The First Civilization of the World, Siddhartha Publishers, Delhi, email arunrajive@gmail.com.
written by
Dr P. Priyadarshi, MBBS, MD, MRCP (UK)
Abstract:
Human DNA studies tell us about origins and migration routes of our species as well as our pets, pests and cattle. Fitting well into the DNA stories, large number of archaeological sites dating back to 10,000 years before present showing evidence of farming has been unearthed in the Ganga Valley and other parts of India.
Barring a few geneticists, like Kivisild, Endicott, Metspalu, Sahoo, Sengupta etc. the geneticists at large believe even today that there was an Aryan invasion on India. Traditionally, the Aryan languages have been believed to have originated in the Central Asia whereas the farming culture in the West Asia. Current study, mainly based on study of Y-chromosomal DNA haplogroups, and also to some extent mitochondrial DNA haplogroups, finds that the Aryans as well as the farming culture originated in India. The Aryan language and farming dispersal took place from India to Iran, Kurdistan, Turkey and finally South Europe after 15,000 years before present (B.P.). The Mesolithic culture too originated in India at 35,000 B.P. and it was from India that Mesolithic cultural practices spread to the rest of Asia, and East Africa. Evidence from DNA studies of man, animals and crops, from linguistics and from recent archaeology have been examined to reach conclusions.
When Cann, Stoneking and Wilson (1987), and the next year Stringer and Andrews (1988), gave their theory of African origin of Homo sapiens sapiens based on genomic studies, Renfrew suggested that Anatolia (Turkey) was the place of origin of farming as well as the Aryan languages, and both migrated together into Europe.But this was found wrong later by DNA studies. (Chapter 6)
It was appreciated that man did not enter North Africa (from East Africa) at all until quite late, and actually man came to India about 100,000 years before present (B.P.) from where he migrated to the rest of the world including West Asia or even North Africa. It was actually India which played a central role in populating the world, and it was by back migration from India to East Africa that much of language and culture arrived into East Africa later.
It was recognised by increasingly larger number of authors, like Metspalu, Michael Petraglia, Toomas Kivisild etc. that India was central in the prehistory of mankind. (Chapter 2) Yet senior authors are still assume the West Asian route of exit out of Africa to be true (Renfrew, 2010; Majumder, 2010). The book is intended to clear confusion prevailing in this matter. As genetic study of man (R1a, J2, O2a), cow, mouse, pig, goat, rice and barley all gravitate towards India, there should be no doubt now that farming and Aryan languages originated and spread from India.
Findings of world’s oldest farming sites from Ganga Valley (India) have only supplied the missing link in the story of evolution of farming. Ganga Valley, Mehrgarh, Darestan (Baluchistan of East Iran), Zagros (West Iran), the Fertile Crescent (Iraq) and Turkey are like footsteps in the march of farming culture starting from India to Europe (Chapter 1). On the other hand, re-examination of lexicon of different languages only correlates well to the conclusions derived from the DNA studies.
DNA studies of Y-chromosomes of man from Europe and Asia confirmed that the marker DNA of farming and pottery migration (J2) originated in India. Hence the obvious conclusion is that there was a human migration starting from India to West Asia with which there was also a migration of farming culture, art of pottery-making and ceramic figurine to West Asia and South Europe. Incidentally this whole area from Ganga Valley to South Europe is inhabited today by people speaking Indo-Aryan language (Chapter 9).
At 35,000 B.P. there was a population expansion in India associated with onset of Microlithic/Mesolithic cultural revolution. At this very time, DNA studies indicate, there was domestication of cow, pig and goat in India. It is supposed that wild cereals, fruits, berries, tubers were harvested and exploited well. Some sort of housing, sedentary life, dress and social systems existed during this period. It was during this population expansion that man was forced to move out of India due to saturation of carrying capacity (Chapter 3).
Y chromosomal haplogroup R and its branches migrated out from India to Central Asia and East Africa during this period. In the East, it was Y-chromosomal haplogroup O2a which migrated to Southeast Asia and thereafter to China. Our study suggests that cow, weaving, some form of measuring system and barter trade etc went out from India to Central Asia, southeast Asia and Africa during this migration. Goat also migrated to Central Asia at this time (Chaptre 3).
West Asia and Western Iran were not habitable between 35,000 B.P. and 14,000 B.P. and hence Indian migrations did not take place to that part of Asia then. There was a climatic barrier in Iran. Earlier it was suggested that R1a is a marker of Central Asian Aryan invasion on India. But now it has been shown conclusively that this DNA originated in India. It migrated out from India at about 14,000-15,000 years back to reach Central Asia and finally Europe. R1a was blocked at the East Iran and not allowed to proceed into West Iran due to climatic barrier. It is likely that some elements of Neolithic, like pottery, reached Central Asia and then Europe with this migration. (Chapter 8).
I have also summarized recent DNA studies of plant and animal genome like cow, goat, buffalo, rice, barley and mice, domestic/domesticated breeds of them originated in India, not in West Asia or China. (Chapter 7). Domestic mouse evolved and lived in India exclusively until recently and migrated to out of India when Indians migrated to other parts of world. (Chapter 10).
Premendra's space 
Excellent work. I really appreciate your work and effort in bringing the truth about india and the truth about the extent in which the British denied our true past, as the most evil in all of all histories. The British and European era not only brought poverty, misery, corruption, and murder but a whole series of lost generations, that don’t know of their past, their history, their holocausts that their people went through. The true heinous crime of all is then how the British did everything they could, after looting india of all its riches, tried to edit and erase their own brutal legacy and then put across an image of them being civilized while placing the blame for the poverty, the deaths on the blameless indians. We need people like you, we need you to bring out the truth, to bring back the pride and glory to indian civilization and most importantly to reverse the trend of racist, biased, ego euro-centric attitude to the world, where the world has been forced to align with the deceit of such people. In india we have a harder time, with the British creating the political system, the congress party and the biased pro Anglo education system all three combine to push lies as truths and to conceal the reality.
I am making videos that promote the truth, as regards to Aryan theory, the Islamic destruction of india, the looted buildings and temples, the biased and racist bigotry of the British, who in their attempt to take away authorship of indian greatness, edited and changed Sanskrit texts to bring about hated towards their own history. Its like asking a Muslim to give his views on Christianity and the bible and then forcing that biased racist completely prejudicial opinion on to europe, or how the British destroyed and looted india into poverty and yet this act of human evil is the basis in which every indian child is taught with books and opinions of the British making up the standard education in india. So thank you. Any person with intelligence, free from bias would agree with you about everything you have said, we need to erase the British input in India as being from a racist and biased era, no christian would accept commentary of the bible done by Hindus or Buddhist, so why should indians accept a history or even accept their moral authority when the British were far more brutal than the Nazis ever could be, the British empire taught the Nazis in holocaust.
Your work is inspirational to the millions of indians that seek to bring back glory to india and its people. Your work is inspiration to intellect, to integrity, to life itself.
So thank you.
One point is that when you made the statement that 98% of all people came from the indian subcontinent, of which i realize before that most Europeans, America, east Asian all come from genetic line that arose in india, but is their any further information you can give me, like a source on the ‘98% of population come from india” and the rest is subsharan. I am creating several videos that allow this information to be easily read and then distributed among the youth of india, the purpose of which is to directly challenge the euro-centric view, and to attack those positions as racism from the British era, and to match up the British lies with the truth. The long term objective is to re-write indian history NOT by racist, biased, bigot, prejudicial centric opinion from one of the most brutal and racist eras in indian history, the British Nazi occupation. The aim to create a petition among the population of india, with solid evidence of first the racist and biased writing and actions of the British and then the false euro centric view of indian history, by distributing this information and using an outlet we aim to force the courts of india to bring justice to indian history and its people. We aim to challenge the history of india in a court room.
Please read this link first.
Also see below link
Migration map by Metspalu.
Then have a look ast this slide presentation by Oppenheimer.
Oppenheimer’s slide Presentation
Braddshaw foundation
You may buy my book, then have my slides and interview, if you wish to make a documentary for national geographic.
Regards and thanks.
Priyadarshi
Thank you so much.
Do you have a face book, twitter or another site where i can keep up with your achievements and latest news about Indian history that you come across.
Truth always triumphs. For Indians the 21st century, is the era of realization of the past 300years. You are a pioneer, in the future history will be looking back at people like you , for bringing india out of the colonial mess that we where led to believe.
Just one more thing do you believe the mount Toba explosion did not exterminate the entire indian sub-continent as recent evidence suggest that a small population did surivive.
”Dr. Martin Williams says “One school says there was no impact whatsoever because when you look at the artifacts in southern India above and beneath the ash they’re the same, they’re…middle stone age, therefore no impact.”
Science Editor Deborah Smith (July 23, 2007): “Hundreds of sophisticated stone tools have been found in Jwalapuram in southern India by an international team including two Australian researchers, Chris Clarkson and Bert Roberts.”
I couldnt find the actual research article, but do you agree with new evidence above, that not everyone in india died?
Just one more thing the J2 haplogroup, do you have any more information on it. In your article you said it has a older mean age in india than in europe, can you give me further research article or links that would give further evidence..
Thanks.
One final question, the relationship between Sanskrit and Tamil. In your opinion what is the relationship between the two. From my relatively amateur position, i believe the people and culture of both north and south where the same, the same people, essentially the same culture, but from different areas of India. And only after 200years of being told by the colonial slave owners of about north and south divide that divisions have been promoted over the unity of such language and people.
Thanks. Sorry for pestering you, but i need a teacher. You could say guru-ship.
Sanskrit and Tamil separated about 25,000 years back to 20,000 years back. The climatic barriers imposed by Last Glacial Maximum caused evolution of three distinct language families in three regions of India. Dravidian in the south, Proto-Indo-European in the north (up to Western Bihar) and the Austro-Asiatic in the region of Orissa, Chattisgarh and Jharkhand, also possibly some regions of Andhra, and some regions of Bengal.
I am still working on it systemetically to build a complete theory.
Thanks.
I have a facebook, twitter and Linkden. But do not get much time to handle them, as I am absorbed all the time reading and reserching.
Regarding Indian back-migration to Sub-Saharan Africa, Hammer’s article was pioneer.
Click to access 427.full.pdf
Chandrasekar found that YAP+ male lineages, which includes Tibetan, Japanese and Andamanese D and African E originated in India.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17786594
Regarding J2, there are enough references in my artcle on the scribd. Please see table on p. 24 of the link:
J2 as well as its sub-clade J2b2 show a decreasing variance from India to theBalkans. The data have been collected from several articles.
The figure for variance of J2 in India has been calculated by only one author so far, Thanseem et al (2006). From that we find that variance of J2 is higheset in India (0.84). We know that variance is a measure of age of that HG in that area.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569435/figure/F2/
Click to access 1471-2156-7-42.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569435/
About J2b, more data are available. Sengupta gives its variance in Ganga Valley 0.43 (p. 212, Figure 4). http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2006_v78_p202-221.pdf
Cinnioglu provides variance of J2b in Iran and Anatolia as 0.33 and 0.24 respectively. see p. 131, Table 2 in the link below:
Click to access Cinnioglu2004.pdf
Cinnioglu gives variance of J2b in Iran as 0.33 and in Anatolia as 0.24.
Age of J2 as per Semino’s calculation is 18,000 ybp.
Age of J2b (M12) in Anatolia is 8,600years (Cinnioglu, 2004, Table 2, p. 131).
Click to access HG_2004_v114_p127-148.pdf
And that of J2b’s branch J2b2 (M241) is 13,800 ybp in India (Sengupta, 2006, p. 216).
Click to access AJHG_2006_v78_p202-221.pdf
Although Sengupta does not provide age of J2b, yet it must be older than its descendant’s age 13,800 years ago. Thus presence of J2b in India is far earlier than in Anatolia, where J2b is seen at the time of Neolithic at 8,600 years back.
Thus by integrating and synthesizing all this information, we can say that J2b, J2b2 and in fact J2 too are oldest in India.
Also please remember that J2b has been named J2e by Cinniogly. So we need to always check the mutation (M12). Some authors have mentioned this M12 as J2a. Thus it was extremely difficult for me to synthesize all these data.
See Semino’s map for M102. It abruptly stops before Ganga Valley. But it is clear that had the study been extended further east, the place of origin of M102 must have come to lie in the Ganga Valley. I think, Semino deliberately removed data from the Ganga Valley. M102 ia also marker mutation of J2b, just like M12.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181965/figure/FG2/
Click to access AJHGv74p1023.pdf
Battaglia shows that age of M241 (or J2b2) is 4,800+/- 1,300 years in Euroepe. Age of this haplogroup is 13,800 ybp in India from Sengupta’s data.
See table 1 on page 826 in Battaglia’s article.
Click to access ejhg2008249a.pdf
King 2008 gives a date of expansion for J2b in Nea Nekomedeia (Macedonia) as 6,700 +/- 3,100 years. See table 2, p. 210 in the link below:
Click to access KingAHG-08-72-205.pdf
In another article age of J2b was mentioned as 4,500 ybp in the Balkans. I was not able to trace that article just now, even though I tried more than 45 minutes to search it. However you can synthesize the matter which I have just mentioned. I think this is enough to prove that J2b originated in Inida and migrated with farming to Anatolia and then to the Balkans.
Regarding Jwalapuram, the original work is by Michael Petraglia:
http://uq.academia.edu/ChristopherClarkson/Papers/390306/Middle_Paleolithic_Assemblages_From_the_Indian_Subcontinent_Before_and_After_the_Toba_Super-Eruption
The reality is that man originated in India and from here it went to Africa much before Toba eruption. These were A and B Y chromosomal HG, and L0-L3 mtDNA. The after Toba eruption these all lineages died due to large scale death of Indians. Yet destruction was less in Africa hence they survived in Africa.
The only mtDNA lineages which could survive Toba in India were M and N. Another lineage which survived Toba in Australia was LM3 mtDNA which had branched from the main Indian trunk 50,000 years before L0 split from it.
See Adcock’s article.
Click to access 537.full.pdf
Ther is DNA evidence that some of L0 members reach Africa earlier, and the others joined then after 50,000 years gap. This split existence of two L0 branches can only be explained by the assumption that they were separated by sea. Yet the group of genomists who discovered this finding of split existence, gave the naive explanation that they may have existed in two areas of Africa.
50,000 years or 100,000 years is not a small period that they could remain as completely split or isolated population. This finding can best be explained by assuming that L0 originated in India about 150,000 ybp to 200,000 ybp. Then one group of it reached Africa and evolved there. About 100,000 ybp, another batch of L0 people crossed sea to reach Africa. Hence the DNA finding.
See pages 7 and 8 of the PDF in link below:
Click to access DawnHumanMatrilinealDiversity.pdf
Thanks
Thank you very much for your time, this will keep me busy, as i take in the information. Its hard to find information if you dont know where to look, but over the last four or five years my interest has grown and grown and someone like you is god sent. India today is a creation of the past 200years of British rule, so all this work and research is revealing the lengths in which the west denied indian honor and the honor of teaching our children the central role indians played. Something which i find very offensive, that indian ancestors achievement are being hijacked.People like you in my mind are leading the intellectual revolution, and the youth of india need to know the truth so that india will become a better place, and that can only happen with education and knowledge. I truly appreciate your time and assistance, its just adding my conviction about how important india is. I want to ultimately convey this to indians who then can teach their children the truth about our ancestors.
Arjen. Thank you again, this is information is like the most delicious food for my brain.
Where can i purchase your book, so i wont be bothering you as much. lol.
In the olden days of india a student touches the feet of a very learned man out of respect, as im touching yours.
One last thing, if have time, how do you explain the higher frequency of Indo-European haplogroups in north western regions of india and upper caste, is this the case for all upper castes throughout india, and what are thoughts on this. Is the j2 genome presence in higher castes native to india, as its older and more diverse, rather than a western centric view that j2 arrived recently from central asia, but really it was the other way round?
”The Indo-Europeans established themselves as upper castes among this
already developed caste-like class structure within the tribes” What is your assessment of this statement, is this highly biased and laced commentary, or is their some weight to this statement.
The Eurocentric view of J2 is not its arrival from Central Asia, but from West Asia (Turkey). However, the journal articles I have referred in my earlier replies, if all synthesized, lead to conclusion that J2 especially its branch J2b and sub-branch J2b2, originated in India much earlier than their presence in Turkey or Europe.
Thus Bellwood hopes that PIE originated in Kurgan, from there came to Turkey, and then from Turkey it migrated both east (to Iran and India) and west (to Europe).
Renfrew is however more fanatic. He thinks all the four major language families originated in West Asia. See map on page 80 in the book link below, and also read text of the chapter.
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=zkteuesBwpQC&pg=PA66&dq=Harris+Renfrew+Indo-European+Farming&hl=en&ei=zreqTYXCEYmqrAeE2P2nCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Elamite&f=false
However, Sengupta 2006 made it clear that J2 could not have arrived to India from outside. Its frequency is more in Dravidian speakers than in the northeast India.
See on page 207:
“The J2 clade is nearly absent among Indian tribals, except
among Austro-Asiatic–speaking tribals (11%). Among
the Austro-Asiatic tribals, the predominant J2b2 HG
occurs only in the Lodha. J2 is present in significantly
higher (P ! .001) frequency among Dravidian castes
(19%) than among Indo-European castes (11%). In Pakistan,
the frequency (12%) is similar to that among Indian
Indo-European castes, but this clade is nearly absent
(1%) in East Asia.”
Click to access AJHGv78p202.pdf
Thus in India, we cannot find any Indo-European specific haplogroup, because all of them are present in all the populations in India, of course in a variable percentage. However, when these lineages migrated out, they migrated out from northwest, where Indo-European was spoken. Hence these people carried with them Indo-European languages to out of India. Thus the same lineages became a marker of Indo-European for the rest of Eurasia.
Please give me a list of as many references as possible stating like “The Indo-Europeans established themselves as upper castes among this
already developed caste-like class structure within the tribes”. I want to place a proper dissection and refutation of all those articles. Thanks in anticipation.
hi thanks for your links it has have been very interesting and has cleared up alot of doubts and black holes. The statement i was referring to was from one of the links that you posted in reply. Having read your links my belief about humanity and civilisation being developed in India had developed further and it makes sense. Just one thing, is there conclusive proof that rice, barley, wheat was developed in India, can you give my any links on the domestication of the cow, goat, pigs, chicken, and does the migration of mice match the human migration exactly, if so this is hard evidence, and ive read somewhere else that europe itself was only populated recently as earlier as 7000years ago with the introduction of farming from outside. I think this angle is very very positive. Do you have any information on the discoveries in ganges plain, about the oldest pottery remains found. Am i correct in saying that from the drying up of the saraswati river destroyed the harrapan civilisation, and from their it went east and west?…or did the civilisation in the ganges develop first or alongside their sister civilization of harrapan? One final thing, the idea that man came from india and then spread out to africa after the toba explosion, and L0 came from india but in india itself it was wiped, out but a branch from the indain groups migrated to australai, can you give me any further evidence that supports this. Thanks in advance.
Also does your field of study take you into the British colonial past, like the history, the breakdown of indian industries, the deceit in which the british promoted a false history. Also i have read stats on indian education before the british arrived and it was the best education in the world, with low castes making up more than 70% of the students, but since the British used divide and conquer tactics they lied and tried to create a picture that india was poor, and backwards, but in reality indian education before the british was the best in the world, and available to all castes, which the british reversed and promoted that progpandga. I have read a book called the Beautiful Tree, about the history of the Indian education system , and that even today in america in europe, Indians achieve markedly higher results in academia, even then their white counterparts. This in my opinion is the intellectual legacy of Indian education…so my question is , does your knowledge extend into this field aswell?
In order to make these videos, for Indian youth so they can understand the history quickly and easily the content has to be undeniable and correct, so i need as much evidence that supports the out of india not theory but reality.
Thanks. Please do nit deviate to education at this moment. That is a huge research, already done by me and that will need months to organize..
Regarding the links you have asked fro I have given them all in my book, which can be had from arunrajive, my publisher, whose email has been given in the very opening of this blog.
However, an abriged list is available in my articles in the two links below. You can copy the titles and paste them to google advanced search exact phrase. That will lead you to the cited reference were you will get map etc for mice, and other details for cattle, rice wheat etc.
You may post some of those maps here a;so, with links, for benifit of other users.
Priyadarshi
Have you heard of the Phoenicians., their are many accounts of them coming from India. And many Europeans consider them the forefathers of european civilization.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3055156/
Extract;
”Mangifera indica L. originated in a region including the north-eastern part of India (Assam), the western part of Myanmar, and Bangladesh. Mango was domesticated in this region and has been cultivated in India for 4000 years. Cultivation spread first to Malaysia and South-East Asia, supposedly expanded by Buddhist monks. Purseglove suggested that Phoenicians and Arabs spread the crop from India to East-Africa where it has been cultivated since the 10thcentury. The global spread of mango outside its original centres of domestication probably did not occur until the beginning of the European voyages of the 15thand 16thcenturies, when the Portuguese took the mango to West-Africa and from there to Brazil at the beginning of the 18th century”
Also the Pomegranate which was originally grown in north india and then spread to the southern Europe, via the Phoenicians .
Clinical and Translational Oncology
Volume 13, Number 2, 69-70, DOI: 10.1007/s12094-011-0620-2
http://www.springerlink.com/content/k6000300776l57g8/
Also many many years ago i was reading an article about iron working in india, and the dates they got all predated the euro-centric dates that iron work arrived in india with So called Aryans, which of course was euro centric propaganda.The link below is the only one i managed to find relating to an earlier date of an indian iron age.
Click to access tewari.pdf
I posted these links just in case your have not covered them already in your research. The one thing i wanted to ask was, as i cant find anything on the web, about the pottery culture that existed in the Ganges with the on set of agriculture, before anything in central Asia or Europe, as you mentioned in one of your article about finding pottery remains in the Ganges plain. Thanks in advance.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/11/some-indians-as-genetically-diverse-as.html
”That is unlikely because the sw asian/s asian ratio in india (but also even in pakistan and central asia) does not match the one in europe besides the lack in europe of typical indian mt DNA T”
Do you have a reply to this pro western stance?
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04/genetic-structure-of-west-eurasians.html
I posted some of your articles on this pro western genetics forum and was given that reply, as your so much more learned than me, i wanted to know if you have an answer to that quote above. The complete article is at the link above. Thanks.
Mitochondrial DNA hg T is found in Europe. See clan of Tara in the link below:
http://www.oxfordancestors.com/content/view/35/55/
Do not waste your time in argueing with ignorent fools. Just get the truth, and speak that. Most of that blog is full of misinformation. The interpretation of data (conclusions) do not match the data. Even the data supplied favour India as the source of Neolithic revolution. Otherwise, how did east Asia specific DNAs reached Europe? These East Asia specific markers are in India too. The most likely explanation is that they originated in India and migrated to both East and West. The migration of these DNAs were more to East, hence they became known as East Asia specific markers.
Does Europe lack typical indian mt DNA? Which Indian mt Dna are present in europe from india? If you get the time much appreciated.
You will get some of the typical Indian HGs in West Asia and Europe in the link below. However R1a1a and J2b are typical Indian DNAs.
http://www.ydnam70.com/analyze_tm70.php
”lack of typical indian mt DNA in europe looks problematic if we would stick to the out of india theory”
This seems like the greatest obstacle to the out of india theory, apart from r1a1 and j2b, which other mtdna are found in europe that come from india. For me to make a video that promote the out of india theory i need project a solid theory, and to try and cover as many aspects as possible, so as your much learned than me, can you clarify the Indian mtdna present in europe. j2 and r1a1 came from india them went onto europe but what other indian mtdna are present in europe. Is Haplogroup R native to india?, what about M and N and others. Thanks if you have time, if you dont then thanks for the all the previous information, its increasing my knowledge and helping to add content to my out of india video which i aim to educate the indian youth. The only reason i argue with those fools, is that it actually helps me to better understand the two sides and in fact reinforces my own position. But because my knowledge is not so great, i am always learning and wanting to understand. So if you have time, even if you have said it before in earlier posts, the statement at the start about the lack of typical indian mtdna in europe, which ones for you are typical indian mtdna in europe?, or the way in which these indian mtdnas arrived in europe,( was it europe via central via western asia). So if yo u have time can you go through indian mtdna that are pressent in europe in brief, so i can counter euro centrics.
is haplogroup R south asian in origin?
J2b and R1a or R1a1a are Y-chromosomal DNA. Y-chromosomal R* originated in Pakistan. Its ancestor P* was also Indian.
The mtDNA R is a branch of mtDNA Hg N, and M, N and R originated in India before dividing further into other lineages.
I confused it earlier. As far as mtDNA is concerned, U2 is Indian, originated 50,000 years back, then split into two branches, one remained in India, other moved to Europe (Kivisild). mtDNA haplogroup W too seems to have originated in India although it is now found mainly in Europe. Yet its oldest examples are noted in India.
The reason why typical Indian mtDNAs cannot be found outside generally is that mtDNAs migrated long back, say 50,000 years back, out of India. Since then local mutations have developed and local lineages have evolved from the original one.
The later migrations (say in last 30,000 years) were mainly male mediated migrations, or male alone migrations. Hence for recent migrations scientists examine only Y-chomosomal DNA.
However, even though mainly males migarted during later times, some females may have accompanied the group. Hence some traces of mtDNA migration can be found even during later times. But that is not the rule. That evidence, if available, will strenghthen the migration story, but mtDNA evidence is not required for establishing the routes of later migrations.
thanks.
what is your take on the new study that rice was first cultivated in china and not india.
the link is provided.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13266431
Is the research article on rice a new study or a old one, does this undermine the out of india theory to the east anyway, as before it supported the dispersal of indians to the east to china?
would love to hear your take on it . thanks.
There are research articles on rice since 1930. All point to India being an independant and older place of rice cultivation.
The PNAS link to this article is below. It postulates that rice cultivation started in China, once only, 9000 years back, and and from there it migrated to India by 3,900 years back.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/04/27/1104686108
This is a mediocre article. The game plan of Anti-India lobby is to crate falsely such articles which promote China and West Asia. However, there have been many other and better studies which prove that China was no centre of rice domestication at all.
See Shoumoura’s article, which finds that the so-called Chinese rice evolved in Isalnd Southeast Asia, which was then continuous with the mainland because of Sunda shelf:
Click to access 201012223161749884.pdf
See Fuller’s objection and then Izawa and Shoumura’s reply to Fuller, which is printed below that:
Click to access Fuller&Sato%20NG08.pdf
Also see his other article:
DNA changes tell us about ricedomestication,Current Opinion in Plant Biology , 2009, 12:185-192
Click to access DNA%20changes%20tell%20us%20about%20rice%20domestication.pdf
This is fuller’s blog: (please see my detailed comments also below the text of Fuller’s blog)
http://archaeobotanist.blogspot.com/2009/06/indian-archaeobotany-watch-lahuradewa.html
Moreover, the group which has made the bogus study is composed of people mostly western people, while reliable investigations of rice have been done by the Chinese and the Japanese, and all of them suggest an independant rice domestication in India, and some say, it was Indian SH4 (anti-Shattering gene) which was essential for further development of rice domestication, and it evolved in domesticated breed in India, and from here it went to China.
And there is archaeological evidence of rice cultivation in India since 10,000 years back..
I think you should buy my book. That discusses all this.
In the link below you will get references for rice domestication:
Thanks
Also see this comment by Carlos Aramayo:
http://tech.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/IndiaArchaeology/message/8814
“Re: Lahuradewa site dates from 9000 BC
The issue of rice cultivation in Lahuradewa is basically a matter of
epistemological debate. After hearing both parts for almost four years, I can
say that it is not so easy just to say that rice was not cultivated or
domesticated in Lahuradewa. Dorian already had sent me his note on his blog, so
it is not news for me. The counterpart (which is led by also a reputed Indian
archeobotanist Dr Saraswat) has many arguments in his favor. I feel Dorian
Fuller very doubtful on the status of rice in Lahuradewa, he admits that it is a
particular case very different than oriza japonica which is the rice type in
Neolithic China that Dorian studied during last year with many papers published
by him.
The rice in Lahuradewa is from 9000 BCE, and after many millennia it did not
changed towards a long size like it occurred in japonica type,this does not mean
it is not domesticated. The index of size that Saraswat uses to confirm
domestication is based on the work of another reputed Indian archaeobotanist
Vishnu Mitre and has three parameters, but Fuller uses only two.
Anyway the methods used by Tewari, Saraswat et al. which are epistemologically
DIFFERENT than Fuller’s confirm that it is DOMESTICATED.
My message wants to clarify, now confirmed by Fuller’s note in his blog, that
Lahuradewa is EARLIER THAN MEHRGARH and has the EARLIEST POTTERY in South Asia
c.7000 BC, a thing that I already pointed out before Fuller’s observation.
Carlos Aramayo”
This is official report for Lahuradewa rice by UP Government’s Dept of Archaeology. Carbon dating was done at three labs out of India:
Click to access pragdhara16.pdf
Hi, again thanks for all the information. At the moment we have several videos in production, with information you have provided, for the One Dharma Movement of India a campaign to promote native culture and ideology and also to demonstrate the colonial deceit in trying to divide and conquer. I have a few questions, again if you have the time to answer, are north and south populations genetically the same, do north indian populations have south indian genome and vice versa?……as you said before that indian populations have equal amounts of north and south genome is this correct as i understand it. If you have any further information on the unity between north and south indian genome i would be grateful as i have been previous with your intellectual genoristy and time taken out of your busy schedule to answer my questions and curiosity. Thanks…as soon as the videos are finished i will post you a link to get your academic opinion as i would like you judgement.
are north and south populations genetically the same, do north indian populations have south indian genome and vice versa?……as you said before that indian populations have equal amounts of north and south genome is this correct as i understand it. If you have any further information on the unity between north and south indian genome i would be grateful as i have been previous with your intellectual genoristy and time taken out of your busy schedule to answer my questions and curiosity”
There are a large number of journal reports of DNA studies, most of them are available on the net. All say that we have common genes and lineages. At the moment I am busy with another paper. But I will write a blog on this topic in near future giving links. By the way, are you planning to give my interview in your video movie?
The rat thing I wrote only because you wanted. I have received no comment of yours on that.
Priyadarshi
Is haplogroup M from india? As deep roots of M phylogeny clearly establish the antiquity of Indian lineages, especially M2, as compared to Ethiopian M1 lineage and hence, support an Asian origin of M majorhaplogroup if the M macrohaplogroup originated in India and some NE Africans are in the M macrohaplogroup, then that is evidence that the migration was in to Africa , not out of Africa.
I came across this. whats your take on it?
The Dazzling Array of Basal Branches in the mtDNA Macrohaplogroup M from India as Inferred from Complete Genomes
首席医学网 2008年06月15日 13:54:28 Sunday 62
作者：Chang Sun,,,, Qing-Peng Kong,,,, Malliya gounder Palanichamy,, Suraksha Agrawal,,
A particular case in question is the origin of haplogroup M1, which is mainly found in Northeast Africa and the Near East (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999 ). Due to the fact that M1 bears variant nucleotides, for example, at site 16311 in common with haplogroup M4, at 16129 with M5, and at 16249 with haplogroup M34, it has been proposed that M1 might have some affinity with Indian M haplogroups (Roychoudhury et al. 2001 ). This inference, however, could not receive support from our complete sequencing information. Indeed, the reconstructed ancestral motifs of all Indian M haplogroups turned out to be devoid of those variations that characterized M1, that is, 6446, 6680, 12403, and 14110 (Maca-Meyer et al. 2001; Herrnstadt et al. 2002 ). Therefore, those common mutations in the control region rather reflect random parallel mutations. There is no evidence whatsoever that M1 originated in India.
Comparison with the Rajkumar et al. (2005) Data
Rajkumar et al. (2005) provided 23 Indian M sequences that were deemed to be complete. On the basis of their phylogenetic tree, the authors negated the haplogroup status of M3 and M4. However, a site-by-site audit of their sequences revealed that the obtained data are problematic, with numerous basal mutations evidently missed as well as some phantom mutations inflicted. To demonstrate these problems and resolve the conflicting information, we compared the evolutionary pathways for haplogroups M2, M3, M5, M6, M35a, and M39 derived from our data and those predicted by Rajkumar et al. (2005). As shown in figure 2, mtDNAs Kur126, Chen, and Katk from Rajkumar et al. (2005) harbored a string of mutations specific for haplogroup M2a, namely, at sites 204, 1780, 5252, 8396, 8502, 9758, 16270, 16319, and 16352 (Kivisild et al. 2003; this study) but lacked the three other diagnostic mutations (at sites 11083, 15670, and 16274), whereas the salient 447G transversion (Kivisild et al. 2003; this study) was misdocumented as a 477 transition in their figure. The two sequences IB306 and Lyn180 from Rajkumar et al. (2005) could be assigned to haplogroup M6 but missed as many as seven M6 characteristic mutations (viz., 461, 5082, 5558, 9329, 10640, 13966, and 14128). Similarly, the M35a sample Lam8 was without the four mutations at sites 482, 12561, 15924, and 16093, and the M39 mtDNA Ho69 lacked a number of characteristic mutations (viz., 55+T, 59-60d, 65+T, 66T, 1811, 8679, and 15938). It is noteworthy that a rare tranversion 10986A was found in three haplogroup M5 mtDNAs (Bho134, Raj90, and Mus112) reported in Rajkumar et al. (2005), whereas this mutation was totally absent in our M5 samples. On the other hand, the basal M5 mutation 1888 identified in our study was not present in the samples of Rajkumar et al. (2005). To resolve these conflicts, we screened both sites in additional six mtDNAs from potentially different branches of haplogroup M5 ( table 3 ). Our results confirmed the presence of 1888 and absence of 10986A in all M5 mtDNAs, thus casting serious doubts on the data provided by Rajkumar et al. (2005). Similarly, the screening for three additional M6 mtDNAs ( table 3 ) confirmed that the 5319 mutation is specific to M6b, which was however regarded as a basal mutation of M6 by Rajkumar et al. (2005). Note that in the first version of the article by Rajkumar et al. (deposited at http://genomebiology.com/content/pdf/gb-2004-6-2-p3.pdf ) the 5319 mutation was allocated to only one of the two M6 lineages.
F IG. 2.- The conflicts between our data and that of Rajkumar et al. (2005). Solid lines represent evolutionary pathways revealed in the present study while broken lines refer to those inferred by Rajkumar et al. (2005). Samples with prefix “RR#” were taken from Rajkumar et al. (2005). Mutations are scored relative to the rCRS (Andrews et al. 1999 ). Private mutations are not shown (//). Suffixes A, G, and T indicate transversions; “d” denotes deletion and a plus sign (+) denotes an insertion (specified by the nucleotide inserted). Haplogroups are defined and indicated as in figure 1.
Table 3 Additional Indian Samples Screened for Three Particular Coding-Region Sites
To roughly assess the extent to which Rajkumar et al. (2005) overlooked the basal and private mutations, we calculated the mean distance (rho value: Forster et al. 1996; Saillard et al. 2000 ) of their reported M lineages to the root of M. The low value (6.7 ± 0.7) observed for their data, compared with ours (8.7 ± 0.6, see table 1 ), suggests that they might have averagely missed about two mutations in the coding region (577-16023) per sample.
A Rapid Dispersal Along the Asian Coast
It was pointed out that macrohaplogroups M, N, and R are universally distributed in Eurasia but differentiated into distinct haplogroups in East Asia, Oceania, Southeast Asia, and the Andaman Islands in particular (Macaulay et al. 2005; Thangaraj et al. 2005 ). This finding is further strengthened by our newly obtained Indian M data because the mutations that characterize the basal M lineages in India are virtually unique and not shared by those of East Asian, Oceanian, and Southeast Asian M lineages (Ingman et al. 2000; Ingman and Gyllensten 2003; Kong et al. 2003; Tanaka et al. 2004; Friedlaender et al. 2005; Macaulay et al. 2005 ). This star-like and nonoverlapping pattern of the mtDNA phylogeny is in good agreement with the proposed scenario that the initial dispersal of modern human into Eurasia some 60 x 10 3 years ago was rather rapid along the Asian coastline (Macaulay et al. 2005; Thangaraj et al. 2005; Forster and Matsumura 2005 ).
Supplementary Material
http://journal.9med.net/qikan/article.php?id=372930
Acknowledgements
We thank Shi-Fang Wu for technical assistance. The work was supported by grants from Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 30021004), Natural Science Foundation of Yunnan Province (2005C0001Z), and Chinese Academy of Sciences (KSCX2-SW-2010).
Often many mediocres have got opportunity to work under big banners and be published. The unique or new mutations in African M1 only prove that these mutations appeared in the M only after it entered East africa. Age of M1 is not as deep as M as a whole.
The Southeast Asian issues relating to M (and also N and R) are because these lineages entered into SEA from India before Mount Toba eruption. India bore the main brunt of Mount Toba volcano eruption. Hence more people survived in East Africa and Southeast Asia, and possibly even Australia. This answers the lissue of LM3 (Lake Mungo 3) DNA.
Also, I believe off the record that L0, L1, L2 and L3 as well as LM3 also must have lived in India before Toba, and they got destroyed from India at Toba catestrophy.
Im trying to figure out the dispersal into india, and out of it also. What do you think of this study? is their any merit to it.
They claim that dravidians are of a recent migration from africa into india, (4-5000years). Is this complete stupidity? Many a time i have heard this allegation, that dravidians are of recent african lineage, according to you, how valid is this?
Regards.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:cx3p_k2TSCoJ:maxwellsci.com/print/crjbs/v2-380-389.pdf+m1+haplogroup+man+out+of+india&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESh7-jqSltU8bm4oEBgXZqn0kfIYUoe8yQm4–oHf3X4OND_tV7P0wFkkdHLm2DGNZresELU1NFQzFh3JBUeScs8eUu_1eNoVMcbKLo7pn0o9eqYmPvSF3pOT0uMoAZIvGffZbr8&sig=AHIEtbRuWDrPsn4HcQzXnCDIs1relKWp9A
There is a saying in my village: “If someone says that the crow has just flew away with your ‘ear’, will you chase the crow, or feel the ‘ear’ first?”
Anybody can say anything, and get published too. But the evidence presented should be undisputable. All the evidence Winters presents in all of his articles, show his ignorence of DNA, and his evidence proves just the reverse: it is the south and west Indians who migrated to East Africa over the last 40,000 years.
Thanks
is it fair to say that out of the south indian populationn we got the eastern indian population, out of them we got the north indian population, which makes all three ancestoral and part of each other, the obvious conlcusion being that all three originated in india? And during those times, the development of languages arose.
One last query, the so called Caucasian gene or indo european component in north indians, is always mentioned as being from europe or from central asia, however data suggests that the so called Caucasian gene actually originated IN north india and not in europe or central asia. What i wanted to know is, are there ANY european specific or central asian genome in north indian populations, during the last 10,000years. As we hear of countless western tales of countless invasions of india, i was wandering if any of those invasions from the 1st centuries to present had any effect on indian populations or have the historical invasion been Greatly exaggerated. Im a part time history teacher, i feel genetics underlines most history and gives merit to that history itself, so according to you, does the european accounts of countless invasions of india hold up to evidence?
For example are their any greek genes in any indian population from alexander the great, or any central asian turk genes during the islamic invasion in any indian population?..or is the indian population a genetically unified group with Minor inflow?,
Could one say that the indian population is of a Pure indian origin and NOT a mixed breed as one hears from time to time?
Thanks.
Quite a few works have been done which show that only a trace of such DNA’s is found in India, for example only 1% of Shia Muslims show West Asian or Iranian DNAs. Trace of Greek DNA has been found in a few tribes of Afghanistan, but not in India. Works are available on the net, which you can search and place the links here if you so like.
No population of world is pure. Yet Indian popuation is one of the purest. And the later trace immigrants also in fact had went out of India in some epoch of history.
”The Influence of Natural Barriers in Shaping the Genetic Structure of Maharashtra Populations
Kumarasamy Thangaraj1#*, B. Prathap Naidu1#, Federica Crivellaro2, Rakesh Tamang1, Shashank Upadhyay1, Varun Kumar Sharma1, Alla G. Reddy1, S. R. Walimbe3, Gyaneshwer Chaubey1,4, Toomas Kivisild2,4, Lalji Singh1*
Conclusions/Significance
Our analysis suggests that Indian populations, including Maharashtra state, are largely derived from Paleolithic ancient settlers; however, a more recent (~10 Ky older) detectable paternal gene flow from west Asia is well reflected in the present study”
____________________________________________________________________________
What is this more recent detectable paternal gene flow from west asia?
Often many authors have considered J2 as a West Asian Y chromosoma haplogroup. However, pooling of data from several works shows that J2, particularly J2b is Indian. Pease have a look at the table of pooled data made by me:
Click to access blog-table-j2b1.pdf
You will see in the article that these authors have taken frequency of M172 (i.e. J2 as a whole). But when it comes to showing origin map, they show that of J2a. This is cheating.
http://www.plosone.org/article/slideshow.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0015283&imageURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0015283.g003
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015283
”Further, the mean expansion time of J2b2 in India is 13.8KYA, clearly earlier than the appearance of agriculture.”
What is your take on this assertion. That although j2b1 is older in india, that it agriculture itself started later on. I think trying to imply that agriculture came back into india from the east. Is their an appearance of agriculture in india at that time?
I think trying to imply that agriculture came back into india from the west*correction
Agriculture went to east and west from India.
Has chinese kushan genome ever been found in north western india?
im a history teacher i have come across the Kushan empire which lasted for a few hundred years in north western india, although unlike in western circles, the kushans where a nomadic tribe, who through warfare established rule in afghanistan, paksitan and co-rule in india like with raja dab and not the whole of north india, plus they also adopted santana dharma as their offical faith, which is unlike islam or christians.
Also thanks for the previous replies.
Kushanas must have been R1a1a (Y). As long as we do not have any Kushana mummy, it has to be an assumption.
Chunxiang Li et al 2010, ‘Evidence that a West-East admixed population lived in the Tarim Basin as early as the early Bronze Age’ BMC Biology 8:15doi:10.1186/1741-7007-8-15.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2838831/
There are more such articles. They have to be read with other migration stories, such as:
https://priyadarshi101.wordpress.com/2011/05/08/mice-migration-and-human-migration-two-linked-journeys/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987245/figure/fig1/
etc. If you like to pursue research on the topic, you are welcome. What are your emphasis areas/
Regards
Priyadarshi
This is something i came across. That ONLY in the last 1200-3500years have ANI and ASI have mixed. this seems highly unlikey, would you agree?
Estimating a date of mixture of ancestral South Asian populations.
P. Moorjani
Linguistic and genetic studies have shown that most Indian groups have ancestry from two genetically divergent populations, Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI). However, the date of mixture still remains unknown. We analyze genome-wide data from about 60 South Asian groups using a newly developed method that utilizes information related to admixture linkage disequilibrium to estimate mixture dates. Our analyses suggest that major ANI-ASI mixture occurred in the ancestors of both northern and southern Indians 1,200-3,500 years ago, overlapping the time when Indo-European languages first began to be spoken in the subcontinent. These results suggest that this formative period of Indian history was accompanied by mixtures between two highly diverged populations, although our results do not rule other, older ANI-ASI admixture events. A cultural shift subsequently led to widespread endogamy, which decreased the rate of additional population mixtures.
”Our analyses suggest that major ANI-ASI mixture occurred in the ancestors of both northern and southern Indians 1,200-3,500 years ago, overlapping the time when Indo-European languages first began to be spoken in the subcontinent”
In your opinion how old is the ANI ASI mixture, it cannot be as young as 1,200-3000years can it?
Here is the full article released in 2011 AUG.
Estimating a date of mixture of ancestral South Asian populations.
P. Moorjani
Linguistic and genetic studies have shown that most Indian groups have ancestry from two genetically divergent populations, Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI). However, the date of mixture still remains unknown. We analyze genome-wide data from about 60 South Asian groups using a newly developed method that utilizes information related to admixture linkage disequilibrium to estimate mixture dates. Our analyses suggest that major ANI-ASI mixture occurred in the ancestors of both northern and southern Indians 1,200-3,500 years ago, overlapping the time when Indo-European languages first began to be spoken in the subcontinent. These results suggest that this formative period of Indian history was accompanied by mixtures between two highly diverged populations, although our results do not rule other, older ANI-ASI admixture events. A cultural shift subsequently led to widespread endogamy, which decreased the rate of additional population mixtures.
Reich’s article mentons means by Ancestral Indians “Indians who first came and settled in India”. They were also ancestral Eurasians. During the Glacial period following the Toba eruption, the people became isolated in pockets. It is wrong to say that there were only ANI and ASI at that time. There were East Indians as well. Hence ANI, ASI and AEA, three populations existed.
After 65,000 BP admixuring stsrted. Admixute–then isolation–then admixture—then isolation.
Final settlements after which no major admixture has taken place may be 3000 years back. Still there is evidence of movement of populations in all directions till the Mughal period.
The article you have cited is bogus, and concocted. How do they know by their DNA analysis that the Indo-European languages began to be spoken about 1200 years or 3000 years ago?
The final large-scale admixture/movement stopped once Neolithic got established in all places. Agriculture binds people to their lands.
Thanks and regards
Thanks. I find this bit confusing.
Okay then correct me if wrong, does that mean from the ASI we got AEI then ANI, which way would you put that?
ASI is the older population then from that did the AEI develop which then led to ANI?,
My understanding 60,000 years ago it was only ASI in india, correct, from then indians migrated north eastwards, who became the AEI , which happened around 40,000 years ago, from then a migration took them westwards who then became ANI….and then mixture with the other two populations occured. leaving us with the current population.
can you give me a quick time line.
Age of ASI =
Age of AEI=
Age of ANI=
or did all THREE populations, asi, ani, and aei exist before 60,000years? or did they occur first as
ASI = AEI = ANI = and modern Indians contain all three ancestoral groups.
Thanks in advance, if you can clear this issue up once and for all for me.
The terms ANI and ASI were coined by Reich (see his article). Reich and the group of authors associated and most of the other mainstream authors have not digested the fact that ancestral India of say 70,000 years back was ancestral to the whole of modern population of Eurasia, Americas and Australia, as well as most of Africa.
Hence their interpretation of DNA data suffers from fatal flaws. We do not need to be guided by what these authors conclude, but by the data they generate from their studies. Data do not lie. The data generated by these authors should be read in the background of those facts which have been settled by previous studies. One of these facts is that man came out of Africa once and once only and settled in India, and it is from India that the rest of the world has been populated. And second such settled fact is that there was a back migration to Africa, from which most of African population has descended.
If you understant this basic principle, you will not have much confusion.
Now if we assign the term “Ancestral Indians” or AI to the first settlers they were the first Eurasian people outside Africa.
Soon they expanded to fill the whole of India. Because of geo-climatic barriers within India, this population developed regional genetic diversions/mutations/ features, and these genetic changes can now be identified by means of DNA technology, because we can determine the age of the DNA mutations. For example mitochondrial DNA haplogroup M2 should be considered to have originated within ASI and M3 within ANI from Ancestral Indian M*.
However, we get a mixture of both ANI and ASI genes or DNAs in modern Indian population. However the Andamanese DNAs match only with DNAs belonging to ASI. This is because Andamanese people left mainland India before ANI and ASI admixture took place in India. This event took place before 50,000 years back.
The European, West Asian and Central Asian DNAs match with DNAs identifiable with ANI. This is because these populations emerged out from the population inhabiting North India before ANI and ASI admixture took place in India. These emmigrations took place between 55,000 years and 30,000 years back.
Ancestral East Indians have not been studied so far. But it is becoming clear that the Southeast Asians emerged out of East India. Please carefully and thoroughly read my unpublished article:
Please ask any question which is not resolved.
Regards
Priyadarshi
Thanks. So am i correct in saying this, A.I settled in south india, soon they migrated to the whole of india, as they spread throughout, their genome changed with the changed climate and environment, and the north indians who are classed as ANI migrated out into central asia and europe………before the ASI and ANI re-grouped. this happened around 30-50,000 years ago in that time frame
Then this brings me on the this point, was there a second migration out of india with agriculture? When ANI first migrated out of north india did they TAKE with them agriculture or was their a LATER SECOND migration out of north india? most notably the vedic culture.
and in reference to the above question, does that mean then agriculture is more ANI than ASI or was their a continued process of moving ideas from north to south and vice versa.
Finally when did the final admixture take place and for how long? In other words how long has this modern population been in existance in its current admixtured form.
Thanks in advance.
“Then this brings me on the this point, was there a second migration out of india with agriculture? When ANI first migrated out of north india did they TAKE with them agriculture or was their a LATER SECOND migration out of north india? most notably the vedic culture.”
So far only this has been proved that there was a second migration out of India after LGM. My research proves that this post LGM migration was associated with farming culture (Priyadarshi, 2011). However scholars are taking their time to understand it and accept it.
Not only this, I believe that there was agriculture in India before LGM, and it went out to SEA and East Africa from India before LGM. I have enough evidence, yet I am taking time to synthesize it before I utter it.
“and in reference to the above question, does that mean then agriculture is more ANI than ASI or was their a continued process of moving ideas from north to south and vice versa.”
Agriculture should not be seen as ANI / ASI dichotomy. That would be wrong because of many things. South India is a semi-desert climate. The best place for agriculturee to flourish is in the river valley regions. Rice Agriculture evolved in a region spreading from northern Andhra, through Orissa, then Jharkhand-Bihar-Bengal trijunction up to East UP.
“Finally when did the final admixture take place and for how long? In other words how long has this modern population been in existance in its current admixtured form.”
We have always been mixing. The jewish castes can be identified on the basis of DNA from dates as back as 4000 BP. However Indian castes can hardly be identified back to a date say 1000 BP by DNA technology. Hence Indian endogamous tradition is only 1000 years or less old.
Regards
THANK YOU so VERY much.
I am now beginning to see the bigger picture.Truthfully speaking i cannot wait for more publications from yourself. And i urge you to publish more knowledge, i wish their where more people like yourself, if we are to eliminate the destructive colonial elements in indian soceity then people like yourself are essential. This is a matter of truth and national pride but more important to make people realise that the current racist colonial ideology of westerners civilising india is in fact just ‘RACIST’.
just one point:
”Hence Indian endogamous tradition is only 1000 years or less old;;
It is around the same that foreign tribes like the greeks, the huns, the kushans trying to invade india during the 1st centuries and the islamic invasion around the 11th century, do you think this destabilising effect of invaders made the indian population alot more conservative and restrictive to ensure survival, thereby caste mobility was decreased, castes closed themselves off from the outside threat, and the later christian invasion which saw the final nail in the coffin for mobile caste system, saw the caste occupation system completely destroyed. Its estimated 70-80% of all Indian wealth including trade routes was either looted, stolen, hijacked, or transfered to europe, and in that climate of poverty the caste system no longer was a system of occupation but had now become a system of control for the christians.
once again Thank you so very much.Every person i meet who is interested in indian history and i direct them to you. I look forward to further pubication from yourself, as do many others.
What you say is correct. However we need to dissect everything to arrive at more detailed picture. 90% of damage was caused during 1200 to 1750 AD. The Kerala temple could save so much of gold only because invadors like Mahmood gaznawi, Nadir Shah and Ahmad Shah Abdali could not reach there. Somnath temple had a many times larger wealth when it was plundered by mahmood.
Please also see my blogs on caste:
Divine / High status of Shudras in Vedas
https://priyadarshi101.wordpress.com/2011/08/19/egalitarian-ethos-of-the-vedas/
Caste system and untouchability in Europe
https://priyadarshi101.wordpress.com/2011/05/15/caste-system-in-europe/
How caste came to India
https://priyadarshi101.wordpress.com/2011/05/15/caste-system-did-not-originate-from-vedic-varna/
See my new on Aryan linguistics:
http://www.scribd.com/premendra_priyadarsh
which tribes in india have high J2b, J2b2 , J2. If this haplogroup originated in india then where do you think that was, and what tribe, location is it highest in within india.
It is highest in Dravidian speakers (19%) then Munda tribes (11%) and Indo-European speakers (11-10%). This is what I remember. The figures may be different by a few percent.
In an article on the Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/varanasi/Indian-scientist-set-to-change-world-history/articleshow/5301655.cms) we find some other interesting assertions made by Prof. Singh in a conference in Varanasi at the beginning of December:
while the ancestors of Ancestor South Indian (ASI) population has been already traced,” he said. “Ongee and Jarva species have been established to be the ancestors of ASI population while DNA matching has found resemblance of East African population with Kurumbha species in Kerala and Raghuvanshi of West Bengal,” he added”
I have never heard that ASI has been associated with Ongee and Jarva species how true is this? and ”DNA matching has found resemblance of East African population with Kurumbha species in Kerala and Raghuvanshi of West Bengal”, how old would this link be if its true?
Lalji Singh, Thangaraj and Gyaneshwer Chaubey do not have deep study, nor do they have capacity to analyse facts. Because proper analysis requires a huge wealth of multidisciplinary knowlege, which these fellows lack. These three have often written bogus articles, which have wasted months of my enery contradicting them.
If you want to know about J2 etc, the are widespread in India in all csstes and tribes. Read Sanghmitra Sahoo, 2006; Sanghamitra Sengupta, 2006 and Trivedi 2008. You may google search them and post the links in my blog too for future reference to other visitors of my blog.
Thanks for the reply.
We know that brahman genome origin locates them to an area from kashmir through to west bengal. So if my understanding is correct, when man went from hunter gatherers, to agriculture, those first agriculturalist MUST have been the origins for the brahman caste. As brahmans study knowledge and truth then originally they must have contained the first knowledge of farming, seeds, domestication and civilisation, which took man from hunter to farmer. Which makes sense. So then these educated castes on farming techniques took the higher position in society naturally, as they have knowledge on food grain etc. Then as these tribes succeeded and prospered that knowledge and the proto brahmins moved around spreading that knowledge and cultivating the land. Which means then as those first agriculturist know about seeds, farming, they must have expanded that knowledge into pottery to keep food safe, contruction of houses to keep food safe, they knew medicine from plants, and then also philisophy with binds it all together. SO then as these Proto brahmin moved with that knowledge, a formation of occupation was born, i.e the caste system, as those proto brahmins moved furthe away from actual agiculture which by then was handed down to other societies , like the farmers, the shopkeepers, the helpers which is the origins of caste, and the many different sub castes, as then that knowledge was passed down from family to family. So outcaste must have meant a person who is not qualified AT all in any field.
So can you tell me then, just like in brahmins who show a higher diversity of r1a and that location is from kashmir to west bengal are their then TRIBES that show kshatriya traits or genome?, is their anything like a kshatriya triat?
or did the brahmins turn into warriors, or was it warriors who turned into the brahamn intellectual class?
Many thanks for putting your views, however I am afraid to say that is not fact. I wish people to come to this type of work. But that will involve a lot of hard work. Yo may write to my private email priyadarshi101@hotmail.com, so that I can send you a copy of my research which is waiting in press hence I do not want to put in blog.
Regards
Thank you very much indeed. My home email is halozzzz@hotmail.co.uk
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15020799
what do you think of this article?
is it suggesting that the australian population is older than the african one? if so then the theory that modern man came from india and then dispersed in both directions is strengthened right? Your expert opinions would be greatful.
Click to access Rasmussen.SOM.pdf
in those articles its proposing a two wave migration out of africa, the first went from africa straight to australia, and the second they claim came from central asia. How correct is this?
in your opinion does the articlem that is proposing a two wave migration change the postion that europeans, asians, north africans stem from genetic lines from india? is it suggesting that europe and central asia was in fact populated from north africa, which would go against a northern route which has been rejected? Or does it add weight that man originated from india and went east and west of india.?
Thanks for your time, i am trying to understand and comprehend, im not professional in the field, so any assitance from you is greatly thanked.
what i dont understand is this, if according to the article about aboriginal from australia, who first migrated out of africa,
A. they must have passed through india…..and left their genetic trace
, second, if their was human poplulation in south india, did that die out due to the toba explosion, or do you think that indians survived and lived on?
B. If that first migration went stright to australia, and didnt leave any populations behind in south asia, around 70, 000 years ago, THEN SURELY THAT MEANS IF NO INDIAN POPULATIONS SURVIVED AFTER TOBA, does that mean india was INDEED populated through central asia, or nortth africa, as these studies looking into aborogines have tended to highlight….or is this the western centric ideology that imposes itself.
For what i see if the first migration took them from africa into india, and then into australia, then SURELY THE SECOND MIGRATION TOOK PLACE FROM INDIA into central asia, europe and east asia, SURELY.?
please can you clarify the issue, even with short replies i understand your time is busy.
thanks.,
First assimilate the story in the powerpoint liked below:
http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/
thanks that was very helpfull. So if anything, india was repopulated through the east and not the west.
Also read this latest work, which supports my hypothesis.
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/4776/aboriginal-genome-rewrites-human-dispersal-story
This is from Nature:
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110928/full/477522a.html
Box: Early human explorers charted a bold course:
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110928/full/477522a/box/1.html
An Aboriginal Australian Genome Reveals Separate Human Dispersals into Asia (This again is a story of pre-Toba and Post-Toba, two waves of migration, which the authors have not appreciated)
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6052/94
Denisova Admixture and the First Modern Human Dispersals into Southeast Asia and Oceania: (This actually is a story of Pre-Toba and Post-Toba Indoian genes, but the authors have not understood).
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929711003958
thanks for that information. So the first migration took place from eastern africa, went through south india, finally into australia.
then the second migration which populated mainland asia, and europe started from india, correct, and NOT africa!… migration from india/s.e.a moved into central asia, north africa and europe.
The western world has always maintained that a tiny west asia genome that is present in indian soceity kick started the agricultural process from central asia, even when the data suggest that the west asian component is indian in origin the west refuses to accept the truth, so when marsh arabs contain a south asian component , they out right dismiss it right away, even though the same authors then promote the aryan inasion theory using the same logic that they try to undermine others who propose an alternative theory using their logic. Now according to me, sumerians MUST have south asian origins, and the data does suggest they contain those links, but what do you think,
heres a quote
”Popular tradition, however, considers the Marsh Arabs as a foreign group, of unknown origin, which arrived in the marshlands when the rearing of water buffalo was introduced to the region.” The rearing of buffalo was introduced from south asia, then SURELY this provides a direct link that sumerian culture is indian in origin, would you agree??
_________________________________________________________________________
BMC Evolutionary Biology 2011, 11:288doi:10.1186/1471-2148-11-288
In search of the genetic footprints of Sumerians: a survey of Y-chromosome and mtDNA variation in the Marsh Arabs of Iraq.
Nadia Al-Zahery et al.
Abstract (provisional)
Background
For millennia, the southern part of the Mesopotamia has been a wetland region generated by the Tigris and Euphrates rivers before flowing into the Gulf. This area has been occupied by human communities since ancient times and the present-day inhabitants, the Marsh Arabs, are considered the population with the strongest link to ancient Sumerians. Popular tradition, however, considers the Marsh Arabs as a foreign group, of unknown origin, which arrived in the marshlands when the rearing of water buffalo was introduced to the region.
Results
To shed some light on the paternal and maternal origin of this population, Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variation was surveyed in 143 Marsh Arabs and in a large sample of Iraqi controls. Analyses of the haplogroups and sub-haplogroups observed in the Marsh Arabs revealed a prevalent autochthonous Middle Eastern component for both male and female gene pools, with weak South-West Asian and African contributions, more evident in mtDNA. A higher male than female homogeneity is characteristic of the Marsh Arab gene pool, likely due to a strong male genetic drift determined by socio-cultural factors (patrilocality, polygamy, unequal male and female migration rates).
Conclusions
Evidence of genetic stratification ascribable to the Sumerian development was provided by the Y-chromosome data where the J1-Page08 branch reveals a local expansion, almost contemporary with the Sumerian City State period that characterized Southern Mesopotamia. On the other hand, a more ancient background shared with to Northern Mesopotamia is revealed by the less represented Y-chromosome lineage J1-M267*. Overall our results indicate that the introduction of water buffalo breeding and rice farming, most likely from the Indian sub-continent, only marginally affected the gene pool of autochthonous people of the region. Furthermore, a prevalent Middle Eastern ancestry of the modern population of the marshes of southern Iraq implies that if the Marsh Arabs are descendants of the ancient Sumerians, also the Sumerians were most likely autochthonous and not of Indian or South Asian ancestry.
in your opinion the sumerian culture and people, could their be an ancestoral indian orign?
Yes.
Also see this new:
I think this clarifies much.
Thanks
It does clarify it. Thank you for illustrating it, it gives it much more impact. Thanks for identifying the blatant racism, and western intolerance, which we are forced to accept as truth.
You are truly a pioneer, and i believe will be honored as such by India in the future, when this truth starts to take a hold in the academic world in india. Slowly India is returning back to its Rich past. People like you are the torch bearers for us to follow and educate ourselves.
Thanks for sharing information.
Regards
I am grateful for your kind words. I wish I could stand up to your expectation and deserved your commendation.
http://www.ashg.org/ICHG2011/EvoPopulationGenetics/index.shtml
you might interested in this.
thanks.
http://www.ashg.org/ICHG2011/EvoPopulationGenetics/index.shtml
you might interested in this.Reich on video
thanks.
This video makes it clear that Reich is one of the few people who stll maintain the two-route theory, which has been ruled out long back. The two-route theory is essential for the Aryan Invasion Theory to survive.
i just have ONE question / Where does ANI come from?……..I have read many times ASI have no relation to any person outside of india…..
does ANI derive from ASI., which seperated from ASI creating the ANI group…then merging back into ONE population. One thing i cannot understand is this, If man left africa and survived in south india, then ANI must be from that orginal ASI group ?, who then in turn merged back into one, but many times i have heard they do not know where ANI came from……..but they couldnt have come from any other group than ASI……correct?
Otherwise it seems to suggest that NRI as an origin come from elsewhere?
To avoid the confusion, it is best to think of Pre-ANI-ASI split stage, the Ancestral Indians, located diffusely from Gujarat/ Sind to the South Indian tip. Yet one of its limb extended along Narmada, to the Sone river. Then along Sone to Ganga, then along Ganga to Brahma-Putra. Then Along BrahmaPutra river into Tibet. That is why we get some of the oldest genes like Y-hg D in Tibet.
The other limb proceeded coastally to Kerala, then reached Andhra coast, then Orissa, then Bengal and then moved into the SEA. However, the Indian tribes (Austro-Asiatic Speakers) originated at North Andhra-Orissa-Chattisgarh-Jharkhand region. The northwest Indians evolved the Indo-European languages, and the South Indians developed the Dravidian languages.
Yet, Lalji Singh said a great thing. He said that Ongan had split from the Indian population before SEA migration. That means the first SEA reachers also spoke a language simialr tto the Ongans. And we know that Ongan shares features with Austronesian languages.
thanks.
that makes it clearer. But just one thing, ancestoral indians first reached india at the southern tip of india then moved out? or did they wander into north west india and then spread out?
Again in that video link provided, David Reich says ANI is closer to European, and central Asians,
but it could it be worded as such, that EUROPEANS and central Asia, are closer to North indians?
That is his mistake. ANI is thousands of years older than (contemporary) Europeans and Central Asians, and ANI is not any existing gene pool, but a re-constructed hypothetical gene pool, just like the Proto-Indo-European language. Hence Reich’s wordings are mistaken.
It must be remembered that the main research was done by two other members of the team, and Reich had just written the script. It is not necessary that his personal views be the same as the results contained in the paper.
Thanks again.
”Pre-ANI-ASI split stage,”
Does that mean all indians share a Pre-ANI-ASI split stage genome that is in both groups, before they split off and rejoined? What genome is that?
Also if south indian created Dravidian language, East indians created the Austro-asiatic langauge group, and western Indians created the Indo-european language group, when the first AI ancestoral Indians lived did they all speak a dravidian language group (for example in the north) before indo european language developed and spread throughout the north?…….(as some groups in northern india pakistan still speak a dravidian dialect)
If so , then indo european langauges, sanskrit, prakrit could be derived from a very early dravidian source if it was initially spoken throughout india?….correct?…and maybe dravidian developed from a munda source, as some have identiied as being the oldest language in india?
Thanks.
Intelligent people have found that all languages of the world must have a common origin. The evidence in the link below is enough for your understanding.
Click to access Global.pdf
My hythesis is that before Tauba split, it was Proto-Ongan-Nihali-Austronesian that was spoken in India, and it was from India that this language family spread to Madagaskar, Andaman and SE Asia. Following Toba eruption, most of the Indians died. The remaining few could develop new language change (with linguistic-drift). This may be called Proto-Sino-Tibetan-Caucasian-Afro-Asiatic-Dravidian-Indo-European.
Then ancestors of Afro-Asiatic + Caucasian branch out westward. Ancestors of Sino-Tibetan too branch out now.
Just following that ancestors of Altaic-Uralic left India to enter the Central Asia. The north Indian language at that time may be called Proto-Indo-European-Altaic-Uralic. In the South, the language would be called Proto-Proto-Dravidian.
In Central-east India there was an ancestral language retaining Austronesian features. From this the Daic and Austro-Asiatic evolved and moved east after the Sino-tibetan had left Indian boarders.
In India, the main differentiation occured during the LGM. Dravidian. In north-West India, the Indo-European developed and migrated out. If age of a family is determined from the date of separation from the main-stem, then Indo-European family is the youngest, and Proto-Dravidian is older. However, one did not evolve from the other, but they had common ancestor, which was ancestor of Nostratic too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostratic_languages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasiatic_languages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burushaski
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Swadesh_lists
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Swadesh_list
Why dont you do some creative writin/work? You may compile the Swadesh List for some of the language families and also some of the languages, afresh. Old lists need revision May be just the ones I have mentioned above.
Regards
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15565654
Its only time mr priyadarshi. That your view is the truth and soon will be the standard.
Thanks for enlightening me.
Thanks for your kind words.
Thanks to you my understanding of genetics, human migration has improved greatly, and also how great ancients indians where, as are modern ones like yourself, However the migration of language is one area i am not that educated.
Do North indian and south indian language share similarities and connections? The proto indo european and proto dravidan language that was created in india, must have a linguistic similarity and connection between the two?
for example sanskrit and classical tamil, are their linguistic similarities between the two??
(for many of earlier years i was told their was no connection between the two, but if they originated from one proto language then surely they must have connections. I have never come accross a language migration map, which would make it clearer.)
if you have time. Thanks.
I have worked a lot on this topic over last 25 years. There is enough evidence that the two had common origin. Yet the Linguistic establishment has throughout maintained that they have no connection.
This is a raw area. You may work under my guidence to make a list of cognate words (words with common origin), not borrowings, for the Indo-European and Dravidian languages.
With best regards
Priyadarshi
I happened to stumble across this recent human migration map from IMB/National geographic.If the origin of Nostratic language group is in india….and that all languages arose in india, and all humans have their origins in india. (except africans) Then the following migration map just released, GIVES solid proof that the two indeed TAKE PLACE in india.
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2011/11/03/modern-humans-wandered-out-of-africa-via-arabia/
Please click on the link…..do you agree? how can that map be a coincidental, it outlines the exact proposal you assert for human migration and language groups.
_________________________________________________________________________
Thanks for the link.
the same image without the news story,
How can this be coincidental ? its almost an exact match of your proposals…
The truth is only one. Some people find that earlier than others. And many never find that.
Also what about the brahui tribe which speak a dravidan dialect in north western india (now paksitan). How does that happen?…unless a proto dravidan dialect was spoken througout india before the develement of prote indo european and later disperal throughout the west.
Hi, was india initially populated in the north or south india?
Not only Brahui, but many more Dravidian languages are spread up to Nepal. This is because of migration. When the LGM receded, many people from the south migrated to northern areas, which might have been vacant land just after LGM, and settled there. Just a few people (say five) were needed to eastablish a village or basti, or even a district of today.
This is a good try by maji for the first wave of migration. Soon after there was a migration from Arunachal Pradesh (India) to Tibet, China and Yunnan etc. I will soon place a better map.
migratin map by Maji, Blogspot
I have read an article im sure which is of yours, which gave explanation of the varna color system, to dispel the eurocentric version of racial color tones……can you please direct me to it. As i have searched throughout your website and cannot seem to relocate it. Unless you have taken it off..
thanks.
I have been writing on this topic for over last 10 years and I cannot remember or recapitulate which one you are talking about. My ealiest notes were on the http://www.hindunet.org by the name priyadarshi in year 2000. Try to search in the “customs” section of the forums. You may have a look at my newest post in the scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/72200770/Origin-of-Caste-System
Also see: http://www.scribd.com/doc/52693533/Origin-of-Caste
Another one on varna is: http://www.scribd.com/doc/62668668/Egalitarian-Ethos-of-Vedas
doesnt the term varna relate to colours that represent the four castes?…white, red, black..
if it doesnt then what does name varna mean?
Varna means many things. Its original meaning is “to cover”. Thence originated the semantic meaning “to marry” or “to select”. Because in the primitive ages girls selected their mates (grooms), and then used to cover herself and the man under a hide (leather). The link below will provide you with some meanings. In the sense of colour, this means the spectrum: the various colurs of social occupations and professions.
Thanks. People of different strata within the same locality have hardly ever differed too much in colour. The thing you are thinking is too much unscientific and not supported by DNA studies.
http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/mwquery/
What about the brahmi script do you think that was of indian origin or of central asian origin as some have stated?
I think both Brahmi and Chinese scripts originated in India. Please read some of latest Kalyanramanji’s blogs.
can you provide a link to Kalyanramanji’s blogs. I have no success searching for it.
thanks.
Kalyanraman ji has many blogs. Today he was busy here:
http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2011/11/decoding-indus-hieroglyphs-which-appear.html
Regards
One thing i just cant seem to understand.
India was populated through the north , yes? then they travelled down to the south. (but many scholars state india was first settled in the south, then moved up… but is that correct?)
language it seems was created in south india rather than north india, would this simply that language at that time was not fully developed by the time humans reached north india, and that development took place mainly in south india then moved up?….
You are a learned person, and you know the correct answers, yet are asking, pretentiously. The link you posted, as well as the other available migration maps clearly show that the first arrival was in Gujarat. Then along Narmada and along the sea coast they migrated, expanded. See this map:
http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/2011/01/eurasian-colonization-routes-map.html
http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/2011/01/eurasian-colonization-routes-map.html
They could not live away from water. hence migarted along the rivers.
Who told you all that non-sense about origin of language. Man had language since much before Homo sapiens sapiens days. Read Bednarik. Also read about language gene in the Neanderthals FOXP gene.
http://www.semioticon.com/frontline/bednarik.htm
Search word “language” in the box in the link below:
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=v7LB-EKYwoEC&pg=PA153&lpg=PA153&dq=bednarik+semiotics+language&source=bl&ots=_f5usqZ4Es&sig=ZY4dlXfYR8GcnlSCpL-KWKbJXWM&hl=en&ei=qr_OTqnnKMmsrAeO8rzHDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=bednarik%20semiotics%20language&f=false
Regards
”Summing up, our results confirm both ancestry and temporal complexity shaping the still on-going process of genetic structuring of South Asian populations. This intricacy cannot be readily explained by the putative recent influx of Indo-Aryans alone but suggests multiple gene flows to the South Asian gene pool, both from the west and east, over a much longer time span. We highlight a few genes as candidates of positive selection in South Asia that could have implications in lipid metabolism and etiology of type 2 diabetes. Further studies on data sets without ascertainment and allele frequency biases such as sequence data will be needed to validate the signals for selection.”
http://www.cell.com/AJHG/fulltext/S0002-9297(11)00488-5
This new article, suggests east and west migration into India. Why do they keep on twisting the information?…At one point they suggest AA Indian speakers are from south east asia!
thanks.
Thanks for posting this valuable link. Please continue helping me by posting what is latest. An appropriate contradiction of the article in your link will be posted soon. You asked why they are doing this again and again.
This is because:
“Paradigms, especially old ones, die harder than BruceWillis. (James Adovasio 1999) ”
quoted by Stephen Oppenheimer in his “Comment” which read:
“Why should a single discipline matter so in what is necessarily a multidisciplinary field? Simply because the archaeologist paradigm-champions made it so. Donohue and Denham aptly quote Bellwood’s tautology “the question of Austronesian origins is basically a linguistic question”; this is more malapropism than tautology, based on the conviction that languages, genes, and culture move hand in hand to invade and replace (Diamond and Bellwood 2003). Combined with the oft-stated stricture that only linguists and likeminded archaeologists are qualified to comment on Austronesian (AN) linguistics, this idea has locked the issue up from objective review by anyone but an inner circle for well over a generation. For these arcane reasons, voices from the humanities guilds of linguists and archaeologists doubting the adequacy of the emperor’s old clothes will resonate better than any number of raggedy dissenters from other disciplines, however objective and informed their critiques.”
Oppenheimer, S. J., comment on Donohue, M. and Denham, T., Farming and Language in
Island Southeast Asia, Current Anthropology 2010, 51(2): 243-244.
This particular group of authors in your link is cipher in other branches of learning and possibly has Eurocentric biases. The Indians are well known as intellectual slaves and to serve the wishes of their masters.
We have based our analyses of human genetic variation on a sample of 1310 individuals that belong to 112 populations. The sample set includes 142 previously unpublished samples from India and published compatible data from South Asia and beyond (Table S1 ), chosen to represent the global and regional contexts of human genetic variation. For some analyses we also included published data on Indian populations18 genotyped on a different platform; adding these sources yielded a combined data set of 1,442 individuals but only ca. 95,000 SNPs (Table S1 ).
Mean pairwise FST values29 within and among continental regions (Figure 1) reveal that the South Asian autosomal gene pool falls into a distinct geographic cluster, characterized internally, like other continental regions, by short interpopulation genetic distances (<0.01). At the interregional scale, the South Asian cluster shows somewhat shorter genetic distances with West Eurasian (average FST = 0.042) than with East Asian (average FST = 0.051) populations. Importantly, the Pakistani (Indus Valley) populations differ substantially from most of the Indian populations and show comparably low genetic differentiation (within the FST range of 0.008–0.020) from European, Near Eastern, Caucasian, and Indian populations (Figure 1 and Figures S1 and S11 ). In agreement with previous Y-chromosome studies,41,42 the Brahmin and Kshatriya from Uttar Pradesh stand out by being closer to Pakistani (FST = 0.006 on average) and West Eurasian populations (FST = 0.030) than to other Indian populations (average FSTs 0.017 and 0.046, respectively) from the same geographic area (Figures S1 and S11 ).
HOW CAN BRAHMINS AND KSYTARIA BE CLOSER TO WEST ASIAN, when ANI is more diverse and older than west asian genome?
ANI must be closer to ASI because of the age and diversity right???
This group of authors are hell bent to destroy their own credibility. Such irresponsible writing cannot go on for ever. Ultimately people, particularly genome scientistists will come to understand that they write conjectures, not reports of their DNA studies.
The actual data of their work say a different truth. In the Fst tables, the smaller the figure, the closer is the relationship. It does not say who gave birth to whom.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/12/first-analysis-of-metspalu-et-al-2011.html
http://www.harappadna.org/2011/12/metspalu-ref3-admixture-results/
Also see:
Click to access PIIS0002929711004885.mmc1.pdf
Thanks
so what is the genetic distance between….. ANI and ASI ………and ANI and west asian?
Is Gedrosia a ANI component…or west asian?…..Some are suggesting that Gedrosia is an ANI component.Logically speaking it would make sense of Tribal migration from east to west.
Where do the origins of the Jatt clan come from?.I have read that Jatt clans came form central asia, but i have also read that Jatt genetics comfirm them to India. Where do you think they come from?
Thanks.
A recent study of the people of Indian Punjab, where about 40% or more of the population are Jat people, strongly shows that the Jat people are Indo-Scythians.[1] The study involved a genealogical DNA test which examined single nucleotide polymorphisms (mutations in a single DNA “letter”) on the Y chromosome (which occurs only in males). Jats share many common haplotypes with Ukrainian people, Germanic people, Slavic people, Baltic peoples, Iranian people, and Central Asian groups.[2] This strongly indicates they originate from near or in Ukraine.[3] It found Jat people share only two haplotypes, one of which is also shared with the population of present-day Turkish people, and have few matches with neighbouring Pakistani populations.[4] This haplotype shared between the two Jat groups may be part of an Indo-Aryan (or Indo-European people) genetic contribution to these populations, where as the haplotypes shared with other Eurasian populations is due to the strong DNA contributions of Indo-European Scythians (Saka, Massagetae) and White Huns.[5] The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) female DNA, Jats contain haplogroups typical of Northern India, Pakistan, and West Asia. This indicates that for the female mtDNA, there is very little connection with Central Asian and northwest European populations, even though Jats share many Y-SNP markers with these populations. Therefore, this DNA Study proves that there has been male DNA into the Jat people from Ukrainian Scythians (Saka, Massagetae) and White Huns.[6]
IS this correct Mr PriyaDarshi, or is the Jatt migration FROM india to central asia, as you have said proven many times over?
Thanks again.
Scythians (Shaka),Kushana, Huna, Greek, Parthian (Pahlaw), Gurjara etc were many tribes which entered India from northwest.
Most of them were absorbed by the massive population of the Punjap and adjoining states. However, the actual frequencies of these DNA are very low, leass than 1 percent.
”Jats share many common haplotypes with Ukrainian people, Germanic people, Slavic people, Baltic peoples, Iranian people, and Central Asian groups.[2] This strongly indicates they originate from near or in Ukraine”
Do Jatt clans originate from or near the ukraine?..and what date are the proposed migration taking place? How is their germanic dna in jatt clans in punjab, does that mean a tribe from europe DID migrate to north west punjab, in numbers that make their origin, more from europe than south asia?……..i was always under the beleif, that Indian populations throughout, all originate from INDIAN ancestoral populations.
thanks.
Dont get misled by writings of those people who have written more pages than they have read in their whole of life. Your understanding is correct. All resemblences are because the West Eurasians, West Asians and the Central Asians reached their modern homes from northwest India.
I know terms such as ANI AND ASI where created by the western world to frame their own eurocentric ideas.
But would it be equally VALID to call all Indians as ANCESTORAL INDIANS, INSTEAD OF ASI AND ANI.
Would this term be valid, in genetics and ideology?…Indian genome is unique to everyone in the else world, so Ancestoral Indians would be the correct term, yes?
thanks. Mr priyadarshi, your knowledge has truly guided me and for that i am always in your debt, for revealing the truth, which i believed in with hard evidence. I dont know of your political background, but credits as a scholar are of the highest order, have you ever considered joining up with dr swami subramanian? Recently he has been promoting that all indians are one, however as he is not an expert, i felt that a person of your calibre would not only help pinpoint the facts, but WILL INFLUENCE A WHOLE INDIAN GENERATION OF TEACHERS, STUDENTS, SCHOLARS, HISTORIANS…….
Truth has always existed, its just about getting that truth to people before the LIES get there!
thanks.
ANI and ASI refer to a hypothetical population of north India and south India respectively, which lived in some remote past. Ancestral Indian would be the correct term to describe both taken together, or to describe the common ancestor of both the ANI and ASI, which lived in India before the Toba eruption.
I do not know dr swami subramanian. But there is one Dr Subrahmanyam Swami, who is a politician. Do you mean him? I think he is not working for this subject.
Thanks.
Yes the very one Dr Subrahmanyam Swami, he is now taking the issue of Indian genetics being ONE, i have heard him many times, now hes taken up the whole aryan invasion issue. I TRULY think KNOWING ANCIENT INDIANS ARE ONE, in genetics in civilisation, will CREATE SUCH A SHIFT IN THINKING, it will REVIVE the dharmic traditions, it will CREATE THE IDENTITY we seek, and the one we are DENIED.
so i was just thinking, that someone of your CALIBRE, who is an expert, should really think about reaching a bigger platform, that reaches millions.. DR swamy needs a person like you, as you can intellectually destroy the aryan movement argument with FACTS AND EVIDENCE.. At the moment i often see how many many many articles keep on stating that north indians are closer to europeans, or saying how north indians have EUROPEAN blood, also such as north indians are closer to west asian, these LIES MUST BE ADDRESSED BEFORE THEY REACH AND TAKE HOLD IN THE MAINSTREAM PUBLIC…..
you can articulate, and show the new generation the facts of how indian migration went into west asia, and beyond.
That was just my opinion, i keep on thinking how lies and distortion get more publcity than the TRUTH.
Mr Swamy talking about the aryan theory, this is now part of his message and i have seen him many many times address this.
but only you DR PRIYADARSHI, is the man to give that final death blow to the aryan theory.
The Arabian Cradle: Mitochondrial Relicts of the First Steps along the Southern Route out of Africa
Verónica Fernandes1, 2, Farida Alshamali3, Marco Alves1, Marta D. Costa1, 2, Joana B. Pereira1, 2, Nuno M. Silva1, Lotfi Cherni4, 5, Nourdin Harich6, Viktor Cerny7, 8, Pedro Soares1, Martin B. Richards2, 9, 11 and Luísa Pereira1, 10, 11, ,
1 Instituto de Patologia e Imunologia Molecular da Universidade do Porto, Porto 4200-465, Portugal
2 Faculty of Biological Sciences, Institute of Integrative and Comparative Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
3 General Department of Forensic Sciences and Criminology, Dubai Police General Headquarters, Dubai 1493, United Arab Emirates
4 Laboratory of Genetics Immunology and Human Pathology, Faculty of Sciences of Tunis, Tunis 2092, Tunisia
5 Higher Institute of Biotechnology of Monastir, Monastir 5000, Tunisia
6 Laboratoire d’Anthropogénétique, Départment de Biologie, Université Chouaïb Doukkali, El Jadida 24000, Morocco
7 Department of Anthropology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague 128 43, Czech Republic
8 Institute for Advanced Study, Paris 75648, France
9 School of Applied Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH, UK
10 Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto, Porto 4200-319, Portugal
Corresponding author
11 These authors contributed equally to this work
Abstract
A major unanswered question regarding the dispersal of modern humans around the world concerns the geographical site of the first human steps outside of Africa. The “southern coastal route” model predicts that the early stages of the dispersal took place when people crossed the Red Sea to southern Arabia, but genetic evidence has hitherto been tenuous. We have addressed this question by analyzing the three minor west-Eurasian haplogroups, N1, N2, and X. These lineages branch directly from the first non-African founder node, the root of haplogroup N, and coalesce to the time of the first successful movement of modern humans out of Africa, ∼60 thousand years (ka) ago. We sequenced complete mtDNA genomes from 85 Southwest Asian samples carrying these haplogroups and compared them with a database of 300 European examples. The results show that these minor haplogroups have a relict distribution that suggests an ancient ancestry within the Arabian Peninsula, and they most likely spread from the Gulf Oasis region toward the Near East and Europe during the pluvial period 55–24 ka ago. This pattern suggests that Arabia was indeed the first staging post in the spread of modern humans around the world.
I FOUND THIS NEW ARTICLE, that suggests Now arabia is the staging post for human dispersal, is this in your opinion correct or are they now promoting an an arabian centric ideology?
This is Arabi-European bhai-bhai politics. For Saudi Arabia to be source of West Eurasian genes, it needs to have the root DNAs of both M and N haplogroups. All the basal lineages of M and N are located in India. Arabia never had the natural resource to generate a population expansion (or population explosion) to have caused migration outside in sufficient numbers to colonize a whole continent. We should never ignore the ecological factors.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0032546
Genetic Affinities of the Central Indian Tribal Populations
Gunjan Sharma et al.
Abstract
Background
The central Indian state Madhya Pradesh is often called as ‘heart of India’ and has always been an important region functioning as a trinexus belt for three major language families (Indo-European, Dravidian and Austroasiatic). There are less detailed genetic studies on the populations inhabited in this region. Therefore, this study is an attempt for extensive characterization of genetic ancestries of three tribal populations, namely; Bharia, Bhil and Sahariya, inhabiting this region using haploid and diploid DNA markers.
Methodology/Principal Findings
Mitochondrial DNA analysis showed high diversity, including some of the older sublineages of M haplogroup and prominent R lineages in all the three tribes. Y-chromosomal biallelic markers revealed high frequency of Austroasiatic-specific M95-O2a haplogroup in Bharia and Sahariya, M82-H1a in Bhil and M17-R1a in Bhil and Sahariya. The results obtained by haploid as well as diploid genetic markers revealed strong genetic affinity of Bharia (a Dravidian speaking tribe) with the Austroasiatic (Munda) group. The gene flow from Austroasiatic group is further confirmed by their Y-STRs haplotype sharing analysis, where we determined their founder haplotype from the North Munda speaking tribe, while, autosomal analysis was largely in concordant with the haploid DNA results.
Conclusions/Significance
Bhil exhibited largely Indo-European specific ancestry, while Sahariya and Bharia showed admixed genetic package of Indo-European and Austroasiatic populations. Hence, in a landscape like India, linguistic label doesn’t unequivocally follow the genetic footprints.
ON A ANOTHER NOTE
I found this on wikipedia, is this correct?
According to the Genographic Project conducted by the National Geographic Society, Haplogroup R2 (Now R2a) arose about 25,000 years ago in Central Asia [4] and its members migrated southward as part of the second[5] major wave of human migration into India.[6]
According to Sengupta et al. (2006),uncertainty neutralizes previous conclusions that the intrusion of HGs R1a1 and R2 (Now R2a) from the northwest in Dravidian-speaking southern tribes is attributable to a single recent event. Rather, these HGs contain considerable demographic complexity, as implied by their high haplotype diversity. Specifically, they could have actually arrived in southern India from a southwestern Asian source region multiple times, with some episodes considerably earlier than others.The following is Manoukian’s (2006) summary of the findings of the Genographic Project conducted by the National Geographic Society and directed by Spencer Wells (2001):Haplogroup R, the ancestral clade to R1 and R2, appeared on the Central Asian Steppes around 35,000 to 30,000 years ago.R1, sister clade to R2, moved to the West from the Central Asian Steppes around 35,000 to 30,000 years ago. R1 pockets were established, from where R1a and R1b emerged.R2a made its first entry into the Indian sub-continent around 25,000 years ago. The routes taken are not clear, although the Indus and Ganges rivers are possible theories put forward. There could, of course, have been multiple immigrations of this haplogroup into the Indian sub-continent, both in the Paleolithic and the Neolithic.
Mr Priyadarshi..
where do you think the origins of r2a or r2 is from? Do you agree that the origins of r2a is from central asia, and NOT south asia as it was reported before? OR is this European bias again, and R2A ORIGINATED IN SOUTH ASIA and migrated into central asia.
thanks.
R2 South Asia. See Sharma’s article, also Sengupta 2006, Sahoo 2006;
When are you going to release more material dr?
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0034288
Afghanistan’s Ethnic Groups Share a Y-Chromosomal Heritage Structured by Historical Events
The prevailing Y-chromosome lineage in Pashtun and Tajik (R1a1a-M17), has the highest observed diversity among populations of the Indus Valley [46]. R1a1a-M17 diversity declines toward the Pontic-Caspian steppe where the mid-Holocene R1a1a7-M458 sublineage is dominant [46]. R1a1a7-M458 was absent in Afghanistan, suggesting that R1a1a-M17 does not support, as previously thought [47], expansions from the Pontic Steppe [3], bringing the Indo-European languages to Central Asia and India.
MDS and Barrier analysis have identified a significant affinity between Pashtun, Tajik, North Indian, and West Indian populations, creating an Afghan-Indian population structure that excludes the Hazaras, Uzbeks, and the South Indian Dravidian speakers. In addition, gene flow to Afghanistan from India marked by Indian lineages, L-M20, H-M69, and R2a-M124, also seems to mostly involve Pashtuns and Tajiks. This genetic affinity and gene flow suggests interactions that could have existed since at least the establishment of the region’s first civilizations at the Indus Valley and the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex.
__________________
”MDS and Barrier analysis have identified a significant affinity between Pashtun, Tajik, North Indian, and West Indian populations, creating an Afghan-Indian population structure that excludes the Hazaras, Uzbeks, and the South Indian Dravidian speakers. ” How can south indian dravidian speakers be classed as being excluded, they must share genome with ANI?
What genetic affinities do south indian and north indians share?……how can south indian dravidan population be so much differnt from the rest?….If all Indians come from ONE ANCESTORAL INDIAN TRIBE, then that CONNECTION, that LINK must be present in all indian, yes?…and what is that genome, or genetic marker that is present in ALL indians?
Thanks, sir.
Thanks.
Common genetic markers can be found in only those populations which have separated from the main bulk only recently, then expanded. The long-standing populations (say 100,000 years) cannot show many things in common.
I have caught pneumonia. Dont know when shall be fit enough to sit.
I am sorry to hear that. I hope and pray you get well soon. You have a very important role in the future of India.
Mystery of the domestication of the horse solved
Research reconciles competing theories about the origin of the domestic horse
New research indicates that domestic horses originated in the steppes of modern-day Ukraine, southwest Russia and west Kazakhstan, mixing with local wild stocks as they spread throughout Europe and Asia. The research was published today, 07 May, in the journal PNAS.
For several decades scientists puzzled over the origin of domesticated horses. Based on archaeological evidence, it had long been thought that horse domestication originated in the western part of the Eurasian Steppe (Ukraine, southwest Russia and west Kazakhstan); however, a single origin in a geographically restricted area appeared at odds with the large number of female lineages in the domestic horse gene pool, commonly thought to reflect multiple domestication “events” across a wide geographic area.
In order to solve the perplexing history of the domestic horse, scientists from the University of Cambridge used a genetic database of more than 300 horses sampled from across the Eurasian Steppe to run a number of different modelling scenarios.
Their research shows that the extinct wild ancestor of domestic horses, Equus ferus, expanded out of East Asia approximately 160,000 years ago. They were also able to demonstrate that Equus ferus was domesticated in the western Eurasian Steppe, and that herds were repeatedly restocked with wild horses as they spread across Eurasia.
Dr Vera Warmuth, from the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology, said: “Our research clearly shows that the original founder population of domestic horses was established in the western Eurasian Steppe, an area where the earliest archaeological evidence for domesticated horses has been found. The spread of horse domestication differed from that of many other domestic animal species, in that spreading herds were augmented with local wild horses on an unprecedented scale. If these restocking events involved mainly wild mares, we can explain the large number of female lineages in the domestic horse gene pool without having to invoke multiple domestication origins.”
The researchers provide the first genetic evidence for a geographically restricted domestication origin in the Eurasian Steppe, as suggested by archaeology, and show
What is your assessment of this article?
Is this again doctored data to fit it inline with the western approach?
Thanks.
This article is not consistent with archaeology and other DNA studies. The Przewalskii’s horse was indomesticable, and actually belongs to a different species. It was the sivalensis horse of India which was first domesticated, this was possibly the wild E. ferus ferus.
The Deveirka horse (Anthony 1991, 1997) of 4200 BCE was a hoax, and Anthony himself retracted his clain in Antiquity 2000, and still later in his book Anthony 2009. Now oldest steppe horse is 2000 BCE Sintashta horse. In India we get horse fossils from from 20,000 BCE in human contexts (Badam).
http://phys.org/news/2012-06-evidence-asia-africa-source-earliest.html
For decades, scientists thought that anthropoid evolution was rooted in Africa. However, more recent fossil discoveries in Asian countries have rapidly altered scientific opinion about where this group of distant human ancestors first evolved. Afrasia is the latest in a series of fossil discoveries that are overturning the concept of Africa as the starting point for anthropoid primate evolution.
“Not only does Afrasia help seal the case that anthropoids first evolved in Asia, it also tells us when our anthropoid ancestors first made their way to Africa, where they continued to evolve into apes and humans,” says Chris Beard, Carnegie Museum of Natural History paleontologist and member of the discovery team that also included researchers from Myanmar, Thailand, and France. Beard is renowned for his extensive work on primate evolution and anthropoid origins. “Afrasia is a game-changer because for the first time it signals when our distant ancestors initially colonized Africa. If this ancient migration had never taken place, we wouldn’t be here talking about it.”
Timing is everything
Paleontologists have been divided over exactly how and when early Asian anthropoids made their way from Asia to Africa. The trip could not have been easy, because a more extensive version of the modern Mediterranean Sea called the Tethys Sea separated Africa from Eurasia at that time. While the discovery of Afrasia does not solve the exact route early anthropoids followed in reaching Africa, it does suggest that the colonization event occurred relatively recently, only shortly before the first anthropoid fossils are found in the African fossil record.
Myanmar’s 37-million-year-old Afrasia is remarkable in that its teeth closely resemble those of Afrotarsius libycus, a North African primate dating to about the same time. The four known teeth of Afrasia were recovered after six years of sifting through tons of sediment near Nyaungpinle in central Myanmar. This locality occurs in the middle Eocene Pondaung Formation, where the same international research team discovered Ganlea megacanina, an influential fossil described in 2009 that helped solidify the presence of early anthropoid primates in Asia.
Ads by Google
Polar Bears Holiday – Breathtaking Natural Beauty. Trust Award-Winning Titan. – TitanTravel.co.uk/LordsOfTheArctic
Details of tooth shape in the Asian Afrasia and the North African Afrotarsius fossils indicate that these animals probably ate insects. The size of their teeth suggests that in life these animals weighed around 3.5 ounces (100 g), roughly the size of a modern tarsier.
Because of the complicated structure of mammalian teeth, paleontologists often use them as fingerprints to reconstruct how extinct species are related to each other and their modern relatives. These similarities provide strong evidence that Afrasia’s Asian cousins colonized North Africa only shortly before the appearance of Afrotarsius in the African fossil record. If Asian anthropoids had arrived in North Africa earlier, there would have been time for more differences to evolve between Afrasia and Afrotarsius. The close similarity in age and anatomy shared by the two species makes Afrasia a touchstone in the quest to date the spread of anthropoid primates from Asia to Africa.
“For years we thought the African fossil record was simply bad,” says Professor Jean-Jacques Jaeger of the University of Poitiers in France, the team leader and a Carnegie Museum research associate. “The fact that such similar anthropoids lived at the same time in Myanmar and Libya suggests that the gap in early African anthropoid evolution is actually real. Anthropoids didn’t arrive in Africa until right before we find their fossils in Libya.”
Implications for future research
The search for the origin of early anthropoids—and, by extension, early human ancestors—is a focal point of modern paleoanthropology. The discovery of Afrasia shows that one lineage of early anthropoids colonized Africa around 37 million years ago, but the diversity of early anthropoids known from the Libyan site that produced Afrotarsius libycus hints that the true picture was more complicated. These other Libyan fossil anthropoids may be the descendants of one or more additional Asian colonists, because they don’t appear to be specially related to Afrasia and Afrotarsius. Fossil evidence of evolutionary divergence—when a species divides to create new lineages—is critical data for researchers in evolution. The groundbreaking discovery of the relationship between Asia’s Afrasia and North Africa’s Afrotarsius is an important benchmark for pinpointing the date at which Asian anthropoids colonized Africa.
“Groundbreaking research like this underscores the vitality of modern natural history museums,” says Sam Taylor, director of Carnegie Museum of Natural History. “Research like this can only be sustained by the irreplaceable collections, curatorial expertise, and scientific infrastructure that natural history museums provide. At the same time, cutting-edge science like this revitalizes our museum’s educational programs and propels its mission.”
“Reconstructing events like the colonization of Africa by early anthropoids is a lot like solving a very cold case file,” says Beard. “Afrasia may not be the anthropoid who actually committed the act, but it is definitely on our short list of prime suspects.”
More information: “A new middle Eocene primate from Myanmar and the initial anthropoid colonization of Africa,” by Yaowalak Chaimanee et al. PNAS, 2012.
A genetic study of skin pigmentation variation in India
Mircea Iliescu1 , Chandana Basu Mallick 2,3 , Niraj Rai 4 , Anshuman Mishra 4 , Gyaneshwer Chaubey 2 , Rakesh Tamang 4 , Märt Möls 3 , Rie Goto 1 , Georgi Hudjashov 2,3 , Srilakshmi Raj 1 , Ramasamy Pitchappan 5 , CG Nicholas Mascie-Taylor 1 , Lalji Singh 4,6 , Marta Mirazon-Lahr 7 , Mait Metspalu 2,3 , Kumarasamy Thangaraj 4 , Toomas Kivisild 1,3 1 Division of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, 2 Evolutionary Biology Group, Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia, 3 Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia, 4 Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, India, 5 Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, Chettinad Health City, Chennai, India, 6 Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India, 7 Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, Division of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Human skin colour is a polygenic trait that is primarily determined by the amount and type of melanin produced in the skin. The pigmentation variation between human populations across the world is highly correlated with geographic latitude and the amount of UV radiation. Association studies together with research involving different model organisms and coat colour variation have largely contributed to the identification of more than 378 pigmentation candidate genes. These include TYR OCA2, that are known to cause albinism, MC1R responsible for the red hair phenotype, and genes such as MATP, SLC24A5 and ASIP that are involved in normal pigmentation variation. In particular, SLC24A5 has been shown to explain one third of the pigmentation difference between Europeans and Africans. However, the same gene cannot explain the lighter East Asian phenotype; therefore, light pigmentation could be the result of convergent evolution. A study on UK residents of Pakistani, Indian and Bangladeshi descent found significant association of SLC24A5, SLC45A2 and TYR genes with skin colour. While these genes may explain a significant proportion of interethnic differences in skin colour, it is not clear how much variation such genes explain within Indian populations who are known for their high level of diversity of pigmentation. We have tested 15 candidate SNPs for association with melanin index in a large sample of 1300 individuals, from three related castes native to South India. Using logistic regression model we found that SLC24A5 functional SNP, rs1426654, is strongly associated with pigmentation in our sample and explains alone more than half of the skin colour difference between the light and the dark group of individuals. Conversely, the other tested SNPs fail to show any significance; this strongly argues in favour of one gene having a major effect on skin pigmentation within ethnic groups of South India, with other genes having small additional effects on this trait. We genotyped the SLC24A5 variant in over 40 populations across India and found that latitudinal differences alone cannot explain its frequency patterns in the subcontinent. Key questions arising from this research are when and where did the light skin variant enter South Asia and the manner and reason for it spreading across the Indian sub-continent. Hence, a comprehensive view of skin colour evolution requires that in depth sequence information be corroborated with population (genetic) history and with ancient DNA data of past populations of Eurasia.
_________________
What do you make of this STUDY, its alleging racial color lines again, and hinting again of some white aryan invasion.
The light colour gene is a later mutation, which was actively selected in the colder regions, by the Gloger’s rule.
The mutation probably took place in the Himachal Pradesh region or the north Kashmir region of India, from where spread to all directions. But the human migrations were more towards the further north from this stock, hence the modern picture.
There are two different mutations of this white gene, whose phylogeography has been mapped (this I saw in a slide presentation), yet not published so far. Or, at least I have not found in any journal on the net.
This explains most of the things.
Mapping the Origins and Expansion of the Indo-European Language Family
Remco Bouckaert et al.
ABSTRACT
There are two competing hypotheses for the origin of the Indo-European language family. The conventional view places the homeland in the Pontic steppes about 6000 years ago. An alternative hypothesis claims that the languages spread from Anatolia with the expansion of farming 8000 to 9500 years ago. We used Bayesian phylogeographic approaches, together with basic vocabulary data from 103 ancient and contemporary Indo-European languages, to explicitly model the expansion of the family and test these hypotheses. We found decisive support for an Anatolian origin over a steppe origin. Both the inferred timing and root location of the Indo-European language trees fit with an agricultural expansion from Anatolia beginning 8000 to 9500 years ago. These results highlight the critical role that phylogeographic inference can play in resolving debates about human prehistory.
__________________________________
Hi what do you make of this claim, that indo european languages started in anatolia and not India?
Thanks
This is just another claim, and has no more importance than the others. They have regularly manipulated the linguistic basic data to yeild the desired results.
For example, the standard Swadesh List used by many of this type of authoprs uses “khoon” for blood in Hindi, Nepali etc. Khoon has entered North India over just 800 years back from Persian during the Muslim rule. Such loan words should not have been included, because they Increase the distance if Indic-Aryan languages away from the root.
No correct result can be obtained unless such necessary corrections are made. Please see some of the Swadesh Lists:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Hindi_Swadesh_list
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Fiji_Hindi_Swadesh_list
Thank you so much for replying. Your answers instill great pride, faith and a desire to make truth be heard. I also watched your Youtube presentation, and it was Excellent. Unforuntaly the last 30mins of your prensentation was not recorded, but nevertheless i delighted. Why i dont understand an Indian politcal party does not use such information i just dont know why!. Why doesnt a nationalistic party take genetics, and such and USE that to unite people and progress development i dont know why. Indian politics is deeply rooted in the divisive colonial mindset, so i would have thought a party like BJP for example would grab such information with every hand and then EDUCATE the masses on what it means to be Indian, and how long our history goes back. In my opinion, the only way India can turn around the mess it finds itself in , is rooted in the past. Using such scientific information to lead a politcal campaign which speaks directly at the heart and soul of all Indians in my opinion would see a massive shift back to the dharmic way of life. The colonial legacy which is present in all education fields, all universities are all a framework a collusion to make sure stories of divide aryan tales are taught at a school level, so children grow up miseducated and who then form ideas and opinions on such miseducation which then leads India in to further corruption, because evrey new generation is being miseducated over and over again. All social divides would disappear with genetics, all colonial lies about divisions and caste system would be diluted with facts, so its great that such information first exists, and people like yourself WILL ONE day be honored for re-engaging the YOUTH of INDIA WITH THEIR PAST, AND THEN DEVELOPING India TO OUR NEEDS AND NOT SOME COLONIAL LEGACY. Soon as a political party of India starts uniting India with science then India will see change, till that moment it will be vote ban politics.
There is no difference between the BJP and the Congress or the CPI.
When the BJP came to power, a large number of crooks and thugs joined the party and gradually filled this party with the same kind of people which was there in the Congress. While in the Cogress, there was always a very shrewd central power, which could check the thugs and keep them in control, the BJP leadership–Bajpai and Adwani were perfect gentlemen and innocent, and allowed the crooks to penetrate the deepest centres of power and finally convert this party too into a crook-ocratic party. There were now people in BJP who had no commitment to the nation, but ot their pockets.
But surely if BJP or another, took this genetic message of unity, surely then the message itself is stronger than any political game. India is corrupt has been for 200years, the education system is corrupt so with that in mind, its no surprise that such corruption has created many more corrupt people. So if we are to change, then we must use the avenues open to us, in my opinion, using the genetic information that has come out and of which you have written about, can SINGLE handily change Indian education, thinking and politics forever. Its the DENIAL of such information, which leads to corruption. The youth of INDIA greatly desire such information, it reconnects all to ancestral past. So i hope, to reverse the colonial education and politics, ONE must PROMOTE THE REAL history of ancient India and within a fraction of the time it took to promote aryan invasion, India will return to its roots.
Btw, when shall you be releasing more document on scribd?
A purely hypothetical question, which you can answer if you wish, if a person like Narendra Modi approached you and other native Dharmic intellectuals, to produce a strong case for rejection of aryan, and implementation and promotion of Out of India, as an intellectual heritage angle to create a strong and reliable education as part of his election program, and in turn re-educate our people with a true sense of the past, would you be open to something like that? Or do you feel politics of India has NOTHING to do with the history of India?
And just one more thing, another area of interest i have is in history of Abrahamic religions, Jewish, Christian and Muslim of Middle east. And ive come across something which i have not heard or read from ANYONE else, its a beleif that is CENTRAL to christianity and islam from the middle east, it makes it a core ideology, a core beleif, it has influenced laws, ideas, and ideology, it helped develop slave trades and occupation of the known world, and that theory which underlines christianity and islam to the core, is NOAHS THREE WORLD LINEAGE.Noah is a central figure in all three abrahamic religions.
The christian and islamic beleif is that, from NOAH, in the middle east, EVERYONE in the whole world is descended from his three sons. Its called the three son lineage of Noah.
Now the religious story goes like this, Noah had three sons, SHEM, JAPETH AND HAM….Now the first two sons, SHEM AND JAPETH, where described as Light skinned, noble and civilized, Europeans claim lineage from JAPETH, and ARABS claim lineage from SHEM, the term semitic in Arabia is a reference back to SHEM.
Now in the bible and the koran, it states that from NOAH FIRST TWO SONS, came civilization, lang, agriculture and they originate from the middle east/central asia area.
BUT NOAH had one final THIRD SON, called, HAM.
Now HAM was considered a slave to the first two sons, and because he is a slave, he was made dark-skinned by god, so his appearance would be the indicator to the first two sons, to enslave him.
In other words, everyone apart from the caucasion race, of europeans and arabs, is considered a slave of the first two. It was this IDEOLOGY that led to Islamic and Christian slave trade of Africans, pagans (which originally meant NON MUSLIM NON CHRISTIAN), kafirs and heathens or the general term….the children of HAM!
Apart from European and Arabs (caucasion) everyone else in the world, African, Indian, Chinese, American, Australian where considered descendants of HAM, and this is the EXACT reason why european christians and arab muslim invaded, conquered and converted large parts of the world, it was a religious beleif from their own books that allowed them to enslave others based on the three son lineage of NOAH, that dark skinned people where slaves to europeans and arabs or caucasions.
Now the interesting part is this!!!!!!
When Abrahamic forces get to India, Muslims first, and then Christians second, they find india an older civilization, a greater civilization than the ones in the middle east, with similarities originating back to India.
Which meant a GREAT CONTRADICTION to the religious belief of NOAH.
How can Indian civilization predate anything from central asia/middle east, when in their religious books, it states everything came from NOAHS first two sons, in the middle east?….A great PROBLEM was dawning upon caucasion elite.
The ELITE of islam and christianity in India, where becoming aware of this massive historical contradiction to their own faith, AND its at THIS POINT, MR DARSHI, at this realization among the religious elite of abrahamic religions, that something had to be done to correct this contradiction, a contradiction that could destroy the VERY FOUNDATION of Islam and Chrsitanity.
So what is known as Noah theory around the world is masked as ARYAN invasion In india!…..
what is aryan tales? some white tribe from outside India, invaded and civilized Indians with lang, technology, theology, and civilisation, pushing down the DARK natives to the south….
IF we DEMASK the aryan and dravidian LIES, the truth is an exact mirror of the religious beleif system of muslims and christians.
So today children of Ham in India, are named as DRAVIDIANS a lost tribe from eygpt who moved to elam then to north India..
Children of japeth and shem (caucasions) are classed as white aryans aka north Indians, And as per Noah ideology, the sons of HAM dark skinned people where enslaved by white skinned people.
Which is an EXACT MIRROR of the story of the aryan invasion. white Aryans invaded and enslaved the dark natives in india.
….it could be read as, people of shem and japeth pushed down people of ham, it could also be read as, caucasions pushing down africans…..But In India its usually known as Aryan/Dravidian divide. This link between aryan invasion and noah has been HEAVILY HIDDEN FROM VIEW.
I dont know if you know of this SIGNIFICANT link between aryan theory and the religious beleif of christian and muslims of the middle east, buts its shocking to me that i have never heard ANYONE mention the SOLID LINK BETWEEN religious christian and islamic idoelogy of the middle east, and the false aryan invasion story.
_________________________________________________
A few quotes.
“Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks; Ham was the father of the Black Africans; and Japheth was the father of the Turks and of Gog and Magog who were cousins of the Turks. Noah prayed that the prophets and apostles would be descended from Shem and kings would be from Japheth. He prayed that the African’s color would change so that their descendants would be slaves to the Arabs and Turks.”
Al-Tabari, Vol. 2, p. 11, p. 11
Genesis 9:25-27:
“Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers. He also said, ‘Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem’.”
_____________________________________________-
Is it not amazing HOW SIMILAR noah theory and aryan theory is! So it could be fare to say, that Aryan theory is a support ideology for Noah!!!!, and that In India, all Muslims and Christians ACTIVELY PUSH ARYAN INVASION in india, because they KNOW it represents NOAHS THEORY and as such reinforces Islam and Christniaty. If out of India was promoted it would serve as the WEAPON that would undermine Mecca and the Vatican!
Thanks.
What are the Origins of Haplogroup D, India or Tibet?
Tibetans migarted out from the northeast India about 60,000 years back. There was a published journal article on this.
Thanks.
What evidence is their on the origins of D in India?
Currenly I am busy with some other research, hence cannot go back to my archives to search the exact articles. But I can remember that there was an article by Chandrashekar (spelling may vary). Moreover, very early D is found in Tibet, and as far as I can remember in Andaman also. In India also it is present with good variance.
Let me google search for you…. I got it…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17786594
Rest of the search you may explore yourself.
Thanks
Priyadarshi
Rice and Barley domestication news
Tibet is one of the centers of domestication of cultivated barley
Fei Dai et al.
The Near East Fertile Crescent is well recognized as a primary center of barley origin, diversity, and domestication. A large number of wild barleys have been collected from the Tibetan Plateau, which is characterized by an extreme environment. We used genome-wide diversity array technology markers to analyze the genotypic division between wild barley from the Near East and Tibet. Our results confirmed the existence of Tibetan wild barley and suggested that the split between the wild barleys in the Near East and those in Tibet occurred around 2.76 million years ago (Mya). To test the concept of polyphyletic domestication of barley, we characterized a set of worldwide cultivated barley. Some Chinese hulless and six-rowed barleys showed a close relationship with Tibetan wild barley but showed no common ancestor with other cultivated barley. Our data support the concept of polyphyletic domestication of cultivated barley and indicate that the Tibetan Plateau and its vicinity is one of the centers of domestication of cultivated barley. The current results may be highly significant in exploring the elite germplasm for barley breeding, especially against cold and drought stresses.
________________
Do you agree Mt Priyadarshi.
Not exactly Tibetan, but the Himalayan wild barley. Many early publications of this effect are actully there alredy, and I find nothing objectional about them. Not many wild barley srtains are available in India due to intense farming. Hence there should be no surprise if the the oldest Indian barley, rice, pig etc may be found in Tibet only.
Also, please read my new blog
http://aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/
A map of rice genome variation reveals the origin of cultivated rice (From the same study Above)
Xuehui Huang et al.
Crop domestications are long-term selection experiments that have greatly advanced human civilization. The domestication of cultivated rice (Oryza sativa L.) ranks as one of the most important developments in history. However, its origins and domestication processes are controversial and have long been debated. Here we generate genome sequences from 446 geographically diverse accessions of the wild rice species Oryza rufipogon, the immediate ancestral progenitor of cultivated rice, and from 1,083 cultivated indica and japonica varieties to construct a comprehensive map of rice genome variation. In the search for signatures of selection, we identify 55 selective sweeps that have occurred during domestication. In-depth analyses of the domestication sweeps and genome-wide patterns reveal that Oryza sativa japonica rice was first domesticated from a specific population of O. rufipogon around the middle area of the Pearl River in southern China, and that Oryza sativa indica rice was subsequently developed from crosses between japonica rice and local wild rice as the initial cultivars spread into South East and South Asia. The domestication-associated traits are analysed through high-resolution genetic mapping. This study provides an important resource for rice breeding and an effective genomics approach for crop domestication research.
I have seen this article. It is full of wrong data from archaeology and what you read is the conclusion. But the data of the study does not support such conclusion.
Please go into the details in the paper.
Thanks
Mr Priyadarshi, i have read time and again of a West Asian migration into India, can you support this, with your own work?
I have read how Brahmins are from a west Asian source rather than India, also this classification that ANI come from another source than ASI, is this true?
I noticed something odd and others on genetic forums, maybe you can clear it up.
If you clink on the link to table S6 page 7(Link below ) Onge have more ANI than ASI in both mtDNA and Y. While Vaish and Kashmiri Pandit have the opposite. How can that be?
Is this a Labelling mistake, if so what are the implications?
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v4 … 365-s1.pdf
I will look into these later. These days I am working on the camel. However I will come back to the original topics soon. Did you see my other blog on archaeology of Central Asia?
http://aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/origin-of-the-light-sivalensis-type-horse-from-india/
Many thanks
This link did not work. Please resend it.
(http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v4 … 365-s1.pdf)
CORRECT LINK, PAGE 7, TABLE S6.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7263/extref/nature08365-s1.pdf
A great paper that might interest you.
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=7539d6f345689b72&id=7539D6F345689B72!116
Download file, it will open up as PDF document.
Brief communication: New Y-chromosome binary markers improve phylogenetic resolution within haplogroup R1a1
Horolma Pamjav et al.
Abstract
Haplogroup R1a1-M198 is a major clade of Y chromosomal haplogroups which is distributed all across Eurasia. To this date, many efforts have been made to identify large SNP-based subgroups and migration patterns of this haplogroup. The origin and spread of R1a1 chromosomes in Eurasia has, however, remained unknown due to the lack of downstream SNPs within the R1a1 haplogroup. Since the discovery of R1a1-M458, this is the first scientific attempt to divide haplogroup R1a1-M198 into multiple SNP-based sub-haplogroups. We have genotyped 217 R1a1-M198 samples from seven different population groups at M458, as well as the Z280 and Z93 SNPs recently identified from the “1000 Genomes Project”.
The two additional binary markers present an effective tool because now more than 98% of the samples analyzed assign to one of the three sub-haplogroups. R1a1-M458 and R1a1-Z280 were typical for the Hungarian population groups, whereas R1a1-Z93 was typical for Malaysian Indians and the Hungarian Roma. Inner and Central Asia is an overlap zone for the R1a1-Z280 and R1a1-Z93 lineages. This pattern implies that an early differentiation zone of R1a1-M198 conceivably occurred somewhere within the Eurasian Steppes or the Middle East and Caucasus region as they lie between South Asia and Eastern Europe. The detection of the Z93 paternal genetic imprint in the Hungarian Roma gene pool is consistent with South Asian ancestry and amends the view that H1a-M82 is their only discernible paternal lineage of Indian heritage.
_____
DO AGREE WITH THIS MR PRIYADARSHI?
Ancient European DNA assessment with ‘globe4’
In a previous experiment, I showed that ADMIXTURE at K=4 tracks the same signal of Amerindian-like admixture detected with f-statistics. I encapsulated that analysis in the globe4 calculator over at the Dodecad Project blog, and decided to use it to assess a few ancient European autosomal samples:
Please note that a very variable number of SNPs was extracted from these various samples. These results should be viewed as indicative of possible patterns that might be confirmed by a more thorough analysis. Also, please consult the globe4 post for more details on the methodology behind it, and the interpretation of the 4 components.
With these various caveats, I would say that these results seem to make some sense and to be fairly consistent with the scenario of Patterson et al. (2012):
Oetzi and Gok4, the “farmers” seem to lack the Amerindian component
Ajv52, and Ajv70, the northern hunter-gatherers seem to possess it
Bra1, the Mesolithic Iberian seems to lack it as well
Bra1 also happens to be the most limited sample in terms of available SNPs. Nonetheless, this would appear broadly consistent with the idea that the “Amerindian”-like admixture in Europeans emanated from north-eastern Europe. Today, all continental Europeans seem to possess some of it, but this can be explained by migration of Ajv-like individuals and their mixtures into Western and Southern Europe from central or northern Europe for which there is ample historical and archaeological evidence (e.g., Italo-Celts, Germans, and Slavs, in addition to other, earlier phenomena).
A broader context
The absence of the Amerindian-like admixture in South Indian Brahmins and Armenians, and its paucity Kurds and Iranians might indicate that this type of ancestry was not represented in ancient Armenians and Indo-Iranians. Indeed, all these populations possess less of this admixture than those of the North Caucasus. Cypriots possess none of it as well, where the Greek_D sample, a small 2.5% portion. In a previous analysis, I estimated a historical-era estimate of North European admixture in Greeks, and this admixture presumably incorporates the signal of Amerindian-like admixture. Additionally, an Iron Age individual from Bulgaria will soon be announced as being Sardinian-like.
The sum of these factors leads me to believe that the signal of Amerindian-like admixture did not play an important role in the formation of the Graeco-Phrygians (and their Armenian relatives) and the Indo-Iranians, or at least did so to an insignificant degree. As the former expanded westward from the PIE homeland, and the latter eastward, they would have had little opportunity to encounter this type of admixture; rather, they would have admixed with Sardinian-like individuals in the west, and Ancestral South Indian (ASI)-like or East Asian individuals in the east.
On the other hand, as Indo-European groups expanded into eastern Europe, setting off a chain of events that would eventually transform most of the northern part of the continent, and, in historical times, much of the rest of it, they would have met with Ajv-like individuals carrying the signal of Amerindian-like admixture, as well as the Oetzi/Sardinian-like farmers that had spread all the way to Scandinavia by the late Neolithic. The population formed by this mixture would have carried with it the signal of Amerindian-like ancestry, and would then transpose it across the continent. The signal would become increasingly muted westward and southward, and indeed this is what we observe.
UPDATE: It is interesting to see that South Indian Brahmins (both the Metspalu et al. sample, and my Iyer_D and Iyengar_D samples) lack this admixture, while Uttar Pradesh Brahmins do not, given the rolloff evidence for a more recent admixture of the latter. This is consistent with a historical admixture event, after the migration of Brahmin groups southwards, as described in that post.
____________
I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING AN ONLINE GENETICS JOURNAL, THAT USES A SOFTWARE PROGRAM CALLED GLOBE 4, I THINK. THE journal is 100% pro western, but since your educated in such fields can you take a look and give me your opinion.
the above section was taken from
http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-min=2012-01-01T00:00:00%2B02:00&updated-max=2013-01-01T00:00:00%2B02:00&max-results=50
The Ameriandian like signal of what age is important. The Amerinindians reached the Americas through Central Asia then northeast Asia. Hence all people having Central Asian ancestry(Europeans except the Balcans people) would have it.
Brief communication: New Y-chromosome binary markers improve phylogenetic resolution within haplogroup R1a1
Horolma Pamjav et al.
Abstract
Haplogroup R1a1-M198 is a major clade of Y chromosomal haplogroups which is distributed all across Eurasia. To this date, many efforts have been made to identify large SNP-based subgroups and migration patterns of this haplogroup. The origin and spread of R1a1 chromosomes in Eurasia has, however, remained unknown due to the lack of downstream SNPs within the R1a1 haplogroup. Since the discovery of R1a1-M458, this is the first scientific attempt to divide haplogroup R1a1-M198 into multiple SNP-based sub-haplogroups. We have genotyped 217 R1a1-M198 samples from seven different population groups at M458, as well as the Z280 and Z93 SNPs recently identified from the “1000 Genomes Project”.
The two additional binary markers present an effective tool because now more than 98% of the samples analyzed assign to one of the three sub-haplogroups. R1a1-M458 and R1a1-Z280 were typical for the Hungarian population groups, whereas R1a1-Z93 was typical for Malaysian Indians and the Hungarian Roma. Inner and Central Asia is an overlap zone for the R1a1-Z280 and R1a1-Z93 lineages. This pattern implies that an early differentiation zone of R1a1-M198 conceivably occurred somewhere within the Eurasian Steppes or the Middle East and Caucasus region as they lie between South Asia and Eastern Europe. The detection of the Z93 paternal genetic imprint in the Hungarian Roma gene pool is consistent with South Asian ancestry and amends the view that H1a-M82 is their only discernible paternal lineage of Indian heritage.
_____
DO AGREE WITH THIS MR PRIYADARSHI?
This is not for us to agree or disagree. This is for expanding our existing knowledge.
Yes i agree, but how does this news affect the out of india theory?
I though r1a1 was an Indian origin haplogroup? Does this suggest a Migration from the Eurasian steppes into India?
In your opinion what side of the argument does this evidence sit on?
Out of India or Into India?
Thanks. Btw your aryaninvasion blog was very informative. Slowly a huge corpus of material is being created.
Or confirm migration from India into central asia steppes?
Hi, what references, or studies state ONLY ONE migration out of africa, recently i have been reading some studies that allege multiple waves out of africa.
Many woks on this topic. To get them all see my book. Or search the net well. Thanks for interest.
Hi, if agriculture started in India, then what evidence is there for pottery in India? My belief is pottery is directly linked to increased food production, as storage for seeds and harvest, do we have evidence of this in India?
It is said that Koldihwa and Lahuradewa were pottery Neolothic about 10,000 YBP, while Mehrgarh was only Neolithic then and 1000 or 2000 years later pottery arrived there from Ganga valley. Read my book. It has been clarified.
What is the oldest pottery found in India? I have searched the internet and only have found dates of 3-4000years centering around the Indus, whereas a study released two years found evidence of pottery in China going back 20,000years.
10,000 ybp, Koldihwa. Also Jhusi, Lahuradewa. Please search more exhaustively
Thanks. Which site is older the Vindhya mountain site, or Lahurdarewa site?
Vindhya
Journal of Archaeological Science
Volume 40, Issue 5, May 2013, Pages 2286–2297
A new approach to tracking connections between the Indus Valley and Mesopotamia: initial results of strontium isotope analyses from Harappa and Ur
J. Mark Kenoyer et al.
Based on this distribution of values, it would appear from our preliminary analysis that almost half of the individuals sampled from the Harappa cemetery have isotope values outside the local baseline (0.7158-0.7189). Most of these individuals have values below the Harappa range. In addition, there are at least three non-local individuals with higher values, including one with an extremely isotope ratio that cannot be from the Harappa region. A more detailed discussion of the Harappa samples will be presented in a future publication on the Harappa cemetery, but it is clear that many of what appear to be local individuals at Harappa are females and they are associated in burial with nearby males who are clearly not local. These preliminary patterns require further testing before major conclusions can be proposed, but it does suggest that they represent a unique population of people from multiple regions of the Indus valley or beyond.
_____________
What do you make of this study, sir?
Thanks. A very useful study. That means that Harappa was a cosmopolitan city, where many outsiders came and settled, or lived, and at least died there. More information should be awaited before we can formulate a hypothesis.
Thanks. But could this study suggest, that foreigners settled and created the Indus?
Click to access dnatribes-digest-2012-04-02.pdf
I hope you can clear up my confusion. I have read some studies stating migration from west asia, bringing agriculture and sanskrit, others stating their was no migration, and Indian culture and language didnt come from outside, in your opinion, which is the case?
If Man leaves africa, settles India, then surely all Indians are from the same stock of initial migrants?
However, time and time again, i read how North Indians have a west asian origin, or input, now which is it?, Is it a west asian input into north india, or a north Indian input into west asia?
Hope you can clear up my confusion.
ps The link i gave suggests the same, that agriculture came from west asia, now is this correct, or is this biased analyses in favour of a central asian origin for agriculture over a south asian one? Also how in the link, how can north Indians have genome from Anatolia?
Lastly, if Indus was far more developed than any other ancient site, then surely we would see Indian migrants into meso, Anatolia aswell, does this show in genetics?
One last point, was there an intrusion into north India between 6000bc and 4500bc, which is shown in archeology, from west asia?
“Thanks. But could this study suggest, that foreigners settled and created the Indus?”. Only a mad person can argue like this. The findings are from mature Harappa. You will need to show a similar typologically but older in time civilization somewher else before you can say that.
“Lastly, if Indus was far more developed than any other ancient site, then surely we would see Indian migrants into meso, Anatolia aswell, does this show in genetics?” How can you assume that this is not reflected in genetics. There are lots of works, and as I told you earlier you should read my books and articles to get the reply. I can repeat the same content again and agian to everybody and several times to you yourself.
“One last point, was there an intrusion into north India between 6000bc and 4500bc, which is shown in archeology, from west asia?” Again a sign of insanity. Do you think if you return to India, you will be an intrusion? If you return, your skeleton will reflect the radiation acquired in London. Even those merchants of Indus who had stayed in West Asia for 15 years and then come back to harappa would have shown this type of radiation pattern. So don’t get crazy and jump to conclusions. I warned you in my previous mail thay please dont make hypotheses at this stage. But you started doing mad conjecturing, and want me to waste my time after your madness.
And a last question, do you think you are an intrusion into UK?
And a last question is your real name GC? GC puts such baseless and wild hypothesis.
“The two additional binary markers present an effective tool because now more than 98% of the samples analyzed assign to one of the three sub-haplogroups. R1a1-M458 and R1a1-Z280 were typical for the Hungarian population groups, whereas R1a1-Z93 was typical for Malaysian Indians and the Hungarian Roma. Inner and Central Asia is an overlap zone for the R1a1-Z280 and R1a1-Z93 lineages. This pattern implies that an early differentiation zone of R1a1-M198 conceivably occurred somewhere within the Eurasian Steppes or the Middle East and Caucasus region as they lie between South Asia and Eastern Europe.”
To your query about this article I would like to draw your attention that the three sub-haplogroups are descendants of the parent R1a1* which originated in India, and then 3 sub-haplogroups originated from the R1a1* only after it had mifrated out. So where is the contradiction or problem? These findings do not contradict Underhill’s findings.
Thanks for the clear up. Much appreciated.
AJPA DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22256
Indian ocean crossroads: Human genetic origin and population structure in the maldives
Jeroen Pijpe et al.
The Maldives are an 850 km-long string of atolls located centrally in the northern Indian Ocean basin. Because of this geographic situation, the present-day Maldivian population has potential for uncovering genetic signatures of historic migration events in the region. We therefore studied autosomal DNA-, mitochondrial DNA-, and Y-chromosomal DNA markers in a representative sample of 141 unrelated Maldivians, with 119 from six major settlements. We found a total of 63 different mtDNA haplotypes that could be allocated to 29 mtDNA haplogroups, mostly within the M, R, and U clades. We found 66 different Y-STR haplotypes in 10 Y-chromosome haplogroups, predominantly H1, J2, L, R1a1a, and R2. Parental admixture analysis for mtDNA- and Y-haplogroup data indicates a strong genetic link between the Maldive Islands and mainland South Asia, and excludes significant gene flow from Southeast Asia. Paternal admixture from West Asia is detected, but cannot be distinguished from admixture from South Asia. Maternal admixture from West Asia is excluded. Within the Maldives, we find a subtle genetic substructure in all marker systems that is not directly related to geographic distance or linguistic dialect. We found reduced Y-STR diversity and reduced male-mediated gene flow between atolls, suggesting independent male founder effects for each atoll. Detected reduced female-mediated gene flow between atolls confirms a Maldives-specific history of matrilocality. In conclusion, our new genetic data agree with the commonly reported Maldivian ancestry in South Asia, but furthermore suggest multiple, independent immigration events and asymmetrical migration of females and males across the archipelago. Am J Phys Anthropol 000:000–000, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
___________
Just reposting this study i found.
PLoS ONE 8(4): e60015. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060015
Identification of Genetic Variation on the Horse Y Chromosome and the Tracing of Male Founder Lineages in Modern Breeds
Barbara Wallner et al.
The paternally inherited Y chromosome displays the population genetic history of males. While modern domestic horses (Equus caballus) exhibit abundant diversity within maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA, no significant Y-chromosomal sequence diversity has been detected. We used high throughput sequencing technology to identify the first polymorphic Y-chromosomal markers useful for tracing paternal lines. The nucleotide variability of the modern horse Y chromosome is extremely low, resulting in six haplotypes (HT), all clearly distinct from the Przewalski horse (E. przewalskii). The most widespread HT1 is ancestral and the other five haplotypes apparently arose on the background of HT1 by mutation or gene conversion after domestication. Two haplotypes (HT2 and HT3) are widely distributed at high frequencies among modern European horse breeds. Using pedigree information, we trace the distribution of Y-haplotype diversity to particular founders. The mutation leading to HT3 occurred in the germline of the famous English Thoroughbred stallion “Eclipse” or his son or grandson and its prevalence demonstrates the influence of this popular paternal line on modern sport horse breeds. The pervasive introgression of Thoroughbred stallions during the last 200 years to refine autochthonous breeds has strongly affected the distribution of Y-chromosomal variation in modern horse breeds and has led to the replacement of autochthonous Y chromosomes. Only a few northern European breeds bear unique variants at high frequencies or fixed within but not shared among breeds. Our Y-chromosomal data complement the well established mtDNA lineages and document the male side of the genetic history of modern horse breeds and breeding practices.
_____
Reposting a study i found. thanks.
Good article. many thanks indeed.
Deep common ancestry of Eurasiatic languages (Pagel et al. 2013)
From the paper:
Posterior support at internal nodes of the tree is low, as we might expect of a linguistic tree of this age, but all exceed chance expectations (SI Text) and the internal topology does not affect our estimates of the age of the superfamily. All inferred ages must be treated with caution but our estimates are consistent with proposals linking the near concomitant spread of the language families that comprise this group to the retreat of glaciers in Eurasia at the end of the last ice age ~15 kya (4, 17). The 95% CIs around the root-age are consistent with the initial separation of these families occurring before the development of agriculture beginning ~11 kya (26).
Ultraconserved words point to deep language ancestry across Eurasia
Mark Pagel et al.
The search for ever deeper relationships among the World’s languages is bedeviled by the fact that most words evolve too rapidly to preserve evidence of their ancestry beyond 5,000 to 9,000 y. On the other hand, quantitative modeling indicates that some “ultraconserved” words exist that might be used to find evidence for deep linguistic relationships beyond that time barrier. Here we use a statistical model, which takes into account the frequency with which words are used in common everyday speech, to predict the existence of a set of such highly conserved words among seven language families of Eurasia postulated to form a linguistic superfamily that evolved from a common ancestor around 15,000 y ago. We derive a dated phylogenetic tree of this proposed superfamily with a time-depth of ∼14,450 y, implying that some frequently used words have been retained in related forms since the end of the last ice age. Words used more than once per 1,000 in everyday speech were 7- to 10-times more likely to show deep ancestry on this tree. Our results suggest a remarkable fidelity in the transmission of some words and give theoretical justification to the search for features of language that might be preserved across wide spans of time and geography.
______________
What is your opinion of the study?
Work is good, conclusions need changed. Eurasiatic must be placed at 50,000 BP in time scale after which the Eurasian parent population fragmented. I am making a pp slide presentation on this article. Will be placed here soon.
Genetic and archaeological perspectives on the initial modern human colonization of southern Asia
Paul Mellarsa,b,1,
Kevin C. Goric,d,
Martin Carre,f,
Pedro A. Soaresg, and
Martin B. Richardse,f,1
Author Affiliations
Edited by Richard G. Klein, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved May 8, 2013 (received for review April 1, 2013)
Abstract
It has been argued recently that the initial dispersal of anatomically modern humans from Africa to southern Asia occurred before the volcanic “supereruption” of the Mount Toba volcano (Sumatra) at ∼74,000 y before present (B.P.)—possibly as early as 120,000 y B.P. We show here that this “pre-Toba” dispersal model is in serious conflict with both the most recent genetic evidence from both Africa and Asia and the archaeological evidence from South Asian sites. We present an alternative model based on a combination of genetic analyses and recent archaeological evidence from South Asia and Africa. These data support a coastally oriented dispersal of modern humans from eastern Africa to southern Asia ∼60–50 thousand years ago (ka). This was associated with distinctively African microlithic and “backed-segment” technologies analogous to the African “Howiesons Poort” and related technologies, together with a range of distinctively “modern” cultural and symbolic features (highly shaped bone tools, personal ornaments, abstract artistic motifs, microblade technology, etc.), similar to those that accompanied the replacement of “archaic” Neanderthal by anatomically modern human populations in other regions of western Eurasia at a broadly similar date.
___________________
I have table that i could not post onto the comment section from the same study. I have posted some of the results.
R = South Asia = 62,300yrs
R = S South Asia = 57,000yrs
R = East Asia = 54,00
R = East Asia = 55,700
N= Arabia/SouthWestAsia = 65,100
_______
Is it my mistake in thinking that haplogroup N could have a South Asian origin, or was this never the case?
One last thing sir,
The study states that there where no human populations in india at the time of toba, do you agree with this?
Please locate and post links to all the articles by Michael Petraglia about Pre-Toba Indian civilization in this blog. They answer your questions.
Well these purely conjectural articles are published every month even in the reputed journals. All depends on contacts.
This article is full of mistake, if you really read it carefully.
Find out the articles on LM3 DNA and post them please. These days I do not get much time to service my blogs.
Thanks again.
Premendra Ji,
Could you please help me my expanding on the paragraph below, that posted as a comment. Are there any research papers, evidence etc to prove the points you’ve mentioned here. a) Separation of Sanskrit and Tamil b) Separation at the rough timeline stipulated below. c) Details of exact Climate barriers and how they became responsible for development of separate language families.
——————
Sanskrit and Tamil separated about 25,000 years back to 20,000 years back. The climatic barriers imposed by Last Glacial Maximum caused evolution of three distinct language families in three regions of India. Dravidian in the south, Proto-Indo-European in the north (up to Western Bihar) and the Austro-Asiatic in the region of Orissa, Chattisgarh and Jharkhand, also possibly some regions of Andhra, and some regions of Bengal.
I am still working on it systemetically to build a complete theory.
——————
I hope to hear back from you soon.
Regards,
Virendra
I am working on it.I do not think anyone before me has ever done a systematic multi-disciplinary study of the topic. However if you correlate works in the different disciplines, you get the answer. However some facts have to be told by someone the first. And if I say many things for the first time, I do not think I am committing a sin. Many people have done things “first” in the world so far. My work is intended for provoking younger and more energetic people to further dig the matters I have just touched. Thanks for comments. Regards.
Premendra
Premendra ji,
Thanks for taking this up and apologies that I disappeared after dropping this on your desk.
Have you read Diana Hawkey’s “peopling of South Asia: Evidence of affinities and microevolution of prehistoric populations of India and Sri Lanka.”
I couldn’t find this paper/book but it has been quoted in “Dental Evolution in Protohistoric Indians” by S R Walimbe; which is available at – http://www.come2mywebsite.com/School/e78729b4-601d-4015-9c1b-e5b62051e9af/image/103.pdf
Allow me to share some lines :
Using certain dental morphological traits Diana Hawkey has examined the relationships between the South Asian populations and other Late Pleistocene/Holocene world populations. This enables an insight into the role of South Asian populations in the process of the peopling of the world.
Hawkey opines that there is no substantial amount of gene flow between the Indus and the Deccan farming/herding communities. In other words, the Deccan Neolithic-Chalcolithic groups are stated to have evolved directly from the hunting-gathering Mesolithic communities.
Hawkey writes “both the Indus and the Deccan farming/herding communities share similarities with Indian Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, reflecting a common origin for these protohistoric communities.”
Her study states that the inhabitants of the IVC appear most likely the descendants of the indigenous hunter-gather populations of South Asia, rather than intrusive (and genetically distinct) populations from the West.
It also underlines that there is genetic homogeneity in the Indus people, though this doesn’t qualify them to be exclusively dravidians. She clarifies “The confusing of a linguistically-defined population (‘Dravidian’) with a biological population (Indus) has plagued Indian population affinity research for many years.”
The peoples of the Indus Civilization are dentally similar not only to modern Dravidian-speakers (of South India, Sri Lankan Tamil), but also to the Indo-European (Afghanistan/Pakistan, Bengal, Sri Lankan Sinhalese), and Austro-Asiatic (East India) groups as well. The dental data thus supports the hypothesis that the IVC population was multi-linguistic, and probably ethnically diverse
Though the skeletal material at Harappa is coming from three different deposits, yet the population has been found to belong to a single morphometrically homogenous series.
Continuing from the point about minimal gene flow, it must be stated that few similarities that are seen between the Indus sample and contemporaneous peoples of the Deccan farming-herding cultures, are due to cultural contacts (influencing food habits) rather than biological in nature.
Evidence for contact between the two groups, based on economic/trade exchange has been observed in the archaeological record (Possehl, 1976; Kennedy and Possehl, 1979).
Her analysis of the data rather suggests the origins of the Iron Age populations within central and southern peninsular India, and not from north-western regions.
Does the study support a reasonable biological isolation between Indus and Deccan region populations?
Regards,
Virendra
Indigenous and foreign Y-chromosomes characterize the Lingayat and Vokkaliga populations of Southwest India
Shilpa Chennakrishnaiah et al.
Previous studies have shown that India’s vast coastal rim played an important role in the dispersal of modern humans out of Africa but the Karnataka state, which is located on the southwest coast of India, remains poorly characterized genetically. In the present study, two Dravidian populations, namely Lingayat (N = 101) and Vokkaliga (N = 102), who represent the two major communities of the Karnataka state, were examined using high-resolution analyses of Y-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphisms (Y-SNPs) and seventeen short tandem repeat (Y-STR) loci. Our results revealed that the majority of the Lingayat and Vokkaliga paternal gene pools are composed of four Y-chromosomal haplogroups (H, L, F* and R2) that are frequent in the Indian subcontinent. The high level of L1-M76 chromosomes in the Vokkaligas suggests an agricultural expansion in the region, while the predominance of R1a1a1b2-Z93 and J2a-M410 lineages in the Lingayat indicates gene flow from neighboring south Indian populations and West Asia, respectively. Lingayat (0.9981) also exhibits a relatively high haplotype diversity compared to Vokkaliga (0.9901), supporting the historical record that the Lingayat originated from multiple source populations. In addition, we detected ancient lineages such as F*-M213, H*-M69 and C*-M216 that may be indicative of genetic signatures of the earliest settlers who reached India after their migration out of Africa.
The virtual absence of Z283 subclades, namely Z280 and M458, and the total representation of R1a1a-derived samples by the Z93 marker in our dataset support an earlier observation that the M198 chromosome likely differentiated in the region between Eastern Europe and South Asia (Pamjav et al., 2012), and subsequently expanded in opposite directions. However, it will require additional R1a1a* samples from different populations across Eurasia to comprehensively evaluate the geographic origins, distribution and ethno-linguistic associations of the individual M198-derived lineages (Pamjav et al., 2012).
In particular, subclade J2a-M410 is believed to have entered through the northwestern corridor and subsequently diffused to the south and east (Sahoo et al., 2006 and Thangaraj et al., 2010). This haplogroup is present exclusively in the Lingayat (6.93%), except for one individual from Vokkaliga, suggesting gene flow from West Asia (Sahoo et al., 2006 and Thangaraj et al., 2010).
________________________
Was there west asian migrations into india that effected the Indian genepool? was R-Z93 and J2a-M410 an intrusion into India? Thanks.
Middle Palaeolithic occupation in the Thar Desert during the Upper Pleistocene: the signature of a modern human exit out of Africa?
James Blinkhorn et al.
The Thar Desert marks the transition from the Saharo-Arabian deserts to the Oriental biogeographical zone and is therefore an important location in understanding hominin occupation and dispersal during the Upper Pleistocene. Here, we report the discovery of stratified Middle Palaeolithic assemblages at Katoati in the north-eastern Thar Desert, dating to Marine Isotope Stages (MIS) 5 and the MIS 4–3 boundary, during periods of enhanced humidity. Hominins procured cobbles from gravels at the site as evidenced by early stages of stone tool reduction, with a component of more formalised point production. The MIS 5c assemblages at Katoati represent the earliest securely dated Middle Palaeolithic occupation of South Asia. Distinctive artefacts identified in both MIS 5 and MIS 4–3 boundary horizons match technological entities observed in Middle Palaeolithic assemblages in South Asia, Arabia and Middle Stone Age sites in the Sahara. The evidence from Katoati is consistent with arguments for the dispersal of Homo sapiens populations from Africa across southern Asia using Middle Palaeolithic technologies.
Thanks for the highly informative material.
A quick question was R-Z93 and J2a-M410 an intrusion into India? Thanks.
Humans reached Asia in two waves 2011
Some early migrants interbred with mysterious Neandertal sister group
DNA extracted from a 40,000-year-old pinky bone and a 100-year-old lock of hair has provided glimpses of two Stone Age human migrations to Asia, including an early foray marked by interbreeding between ancient people and some mysterious, well-traveled members of the human evolutionary family.
Denisovans, an ancient humanlike population previously identified via nuclear DNA taken from a finger bone excavated in Siberia’s Denisova Cave, contributed a small portion of genes to living New Guineans, Australian aborigines, two aboriginal groups in the Philippines and populations on several nearby islands, say geneticist David Reich of Harvard Medical School in Boston and his colleagues.
Earlier analyses of modern human mitochondrial DNA, which is maternally inherited, had suggested that a single wave of humans took a southern coastal route from Africa to Asia around 65,000 years ago. Patterns of nuclear DNA alterations in an ancient Denisovan and in living groups instead point to at least two Stone Age human migrations into Asia, Reich’s team reports in a paper published online September 22 in the American Journal of Human Genetics.
________________________________
In your opinion was there one single migration of out of africa or two?
Thanks for informing about the important publication. In fact there were not one, or two but three or four migrations. In each inter-glacial period, at least one migration took place which has survived till date. Route of all the surviving past migrations were south-south. However it is impossible to say from the available data whether the migrations were Afro-India or Indo-African. Assumption that the African Eve Lucy lived in India can be better supported by the available data than the current assumption that she lived in Africa. Even if the African Eve may have lived in Africa, her ancestors certainly lived in India, if we do not ignore the LM3 mtDNA study by Adcock.
Thanks for the clarification, so there were more than one out of africa migration, but only one that survived enough to settle India which then kick started the massive population expansion.
I have just one nagging question, i know realize that india was the most likely source for west asia, and europe, but having discussion with others, they keep on addressing the R-Z93 marker, which they state was the marker that brought west asian agriculture, and languages into India.
I do not possess enough knowledge to refute this, i do know that r r1a r1a1a are all Indian lineages, so in your opinion this R-Z93 marker what does it signify if anything at all? …Is it down to a pro western bias agenda?
Thanks again.
I was hoping you could clarify another issue. If cows where domesticated in India, surely the genetic mutation to drink milk would have occured within the Indian continent, however this study states such mutation accord in europe. So i am a right in assuming that this genetic mutation then migrated back into India at some point?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Archaeology: The milk revolution
When a single genetic mutation first let ancient Europeans drink milk, it set the stage for a continental upheaval.
In the 1970s, archaeologist Peter Bogucki was excavating a Stone Age site in the fertile plains of central Poland when he came across an assortment of odd artefacts. The people who had lived there around 7,000 years ago were among central Europe’s first farmers, and they had left behind fragments of pottery dotted with tiny holes. It looked as though the coarse red clay had been baked while pierced with pieces of straw.
Looking back through the archaeological literature, Bogucki found other examples of ancient perforated pottery. “They were so unusual — people would almost always include them in publications,” says Bogucki, now at Princeton University in New Jersey. He had seen something similar at a friend’s house that was used for straining cheese, so he speculated that the pottery might be connected with cheese-making. But he had no way to test his idea.
Free podcast
Mark Thomas talks about human evolution and the rise of dairying.
00:00
Go to full podcast
The mystery potsherds sat in storage until 2011, when Mélanie Roffet-Salque pulled them out and analysed fatty residues preserved in the clay. Roffet-Salque, a geochemist at the University of Bristol, UK, found signatures of abundant milk fats — evidence that the early farmers had used the pottery as sieves to separate fatty milk solids from liquid whey. That makes the Polish relics the oldest known evidence of cheese-making in the world1.
Related stories
Pottery shards put a date on Africa’s dairying
Ancient DNA solves milk mystery
Human evolution: How Africa learned to love the cow
More related stories
Roffet-Salque’s sleuthing is part of a wave of discoveries about the history of milk in Europe. Many of them have come from a €3.3-million (US$4.4-million) project that started in 2009 and has involved archaeologists, chemists and geneticists. The findings from this group illuminate the profound ways that dairy products have shaped human settlement on the continent.
During the most recent ice age, milk was essentially a toxin to adults because — unlike children — they could not produce the lactase enzyme required to break down lactose, the main sugar in milk. But as farming started to replace hunting and gathering in the Middle East around 11,000 years ago, cattle herders learned how to reduce lactose in dairy products to tolerable levels by fermenting milk to make cheese or yogurt. Several thousand years later, a genetic mutation spread through Europe that gave people the ability to produce lactase — and drink milk — throughout their lives. That adaptation opened up a rich new source of nutrition that could have sustained communities when harvests failed.
This two-step milk revolution may have been a prime factor in allowing bands of farmers and herders from the south to sweep through Europe and displace the hunter-gatherer cultures that had lived there for millennia. “They spread really rapidly into northern Europe from an archaeological point of view,” says Mark Thomas, a population geneticist at University College London. That wave of emigration left an enduring imprint on Europe, where, unlike in many regions of the world, most people can now tolerate milk. “It could be that a large proportion of Europeans are descended from the first lactase-persistent dairy farmers in Europe,” says Thomas.
Strong stomachs
Young children almost universally produce lactase and can digest the lactose in their mother’s milk. But as they mature, most switch off the lactase gene. Only 35% of the human population can digest lactose beyond the age of about seven or eight (ref. 2). “If you’re lactose intolerant and you drink half a pint of milk, you’re going to be really ill. Explosive diarrhoea — dysentery essentially,” says Oliver Craig, an archaeologist at the University of York, UK. “I’m not saying it’s lethal, but it’s quite unpleasant.”
Expand
MAP SOURCE: REF. 2
Most people who retain the ability to digest milk can trace their ancestry to Europe, where the trait seems to be linked to a single nucleotide in which the DNA base cytosine changed to thymine in a genomic region not far from the lactase gene. There are other pockets of lactase persistence in West Africa (see Nature 444, 994–996; 2006), the Middle East and south Asia that seem to be linked to separate mutations3 (see ‘Lactase hotspots’).
The single-nucleotide switch in Europe happened relatively recently. Thomas and his colleagues estimated the timing by looking at genetic variations in modern populations and running computer simulations of how the related genetic mutation might have spread through ancient populations4. They proposed that the trait of lactase persistence, dubbed the LP allele, emerged about 7,500 years ago in the broad, fertile plains of Hungary.
Powerful gene
Once the LP allele appeared, it offered a major selective advantage. In a 2004 study5, researchers estimated that people with the mutation would have produced up to 19% more fertile offspring than those who lacked it. The researchers called that degree of selection “among the strongest yet seen for any gene in the genome”.
Compounded over several hundred generations, that advantage could help a population to take over a continent. But only if “the population has a supply of fresh milk and is dairying”, says Thomas. “It’s gene–culture co-evolution. They feed off of each other.”
To investigate the history of that interaction, Thomas teamed up with Joachim Burger, a palaeogeneticist at the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz in Germany, and Matthew Collins, a bioarchaeologist at the University of York. They organized a multidisciplinary project called LeCHE (Lactase Persistence in the early Cultural History of Europe), which brought together a dozen early-career researchers from around Europe.
By studying human molecular biology and the archaeology and chemistry of ancient pottery, LeCHE participants also hoped to address a key issue about the origins of modern Europeans. “It’s been an enduring question in archaeology — whether we’re descended from Middle Eastern farmers or indigenous hunter-gatherers,” says Thomas. The argument boils down to evolution versus replacement. Did native populations of hunter-gatherers in Europe take up farming and herding? Or was there an influx of agricultural colonists who outcompeted the locals, thanks to a combination of genes and technology?
One strand of evidence came from studies of animal bones found at archaeological sites. If cattle are raised primarily for dairying, calves are generally slaughtered before their first birthday so that their mothers can be milked. But cattle raised mainly for meat are killed later, when they have reached their full size. (The pattern, if not the ages, is similar for sheep and goats, which were part of the dairying revolution.)
Expand
MAP SOURCE: REF. 2; POT PHOTOGRAPH: REF. 1
On the basis of studies of growth patterns in bones, LeCHE participant Jean-Denis Vigne, an archaeozoologist at the French National Museum of Natural History in Paris, suggests that dairying in the Middle East may go all the way back to when humans first started domesticating animals there, about 10,500 years ago6. That would place it just after the Middle Eastern Neolithic transition — when an economy based on hunter-gathering gave way to one devoted to agriculture. Dairying, says Roz Gillis, also an archaeozoologist at the Paris museum, “may have been one of the reasons why human populations began trapping and keeping ruminants such as cattle, sheep and goats”. (See ‘Dairy diaspora’.)
Dairying then expanded in concert with the Neolithic transition, says Gillis, who has looked at bone growth at 150 sites in Europe and Anatolia (modern Turkey). As agriculture spread from Anatolia to northern Europe over roughly two millennia, dairying followed a similar pattern.
On their own, the growth patterns do not say whether the Neolithic transition in Europe happened through evolution or replacement, but cattle bones offer important clues. In a precursor study7, Burger and several other LeCHE participants found that domesticated cattle at Neolithic sites in Europe were most closely related to cows from the Middle East, rather than indigenous wild aurochs. This is a strong indication that incoming herders brought their cattle with them, rather than domesticating locally, says Burger. A similar story is emerging from studies of ancient human DNA recovered at a few sites in central Europe, which suggest that Neolithic farmers were not descended from the hunter-gatherers who lived there before8.
Taken together, the data help to resolve the origins of the first European farmers. “For a long time, the mainstream of continental European archaeology said Mesolithic hunter-gatherers developed into Neolithic farmers,” says Burger. “We basically showed they were completely different.”
Milk or meat
Given that dairying in the Middle East started thousands of years before the LP allele emerged in Europe, ancient herders must have found ways to reduce lactose concentrations in milk. It seems likely that they did so by making cheese or yogurt. (Fermented cheeses such as feta and cheddar have a small fraction of the lactose found in fresh milk; aged hard cheeses similar to Parmesan have hardly any.)
To test that theory, LeCHE researchers ran chemical tests on ancient pottery. The coarse, porous clay contains enough residues for chemists to distinguish what type of fat was absorbed during the cooking process: whether it was from meat or milk, and from ruminants such as cows, sheep and goats or from other animals. “That gave us a way into saying what types of things were being cooked,” says Richard Evershed, a chemist at the University of Bristol.
“It’s been an enduring question in archaeology — whether we’re descended from Middle Eastern farmers or indigenous hunter-gatherers.”
Evershed and his LeCHE collaborators found milk fat on pottery in the Middle Eastern Fertile Crescent going back at least 8,500 years9, and Roffet-Salque’s work on the Polish pottery1offers clear evidence that herders in Europe were producing cheese to supplement their diets between 6,800 and 7,400 years ago. By then, dairy had become a component of the Neolithic diet, but it was not yet a dominant part of the economy.
That next step happened slowly, and it seems to have required the spread of lactase persistence. The LP allele did not become common in the population until some time after it first emerged: Burger has looked for the mutation in samples of ancient human DNA and has found it only as far back as 6,500 years ago in northern Germany.
Models created by LeCHE participant Pascale Gerbault, a population geneticist at University College London, explain how the trait might have spread. As Middle Eastern Neolithic cultures moved into Europe, their farming and herding technologies helped them to out-compete the local hunter-gatherers. And as the southerners pushed north, says Gerbault, the LP allele ‘surfed’ the wave of migration.
Lactase persistence had a harder time becoming established in parts of southern Europe, because Neolithic farmers had settled there before the mutation appeared. But as the agricultural society expanded northwards and westwards into new territory, the advantage provided by lactase persistence had a big impact. “As the population grows quickly at the edge of the wave, the allele can increase in frequency,” says Gerbault.
The remnants of that pattern are still visible today. In southern Europe, lactase persistence is relatively rare — less than 40% in Greece and Turkey. In Britain and Scandinavia, by contrast, more than 90% of adults can digest milk.
Cattle conquest
By the late Neolithic and early Bronze Age, around 5,000 years ago, the LP allele was prevalent across most of northern and central Europe, and cattle herding had become a dominant part of the culture. “They discover this way of life, and once they can really get the nutritional benefits they increase or intensify herding as well,” says Burger. Cattle bones represent more than two-thirds of the animal bones in many late Neolithic and early Bronze Age archaeological sites in central and northern Europe.
The LeCHE researchers are still puzzling out exactly why the ability to consume milk offered such an advantage in these regions. Thomas suggests that, as people moved north, milk would have been a hedge against famine. Dairy products — which could be stored for longer in colder climes — provided rich sources of calories that were independent of growing seasons or bad harvests.
Others think that milk may have helped, particularly in the north, because of its relatively high concentration of vitamin D, a nutrient that can help to ward off diseases such as rickets. Humans synthesize vitamin D naturally only when exposed to the sun, which makes it difficult for northerners to make enough during winter months. But lactase persistence also took root in sunny Spain, casting vitamin D’s role into doubt.
The LeCHE project may offer a model for how archaeological questions can be answered using a variety of disciplines and tools. “They have got a lot of different tentacles — archaeology, palaeoanthropology, ancient DNA and modern DNA, chemical analysis — all focused on one single question,” says Ian Barnes, a palaeogeneticist at Royal Holloway, University of London, who is not involved in the project. “There are lots of other dietary changes which could be studied in this way.”
The approach could, for example, help to tease apart the origins of amylase, an enzyme that helps to break down starch. Researchers have suggested that the development of the enzyme may have followed — or made possible — the increasing appetite for grain that accompanied the growth of agriculture. Scientists also want to trace the evolution of alcohol dehydrogenase, which is crucial to the breakdown of alcohol and could reveal the origins of humanity’s thirst for drink.
Some of the LeCHE participants are now probing further back in time, as part of a project named BEAN (Bridging the European and Anatolian Neolithic), which is looking at how the first farmers and herders made their way into Europe. Burger, Thomas and their BEAN collaborators will be in Turkey this summer, tracing the origins of the Neolithic using computer models and ancient-DNA analysis in the hope of better understanding who the early farmers were, and when they arrived in Europe.
Along the way, they will encounter beyaz peynir, a salty sheep’s-milk cheese eaten with nearly every Turkish breakfast. It is probably much like the cheese that Neolithic farmers in the region would have eaten some 8,000 years ago — long before the march of lactase persistence allowed people to drink fresh milk.
f you have time can you please give me some clarification.
If zebu cows where domesticated in India, surely the genetic mutation to drink milk would have occured within the Indian continent, however this study states such mutation accord in europe. So i am a right in assuming that this genetic mutation then migrated back into India at some point, but surely that would go against the genetic data?
Much appreciative if you have the time to answer, thanks.
________________
”The final tally included almost 2,300 individuals from 105 different tribes and castes, five different language families, 22 of 28 states, and even one group from Nepal. Romero and a team of researchers from the United Kingdom, Estonia, India, and the United States then zeroed in on the chromosomal region where most of the previously-detected lactose tolerance mutations are located. To the authors’ surprise, what they found there was not a new India-specific mutation, but a familiar genetic pattern – a single switch from C to T, characteristic of the common European mutation.
“We thought they would have a different mutation, because they’ve had cattle for a long time and they’ve been drinking milk,” Gallego Romero said. “But it was all European, except for a couple mutations that we haven’t proven yet do anything. We were very shocked by that, it was interesting.”
The finding suggests that the most common lactose tolerance mutation made a two-way migration out of the Middle East less than 10,000 years ago. While the mutation spread across Europe, another explorer must have brought the mutation eastward to India – likely traveling along the coast of the Persian Gulf where other pockets of the same mutation have been found, Gallego Romero said. Once the ability to take nourishment from milk in adulthood met the pastoralist cattle-herding cultures of northwest India, it made for the perfect evolutionary mix.
“All you need is a few people,” Gallego Romero said. “It’s not disadvantageous if you’re not drinking milk, it’s just sitting there, so it’s going to drift like anything else that’s neutral and then it’s going to hit some advantageous population and spread,” Gallego Romero said. “So then you have to ask the important question: Who decided to start drinking milk from a cow the first time?”
Another surprising fact was turned up by the researchers when they measure just how common the lactose tolerance mutation was among Indian populations. The mutation was found in less than 1 out of 5 individuals tested, a figure far lower than anticipated by many of the project’s Indian advisors.
That was a bogus work. Much of the conclusions are based on non-existent (un-)facts. The date of archaeologica evidence for domestication in India has been taken as 5000 BP (3000 BC) while that for Hungary (Central Europe) has taken as 5,500 BP–both the figures are wrong. One can prove anything by cooking data.
The lactose tolerance gene is an example of pre-adaptation (please read that in any appropriate reference). This gene mutation had occurred by 35000 BP. When a gene increase in frequency in response to any environmental factor including the availability or the absence of any food, the word positive-selection is applied, not the word-genetic drift. You also need to read and know the process of positive-selection. Positive selection only operates by the action of the negative-selection on the alleles of the genes. And negative-selection only operates by acting as a serial killer for the allelic genes.
Thus one will have to prove that the absence of the Lactase gene resulted in massive deaths of those who did not have the Lactase Gene. For this to happen, dairying is not the factor, but “forced subsistence on the dairy product milk” because of absence of alternative complete diet.
Unfortunately many molecular biologists are working and occupying positions and getting published even without having the appropriate basic knowledge or understanding of the evolutionary processes and principles.
I hope if you read these things and understand them, you will be able to understand the cheating involved in these articles, and the thoroughly unreliable nature of their contents. These are meant only to sensationalize their Eurocentric whims, fantasies and fancies.
Thanks.
Thanks. Through a dialogue with you i now know the SPIN and DISTORTIONS the west plants in such studies. And it makes it even more important that we defend the truth of humans.
”We are to teach false history”,
Thomas Macauley, Christian key founder of Hindu Education or Secular as we know it.
(i am very grateful i crossed your path.)
AJHG doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.07.006
Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India
Priya Moorjani et al.
Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.
It is also important to emphasize what our study has not shown. Although we have documented evidence for mixture in India between about 1,900 and 4,200 years BP, this does not imply migration from West Eurasia into India during this time. On the contrary, a recent study that searched for West Eurasian groups most closely related to the ANI ancestors of Indians failed to find any evidence for shared ancestry between the ANI and groups in West Eurasia within the past 12,500 years3 (although it is possible that with further sampling and new methods such relatedness might be detected). An alternative possibility that is also consistent with our data is that the ANI and ASI were both living in or near South Asia for a substantial period prior to their mixture. Such a pattern has been documented elsewhere; for example, ancient DNA studies of northern Europeans have shown that Neolithic farmers originating in Western Asia migrated to Europe about 7,500 years BP but did not mix with local hunter gatherers until thousands of years later to form the present-day populations of northern Europe.15, 16, 44 and 45
_______________________
Do you still agree that both ANI and ASI are from AI?
In your paper Understanding Reich Et Al 2009 you suggest that
”Reich et al examined six Indo-European and Dravidian speaking groups (caste or tribe), andfound that their founder event dated back to about thirtygenerations back (p. 1 pdf). Each generation is considered about18 to 20 years. Hence these castes were founded about 600years back. This figure is consistent with findings from historythat endogamous caste system started only during the latemedieval period in India”
1.But the new paper in the above comment, suggest endogamous took place between years back 1,900 and 4,200 back. What do you think the time line is?
2.Also in the paper it states that both ASI and ANI where living in south asia at the same time, am i correct in thinking that both ASI and ANI stem from one ancestoral indian group AI, and do you think this admixture took place between 1,900 and 4,200 years ago?
3.However in this other paper below it suggests ANI and ASI mixed about 12,500years ago. In your opinion when did this admixture occur?.
Mait Metspalu of Evolutionary Biology Group of Estonia studied 600,000 Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) markers among 30 ethnic groups in India:
”Thus the mixing of the ANI and ASI did not happen 140 generations before as was believed, but probably more than 500 generations back (Each generation is 25 years). ”
— Mait Metspalu of Evolutionary Biology Group of Estonia studied 600,000 Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) markers among 30 ethnic groups in India:
4. Also the paper it says Indians stem from two ”Divergent” groups how divergent are these groups since in this paper below it states north indian stem from south indians?
(Metspalu, Gyaneshwer Chaubey et al, American Journal of Human Genetics, Dec. 2011)
Genetic study finds no evidence for Aryan Migration Theory on the contrary, South Indians migrated to north and South Asians migrated into Eurasia. The study is comprehensive, unlike previous studies of human genome and is unique, because it focuses on large number of populations in South Asia, and India, a region which harbours one of the highest levels of genetic diversity in Eurasia and currently accounts for one sixth of human population in the world.Two genetic components among Indians are observed: one is restricted to India and explains 50% genetic ancestry of Indian populations , while, the second which spread to West Asia and Caucasus region. Technically called “haplotype diversity”, it is a measure of the origin of the genetic component. The component which spread beyond India has significantly higher haplotype diversity in India than in any other part of world. This is clear proof that this genetic component originated in India and then spread to West Asia and Caucasus.
___________________________
If you have time only, would be very grateful if you could clarify my questions? Thanks you very much.
People across India mixed and mated without class, caste, or ethnic barriers for about 2,300 years until strict endogamy emerged across the subcontinent around the 2nd century AD, a new genetic study has suggested.
The study by scientists at the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, and the Harvard Medical School has indicated a staggering level of population admixture that they say had not been previously suspected.
The scientists said that ancient, pervasive and widespread mixture of genes showed up in the genetic makeup of virtually all of India’s present-day populations — upper-castes, lower-castes, and even tribes such as Bhils of Gujarat, the Kallars of Tamil Nadu, and another tribe from Uttar Pradesh, long viewed as genetically isolated.
The study, based on the analysis of the genetic make-up of 571 persons from 73 well-defined ethno-linguistic groups — 71 from India and two from Pakistan — has found evidence of widespread population mixture between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago.
“With the dawn of endogamy, genetic mixing became rare — that’s what we see in present-day Indian genomes,” Priya Moorjani, a graduate student at the Harvard Medical School and the first author of the study, told The Telegraph. The findings will be published tomorrow in the American Journal of Human Genetics.
The study has also indicated tentative dates when specific population groups turned to endogamy — the Vysyas in Andhra for instance have the longest period of endogamy, or genetic isolation, nearly 3000 years. The Bhils in Gujarat have remained largely isolated for nearly 2200 years.
The ancestors of Kshatriyas in Uttar Pradesh were mixing with other groups at least until 2,200 years ago, the ancestors of Brahmins in Uttar Pradesh were doing so at least until 1,885 years ago, as did those of the Sindhis of Pakistan up to 1,940 years ago.
Moorjani, who completed a Bachelor of Engineering in computer science in Mumbai before pursuing a PhD in genetics in the US, said the new study was consistent with the content of the ancient Indian texts, including the Rig Veda.
“The oldest text in India, the Rig Veda, does not mention a caste system at all, and suggests there was substantial social movement of populations, as reflected in the acceptance of people with non-Indo-European names as chieftains and poets,” she said.
“The class system, of grouping people based on occupational roles, is first mentioned only in the book 10 of Rig Veda that was likely to have been composed later. The caste system of endogamous groups is, however, only mentioned centuries later in the law code of Manu, or Manusmriti, that forbids mixing between caste groups.”
“We’ve known there was admixture and co-mingling of populations, but we’ll need more evidence to establish the chronology,” said T.K. Venkatasubramanian, a former professor of ancient Indian history at the University of Delhi.
“The date for the code of Manu is not clear, but it is accepted as having been around in the pre-Christian era, after the advent of the iron age which began in India around 1000 BC.”
The CCMB’s Thangaraj said long periods of endogamy had led to concentration of certain deleterious genetic mutations in some populations.
“This genetic datatells us a three-part cultural and historical story,” said Reich, who is also an associate member of the Broad Institute. “Prior to about 4000 years ago there was no mixture. After that, widespread mixture affected almost every group in India, even the most isolated tribal groups. And finally, endogamy set in and froze everything in place.”
“The fact that every population in India evolved from randomly mixed populations suggests that social classifications like the caste system are not likely to have existed in the same way before the mixture,” said co–senior author Lalji Singh, currently of Banaras Hindu University, in Varanasi, India, and formerly of the CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology. “Thus, the present-day structure of the caste system came into being only relatively recently in Indian history.”*
But once established, the caste system became genetically effective, the researchers observed. Mixture across groups became very rare.
“An important consequence of these results is that the high incidence of genetic and population-specific diseases that is characteristic of present-day India is likely to have increased only in the last few thousand years when groups in India started following strict endogamous marriage,” said co–first author Kumarasamy Thangaraj, of the CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, India.**
Thanks Sharmalondon. Please send me the pdf versions of the journals you have mentioned. I shall be grateful for that. Only after studying them I will be able to make any certain comment. my email is priyadarshi101@hotmail.com
Regards
Priyadarshi
The only link i can give you is http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929713003248
which contains the PDF.
Hi over the years reading genetic information i have been able to reconstruct human migration to what i think happened. I wanted you to read my thoughts and let me know if you think i am correct. Thanks.
Humans settle india approx 60,000years ago, around Gujarat , they moved down south to hills and
mountains early humans would have settled in caves/forrests for safety, which is where you get the
highest concentration of tribals in the south, rather the flat northern planes. Overtime tribals
settling south india start move back north and east,40,000years approx . As south Indians migrate back to north india, they become isolated because of the terrain/mountain range for along as 20,000years, creating the ANI and ASI.
”Outside Africa, the earliest and fastest growth is inferred in Southern Asia ∼52 kya. Comparisons
of relative regional population sizes through time suggest that between approximately 45 and 20 kya
most of humanity lived in Southern Asia.-mtDNA Variation Predicts Population Size in Humans and Reveals a Major Southern Asian Chapter in Human Prehistory.
Genetics would show a difference between the temperate flat plains of northern India, with the mountainous hot humid regions of south india. In north India the flat plains make it an ideal setting for agriculture development, it takes place from India through to Afghanistan and West ASIA from ANI migrations that come from north india going into west asia, central asia, technology gets betters allowing for greater distances traveled. As civilization increases, 15,000-5000years ago, more people are living in farming societies, population
increases greater than tribal people who remain in the hunter gather society. So tribal people split in two groups, tribal hunter gatheres, and tribal farmers and its the tribal farmers who eventually develop to set up the vaarna system, through agriculture development.
The American Journal of Human Genetics (2011), doi:10.1016
Aryan Migration Theory–On the contrary, South Indians migrated to north and South Asians migrated into Eurasia
As development increases, farming to discovering iron metal in soil, to building towns, carts, domesticating animals takes hold especially in northern india on flatter plaines, to west asia, the onset of techonology, tribal farmers are able to migrate back in mountainous south India quicker and easier, Indian tribal farmers start admixture back from 4.2-1.9 thousand years quickly, with each other and with Tribal Hunter gathers, backing up Vedic literature that doesn’t mention rigid caste, but occurred later on, when the Saraswati dried up, people with skills and trade moved into less developed areas with less developed cultures (hunter gather -less developed culture) to the ganges plain, this migration reclassified the vaarna system into a more rigid administration, to maintain order during this mass migration. When Harrapan moved from Sarawati to the Ganges plain, this shift of trained people created the vaarna classification to maintain order shifting from one settlement to another, which must have been major major event. So as the study below states the Brahmin founder group started from west bengal, in the area of the Ganges plaine, after downfall of saraswati, who then evetually moved back to kashmir the location of the saraswati. Early Humans must have had GREAT knowledge of the land and well trodden paths, moving from saraswati to the ganges, the people in their collective memory must have remembered saraswati which is why you get highest R1A in kashmir, they eventually moved back.
“no consistent pattern of the exclusive presence and distribution of Y-haplogroups to distinguish the higher-most caste, Brahmins, from the lower-most ones, schedule castes and tribals”. Brahmins from West Bengal showed the highest frequency (72.22%) of Y-haplogroups R1a1* hinting that it may have been a founder lineage for this caste group. The authors found it significant that the Saharia tribe of Madhya Pradesh had not only 28.07% R1a1, but also 22.8% R1a*, out of 57 people, with such a high percentage of R1a* never having been found before. Based on STR variance the estimated age of R1a* in India was 18,478 years, and for R1a1 it was 13,768 years.
S. Sharma, argued for an Indian origin of R1a1 lineage among Brahmins, by pointing out the highest incidence of R1a*, ancestral clade to R1a1, among Kashmiri Pandits (Brahmins) and Saharias, an Indian tribe.
– Sharma et al 2009
West Asian genome comes from ANI migrants before ANI mixed back with ASI. Then
from the 3-2nd century bc onwards those ANI that had migrated out to west asia and central asia, now
civilized start to attack the boundaries of india, Huns, Alexander the great and others, which
resulted in a more rigid vaarna system, a stricter code of conduct, administration and soceity in
general, especially in north India which bore the brunt of such invasions, finally caste became
completely rigid during the onset of the islamic invasion, 10th-18th century. Then with the Christian occupation, the largest transfer of wealth in human history took place from india to europe, and today India is run like post colonial state.
Thanks for reading and would love your thoughts.
Thanks.Yes what you think is correct and finer details will certainly differ between two researchers. But on the whole you are on the right track. About the caste you please study more, because what you have said is what you find reasonable. But reasonable is not always the truth. Caste was hot known to Megasthenese and Hu-en-Tsiang who visited India (A.L. Basham). Please read my articles which provide you valuable references and links about the genesis of the caste system. Also, you need to know the meaning of the word caste as defined by the sociologists, rather that apply your own mind and think that reference to Varna is the reference to caste.
Thanks. I have read megathenese and H9-enTsian who visisted india and they said where broad classes. But the new study brings a conflict doesnt it with the historical information. For if magathense and Tsaing, saw a broad class with no purity laws, but the new study states vaarna become rigid during the last 1500-2000years with little admixture, but before that there was massive admixture, Tsain and Megathense visisted india in that time period, when the new study suggests strong endogamy laws, but at the same time Brahmins would prefer a long distance marriage, is this which is confusing me.
Its this point i dont understand, because in your paper Understanding Reich, it states endogamy started during the onset of Medieval period, which fitted perfectly, but this new study states that could have started 1000years before. So what did magathense and tsaing see?…..Did they see the broad classes mixing and working together, or did see the broad classes that worked together but did not mix.
The main issue im having now is when did vaarna turn into caste? Did it happen in the medieval period with Islamic invasion or did it appear during the onset of collapse of the Saraswati moving to the ganges, and what did Megathense and Tsaing actaully see?
So when do you think the vaarna classification took place and when did become rigid? Between 1500bc, to the medieval period?
”Boya tribe of Andhra Pradesh got converted into Boya Hindu caste after getting job of temple servants, and with time were able to rise in the hierarchy in the temple establishment, reaching highest positions. (26) Some Boyas eventually entered Brahmana Caste is documented by other authors (supra). Romila Thapar also notes that forest tribals have entered into Kshatriya and Rajput fold quite late.”
Now the new study states during this time, tribes practised strict endogamy, but does this mean that even thought they practised strict endogamy that didnt stop tribes from moving up the vaarna to become Brahmins or Kshatriya. Where as before vaarna was fluid people married each other from different tribes, then when vaarna became caste, people didnt mix with each other, but carried out working together, allowing for tribes to move up and down the order?
If you can clear up my confusion would be greatful. Thanks once again.
”The main, and quite possibly only, R1a found in South Asia is R1a-Z93. There’s no way this marker was anywhere near India during the Mesolithic or even Neolithic. It’s too closely related to the European-specific R1a-Z283. In fact, R1a-Z283 is more closely related to R1a-Z93 than to R1a-L664, which is another European-specific subclade.
Europe has all three subclades, and more, with instances of R1a-Z93* all over Europe. On the other hand, South Asia just has R1a-Z93, with R1a-Z93* occurring only sporadically closer to Afghanistan.
So to cut a long story short, the vast majority of modern Asian R1a is very likely of European origin, and it arrived in South Asia via Central Asia no earlier than the Bronze Age.”
Mr Priyadarshi i have heard this before do you agree, with the above comment? Would really appreciate if you can clarify this for me. Thanks.
@SharmaLondon
Probably genetic papers from Oppenheimer, Kivisild, Metspalu, Thangaraj etc would help.
This one establishes majority of Indian population as having local origin (atleast for past 12,500 yrs) on basis of haplotype diversity.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3234374/
Regards,
Virendra
Thanks.
PLoS ONE 8(9): e73682. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073682
mtDNA from the Early Bronze Age to the Roman Period Suggests a Genetic Link between the Indian Subcontinent and Mesopotamian Cradle of Civilization
Henryk W. Witas et al.
Ancient DNA methodology was applied to analyse sequences extracted from freshly unearthed remains (teeth) of 4 individuals deeply deposited in slightly alkaline soil of the Tell Ashara (ancient Terqa) and Tell Masaikh (ancient Kar-Assurnasirpal) Syrian archaeological sites, both in the middle Euphrates valley. Dated to the period between 2.5 Kyrs BC and 0.5 Kyrs AD the studied individuals carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Paleolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, they are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan. We anticipate that the analysed remains from Mesopotamia belonged to people with genetic affinity to the Indian subcontinent since the distribution of identified ancient haplotypes indicates solid link with populations from the region of South Asia-Tibet (Trans-Himalaya). They may have been descendants of migrants from much earlier times, spreading the clades of the macrohaplogroup M throughout Eurasia and founding regional Mesopotamian groups like that of Terqa or just merchants moving along trade routes passing near or through the region. None of the successfully identified nuclear alleles turned out to be ΔF508 CFTR, LCT-13910T or Δ32 CCR5.
Nature Communications 4, Article number: 2755 doi:10.1038/ncomms3755
Morphological and genetic evidence for early Holocene cattle management in northeastern China
Hucai Zhang et al.
The domestication of cattle is generally accepted to have taken place in two independent centres: around 10,500 years ago in the Near East, giving rise to modern taurine cattle, and two millennia later in southern Asia, giving rise to zebu cattle. Here we provide firmly dated morphological and genetic evidence for early Holocene management of taurine cattle in northeastern China. We describe conjoining mandibles from this region that show evidence of oral stereotypy, dated to the early Holocene by two independent 14C dates. Using Illumina high-throughput sequencing coupled with DNA hybridization capture, we characterize 15,406 bp of the mitogenome with on average 16.7-fold coverage. Phylogenetic analyses reveal a hitherto unknown mitochondrial haplogroup that falls outside the known taurine diversity. Our data suggest that the first attempts to manage cattle in northern China predate the introduction of domestic cattle that gave rise to the current stock by several thousand years.
PLoS Genet 9(11): e1003912. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1003912
The Light Skin Allele of SLC24A5 in South Asians and Europeans Shares Identity by Descent
Chandana Basu Mallick et al.
Skin pigmentation is one of the most variable phenotypic traits in humans. A non-synonymous substitution (rs1426654) in the third exon of SLC24A5 accounts for lighter skin in Europeans but not in East Asians. A previous genome-wide association study carried out in a heterogeneous sample of UK immigrants of South Asian descent suggested that this gene also contributes significantly to skin pigmentation variation among South Asians. In the present study, we have quantitatively assessed skin pigmentation for a largely homogeneous cohort of 1228 individuals from the Southern region of the Indian subcontinent. Our data confirm significant association of rs1426654 SNP with skin pigmentation, explaining about 27% of total phenotypic variation in the cohort studied. Our extensive survey of the polymorphism in 1573 individuals from 54 ethnic populations across the Indian subcontinent reveals wide presence of the derived-A allele, although the frequencies vary substantially among populations. We also show that the geospatial pattern of this allele is complex, but most importantly, reflects strong influence of language, geography and demographic history of the populations. Sequencing 11.74 kb of SLC24A5 in 95 individuals worldwide reveals that the rs1426654-A alleles in South Asian and West Eurasian populations are monophyletic and occur on the background of a common haplotype that is characterized by low genetic diversity. We date the coalescence of the light skin associated allele at 22–28 KYA. Both our sequence and genome-wide genotype data confirm that this gene has been a target for positive selection among Europeans. However, the latter also shows additional evidence of selection in populations of the Middle East, Central Asia, Pakistan and North India but not in South India.
Sir, how can I get this book?
It’s not available on Amazon. Can you please suggest other mediums?
Try here:
http://www.indianbooksworldwide.com/index.php/the-first-civilisation-of-the-world.html
Thanks