posted
This is a change from the constant Eurasian Back Migration Hypotheses:
"Abstract The population dynamics that followed the out of Africa expansion (OoA) and ultimately led to the formation of Oceanian, West and East Eurasian macro populations have long been debated. Furthermore, with the OoA being dated between 70 kya and 65 kya and the earliest splits between West and East Eurasian populations being inferred not earlier than 43 kya from modern DNA data, an additional question concerns the whereabouts of the early migrants out of Africa before those differentiations. Shedding light on these population dynamics may, in turn, provide clues to better understand cultural evolution in Eurasia between 50 kya and 35 kya, where the development of new technologies may be correlated to parallel independent evolution paths, to the arrival of new populations, or to long-term processes of cultural and biological exchanges. Here we jointly re-analyze Eurasian Paleolithic DNA available to date in light of material culture, and provide a comprehensive population model with minimal admixture events. Our integrated approach i) maintains Zlaty Kůň genetically as the most basal out of Africa human lineage sequenced to date, also in comparison to Oceanians and putatively links it with non-Mousterian material cultures documented in Europe 48-43 kya; ii) infers the presence of an OoA population Hub from which a major wave broadly associated with Initial Upper Paleolithic lithic industries emanated to populate West and East Eurasia before or around 45 kya, and of which Ust′Ishim, Bacho Kiro and Tianyuan were unadmixed descendants; iii) proposes a parsimonious placement of Oase1 as an individual related to Bacho Kiro who experienced additional Neanderthal introgression; and iv) explains the East/West Eurasian population split as a longer permanence of the latter in the OoA Hub, followed by a second population expansion (before 37 kya), broadly associated with Upper Paleolithic industries, that largely replaced pre-existing humans in Europe, and admixed with the previous wave to form Yana and Mal′ta in Siberia and, to a greater extent, GoyetQ116-1 in Belgium." Pagani paperPosts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Archaeological evidence indicates that Neolithic culture was introduced to Eurasia by Africans 8000 years ago.
Y-CHROMOSOME R1 WAS INTRODUCED TO EURASIA BY KUSHITES
Abstract
The Kushites lived in Africa and Eurasia. Kushites originated in Africa. Researchers have observed that many of the Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG) and early European farmers (EF) populations carried R1a and R1b clades, and cultivated millet, which was not cultivated in Central Asia and the Middle East until 1000s of years after it was cultivated at Nabta Playa in Africa, and in the Ukraine by CHG and EF populations . Interestingly, the CHG carried the R1b1, and R1b1a lineages. Some researchers claim that these clades are “distant relatives” of V88, and that V88 is the result of a back migration from Eurasia to Central Africa. The archaeological evidence, on the other hand, lacks any corroboration of a back migration from Eurasia. Instead, the archaeogenetic evidence indicates that Niger-Congo speaking Africans from North Africa and the Saharo-Sahel, called Kushites in the historical literature early settled Crete, Iberia and Anatolia, and that these Africans introduced R1b, the Bell Beaker and the agro-pastoral cultural traditions into Eurasia during the Neolithic. See web page
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Nothing hurts a racist more than the absolute truth and a punch to the face" Posts: 101 | From: United States | Registered: Aug 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
They do not identify a geographical location for the Post-OOA hub, but they make it clear that populations out of it defined many Upper Paleothic European populations.
According to the researchers, Zlatý Kůň (ZK) represent the first movement from that hub (before 45 kya), which died out and left no trace in later populations. In short, a dead-end population.
The second movement out of the Post-OOA hub took place around 45Kya and was associated with the Initial Upper Paleolithic (IUP) in Eurasia. It was a broad expansion that affected the whole Mediterranean and Central and Eastern Europe and reached as far as Oceania (Does that mean that dark-skin Oceania populations obtained such features from this population?). The authors suggest that this population became a dead end in Western Europe after admixture with Neanderthals (Bacho Kiro and Oase 1 are seen as examples of this admixture).
The third and last movement occurred between 45 kya and 37kya. It repopulated (e.g., Kostenki and Sunghir) or mixed with the remnant populations in Europe from the previous second wave, as well as mixing with such populations in Siberia (as presented by Yana, Mal’ta, and perhaps Salkhit).
I am wondering where does Dzudzuana fit into all this? It's like 27-24kya, which means it might be descended from that last wave.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
Are Lazaridis et al. embarrassed with describing Dzudzuana as "the core of West Eurasian ancestry" instead of evidence of Deep African ancestry that spanned from Western Eurasia all the way to the infamous Caucasus?
Is that why that Dzudzuana paper is so delayed? Two years plus.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic