Qpgraph of Eurasian AMH dispersion

[crashdoc]

AMERINDS

Nothing unexpected here. We have the EastAsia, Onge-like, ANE components.

What I note is that now EHG needs some real Para-America ancestry but still also keeps the EastAsia additionnal ancestry.




  amerinds.zip (Size: 41.47 KB / Downloads: 3)

[crashdoc]

That was my last graph.  Next I will do the post about archeology.  I will touch upon mainly the top of the tree, focusing on Europe.

In the meantime, if anyone wonders about Oase1, aside from the Neandertal input, it is about 94-95% BachoKiroIUP-like and 4-5% Muierii-like.  It is older than Muierii and has different proportions of the Muierii-like ancestry.  Oase2, for which the data was never released, has a level of Neandertal ancestry comparable to BackoKiroIUP and doesn't have the Muierii-like ancestry (inferred from https://doi.org/10.17863%2FCAM.31536 which was published before BachoKiroIUP was)

[Kale]

The graphs are obviously quite large, a lot going on, so to accompany the archaeological explanation, if you could, put each of the nodes on a map with a date (or date range)?

[crashdoc]

The graphs are obviously quite large, a lot going on, so to accompany the archaeological explanation, if you could, put each of the nodes on a map with a date (or date range)?

I have the necessary info to do it, but I'm not much of an artist.  Do you (or anyone) have a suggestion of a program or a website that I could use to do that, which would make it easy to add nice looking arrows and text tags using coordinates?

[TanTin]

The graphs are obviously quite large, a lot going on, so to accompany the archaeological explanation, if you could, put each of the nodes on a map with a date (or date range)?

I have the necessary info to do it, but I'm not much of an artist.  Do you (or anyone) have a suggestion of a program or a website that I could use to do that, which would make it easy to add nice looking arrows and text tags using coordinates?

My best experience so far is with Plotly. 2D and 3D.. I project my PCA data in such format and it's just amazing.
It allows also  to draw lines between dots. And if you wish you may add extra dots and to connect them.  As a result my PCA data may have the same or similar structure as qpWave for example.  The only difference is that my pca data is real, the connections on my plot are based on shortest distance.  Which is still similar to qpWave graphs.

[Desdonas]

I have recently heard that f4(Chimp, Papuan; Tianyuan, EA/AR19K) is not significant, while f4(Chimp, Papuan; Tianyuan, Onge) is significant. So the phylogenetic structure of ENA may not be simply South vs North. Here I give an assumption:

-ENA
--Papuan
--Late ENA (LENA)
---Tianyuan-AR33K
---Nuclear ENA (NENA)
----East Asian (unadmixed)
----Pre-Onge/Hoabinhian
----Eastern Part of ANE
----Eastern Elements in the Near East

ENA, LENA and NENA may all form in Central Asia, and the ancestors of East Asians stayed longer in this area. Onge and Hoabinhian are mixture of a more East Asian lineage and a Papuan-related lineage.

[Kale]

I suspect AR19K has some quality issues, it just seems far from a lot of populations.
Chimp.REF Papuan.DG China_UP AR19K 0.00156 2.96 699976
Mbuti.DG Papuan.DG China_UP AR19K 0.00038 0.81 728883
Mbuti.DG Papuan.DG China_UP RUS_Primorsky_Boisman_MN 0.00092 2.43 944830
Mbuti.DG Australian.DG China_UP AR19K 0.00034 0.68 728578
Mbuti.DG Australian.DG China_UP RUS_Primorsky_Boisman_MN 0.00128 3.17 944431
Mbuti.DG Australia_ancient China_UP AR19K 0.00062 1.31 741012
Mbuti.DG Australia_ancient China_UP RUS_Primorsky_Boisman_MN 0.00137 3.72 962556
Mbuti.DG Onge.DG China_UP AR19K 0.00186 3.96 728437
Mbuti.DG Onge.DG China_UP RUS_Primorsky_Boisman_MN 0.00216 5.59 944243

[CLTVTE]

According to "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", “Hòabìnhian ancestry: This ancestry was first defined by (McColl et al., 2018), specifically referring to ancient hunter-gatherers from Laos and Malaysia associated with Hòabìnhian material culture for whom genetic data were sampled. (…) Hòabìnhian ancestry has yet to be found in any ancient human outside Southeast Asia. (…) The presence of Hòabìnhian ancestry in Baojianshan suggests that the range for Hòabìnhian ancestry extended from Southeast Asia into southern China. (…)” Consequently, it is likely that earlier ancient East Asians as a whole did not interact with the bearers of the Onge ancestry. Since Baojianshan is only dated to 6400-8335 years ago, it is more likely that earlier ancient East Asians could only “interact” with the ancestors of the Onge via intermediary populations, some of which had preserved in the mosaic environment of China as relatively unadmixed. As a migration analogy from the different, earlier period, the ancient Ust’-Ishim individual was found close to Central Asia, but the ancient Ust’-Ishim individual’s ancestry was observed in Indian populations and in the ancient yDNA D-M174 Yushu individual from the Himalayas in “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, and the ancient Ust’-Ishim individual belonged to the basal branch of mtDNA R*, while the highest amount of cases of basal mtDNA R* in China “persisted” in the ancient DNA of the more areally isolated Taiwan Island in the south, where archaic customs, such as headhunting, were still practiced by aboriginal populations (whereas headhunting was reported to be practiced “in Europe, East Asia, Oceania, Southeast Asia, South Asia, Mesoamerica, South America, West Africa, and Central Africa”).