asia with a subsequent movement into Africa [5]. Several age estimates for the whole U6 mtDNA clade have been calculated with different sets of complete sequences, varying mutation rates and different coalescence-based approaches; including, mean pairwise distances, maximum likelihood, and internally calibrated Bayesian relaxed clock phylogenetics. Ages ranged from 33.5 ky [9] to 45.1 ky [7], but with broad credibility boundaries that largely overlap. Our own estimate of the time to the most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) for U6, using the current enlarged set of complete sequences, is 35.3 (24.6 - 46.4) ky. This period coincides with the Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) period, prior to the Last Glacial Maximum, but cold and dry enough to force a North African coastal route.
The upper limit for the first U6 radiation within Africa, represented by the time to the MRCA of U6a is 26.2 (20.3 - 32.2) kya, and likely occurred in the Northwest 9,000 years later than the age of the whole clade.
This first African expansion of U6a in the Maghreb was suggested in a previous analysis [6]. This radiation inside Africa occurred in Morocco around 26 kya (Table 2) and, ruling out the earlier Aterian, we suggested the Iberomaurusian as the most probable archaeological and anthropological correlate of this spread in the Maghreb [6]. Others have pointed to the Dabban industry in North Africa and its supposed source in the Levant, the Ahmarian, as the archaeological footprints of U6 coming back to Africa [7, 9]. However, we disagree for several reasons: firstly, they most probably evolved in situ from previous cultures, not being intrusive in their respective areas [42, 43, 44]; second, their chronologies are out of phase with U6 and third, Dabban is a local industry in Cyrenaica not showing the whole coastal expansion of U6. In addition, recent archaeological evidence, based on securely dated layers, also points to the Maghreb as the place with the oldest implantation of the Iberomaurusian culture [45], which is coincidental with the U6 radiation from this region proposed in this and previous studies [6].
Also, just for bonehead Eurocentrics who don't get it. U and R are older than any human remains in Europe proper. Hence thinking that labeling these lineages as "Eurasian" means they have anything to do with modern humans in Europe today is absolutely FALSE. Europeans likely did not even exist at the time these lineages developed.
The term "Eurasia" does not mean "Europe proper" is mean anywhere in Europe + Asia.
U6 in Africa is most frequent in berber populations
The history of the North African mitochondrial DNA haplogroup U6 gene flow into the African, Eurasian and American continents 2014
Return to Africa traced by U6
As secondary branch of the Eurasian macro-haplogroup N, phylogenetically, U6 is a non-African lineage and represents a back-migration to Africa. According to haplogroup U geographic radiation, it was suggested that the most probable origin of the U6 ancestor was in western Asia with a subsequent movement into Africa [5]. Several age estimates for the whole U6 mtDNA clade have been calculated with different sets of complete sequences, varying mutation rates and different coalescence-based approaches; including, mean pairwise distances, maximum likelihood, and internally calibrated Bayesian relaxed clock phylogenetics. Ages ranged from 33.5 ky [9] to 45.1 ky [7], but with broad credibility boundaries that largely overlap. Our own estimate of the time to the most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) for U6, using the current enlarged set of complete sequences, is 35.3 (24.6 - 46.4) ky. This period coincides with the Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) period, prior to the Last Glacial Maximum, but cold and dry enough to force a North African coastal route.
The upper limit for the first U6 radiation within Africa, represented by the time to the MRCA of U6a is 26.2 (20.3 - 32.2) kya, and likely occurred in the Northwest 9,000 years later than the age of the whole clade.
This first African expansion of U6a in the Maghreb was suggested in a previous analysis [6]. This radiation inside Africa occurred in Morocco around 26 kya (Table 2) and, ruling out the earlier Aterian, we suggested the Iberomaurusian as the most probable archaeological and anthropological correlate of this spread in the Maghreb [6]. Others have pointed to the Dabban industry in North Africa and its supposed source in the Levant, the Ahmarian, as the archaeological footprints of U6 coming back to Africa [7, 9]. However, we disagree for several reasons: firstly, they most probably evolved in situ from previous cultures, not being intrusive in their respective areas [42, 43, 44]; second, their chronologies are out of phase with U6 and third, Dabban is a local industry in Cyrenaica not showing the whole coastal expansion of U6. In addition, recent archaeological evidence, based on securely dated layers, also points to the Maghreb as the place with the oldest implantation of the Iberomaurusian culture [45], which is coincidental with the U6 radiation from this region proposed in this and previous studies [6].
I can no longer play the ignorant game. Now that we know the naming games geneticist are playing with L, R and U it is hard to believe anything they publish, especially the idea that U6 is in Africa because of a back migration.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Also, just for bonehead Eurocentrics who don't get it. U and R are older than any human remains in Europe proper. Hence thinking that labeling these lineages as "Eurasian" means they have anything to do with modern humans in Europe today is absolutely FALSE. Europeans likely did not even exist at the time these lineages developed.
The term "Eurasia" does not mean "Europe proper" is mean anywhere in Europe + Asia.
U6 in Africa is most frequent in berber populations
The history of the North African mitochondrial DNA haplogroup U6 gene flow into the African, Eurasian and American continents 2014
Return to Africa traced by U6
As secondary branch of the Eurasian macro-haplogroup N, phylogenetically, U6 is a non-African lineage and represents a back-migration to Africa. According to haplogroup U geographic radiation, it was suggested that the most probable origin of the U6 ancestor was in western Asia with a subsequent movement into Africa [5]. Several age estimates for the whole U6 mtDNA clade have been calculated with different sets of complete sequences, varying mutation rates and different coalescence-based approaches; including, mean pairwise distances, maximum likelihood, and internally calibrated Bayesian relaxed clock phylogenetics. Ages ranged from 33.5 ky [9] to 45.1 ky [7], but with broad credibility boundaries that largely overlap. Our own estimate of the time to the most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) for U6, using the current enlarged set of complete sequences, is 35.3 (24.6 - 46.4) ky. This period coincides with the Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) period, prior to the Last Glacial Maximum, but cold and dry enough to force a North African coastal route.
The upper limit for the first U6 radiation within Africa, represented by the time to the MRCA of U6a is 26.2 (20.3 - 32.2) kya, and likely occurred in the Northwest 9,000 years later than the age of the whole clade.
This first African expansion of U6a in the Maghreb was suggested in a previous analysis [6]. This radiation inside Africa occurred in Morocco around 26 kya (Table 2) and, ruling out the earlier Aterian, we suggested the Iberomaurusian as the most probable archaeological and anthropological correlate of this spread in the Maghreb [6]. Others have pointed to the Dabban industry in North Africa and its supposed source in the Levant, the Ahmarian, as the archaeological footprints of U6 coming back to Africa [7, 9]. However, we disagree for several reasons: firstly, they most probably evolved in situ from previous cultures, not being intrusive in their respective areas [42, 43, 44]; second, their chronologies are out of phase with U6 and third, Dabban is a local industry in Cyrenaica not showing the whole coastal expansion of U6. In addition, recent archaeological evidence, based on securely dated layers, also points to the Maghreb as the place with the oldest implantation of the Iberomaurusian culture [45], which is coincidental with the U6 radiation from this region proposed in this and previous studies [6].
I can no longer play the ignorant game. Now that we know the naming games geneticist are playing with L, R and U it is hard to believe anything they publish, especially the idea that U6 is in Africa because of a back migration.
Yes. Correct. The current distribution of U6 has nothing to do with the ancient distribution of U6. And also does not tell us where U6 actually arose geographically. Populations carrying U6 today are not the same people carrying U6 50,000 years ago. There was no "white" Eurasian 50,000 years ago. What we see today are remnants of an ancient population wave that originated somewhere in North Africa or the Levant and spread out in different directions. Part of this wave made it into Romania and another part of this wave probably was in North Africa at the same time frame but was a relatively isolated branch of U6 and another part of this wave reached into South Asia. These branches of U6 among Berber speakers arose long before the existence of a Berber language. So when we say U6 is of African origin we are talking of populations 50,000 years ago. Modern Berber speakers are basically remnants of a population that once spanned Africa, West Asia and Europe but later mostly disappeared and were replaced. The Berber speakers are basically downstream remnants of this ancient population in Africa. Given that this implies a large proposed population spread over North Africa, Europe, West Asia and South Asia, it is quite possible some of these lineages are basically the result of errors in the theoretical frameworks used to map the extent of these lineages back in time. It wont be cleared up until we can get more actual remains and DNA samples from 50,000 years ago.
Posts: 8895 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The current distribution of U6 has nothing to do with the ancient distribution of U6.
.
.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
What we see today are remnants of an ancient population wave that originated somewhere in North Africa or the Levant
How do you know it originated somewhere in North Africa or the Levant? You have made no case for it
Posts: 42930 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic