The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersGene Expression Blog
The Y Chromosomal Sons of the Conquerors?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
Citation: Y-chromosome descent clusters and male differential reproductive success: young lineage expansions dominate Asian pastoral nomadic populations

Citation: Y-chromosome descent clusters and male differential reproductive success: young lineage expansions dominate Asian pastoral nomadic populations

Balaresque_FiguresRevised251114 copy When it comes to human evolutionary genetics there are two broad areas of interest for me. One the one hand there are classic questions of functional biology and population genetics. Variation of traits and how that variation was selected for over time and space. Then there are the issues of demography, phylogeography, and phylogenetics. This is the domain under which “historical population genetics” tends to fall. Between 1995 and 2005 there was a significant period when the focus was on reconstructing phylogenetic trees inferred from uniparental maternal (mtDNA) and paternal (Y chromosomal) lineages. Using a coalescent framework these non-recombining regions generated intuitively appealing and computationally tractable trees, which illustrated relationships across history. These were often superimposed upon geographical maps to reconstruct patterns of the past. The_Journey_of_Man_-_A_Genetic_Odyssey Since 2005 the emergence of dense SNP chips, where individuals could be typed on hundreds of thousands of markers, ushered in a new era and uniparental studies faded somewhat into the backdrop (and today we are moving into whole genome analyses). But sometimes the uniparental research is still useful, in particular since there is already a huge databank of samples and studies which one can leverage. A new paper in The European Journal of Human Genetics does just that, Y-chromosome descent clusters and male differential reproductive success: young lineage expansions dominate Asian pastoral nomadic populations.The figure at the top of this post is a summary of the primary results, which show how extremely common Y chromosomal haplogroups in their data set can be correlated with particular historical events. The authors used a data set of over 5,000 males across a huge range of Eurasian populations. Surveying the genetic variation it is clear that the haplogroup counts exhibited an exponential distribution. Many of the genotypes were found in only a few individuals, but a few were found in many individuals.

510CbnsBGLL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_ The authors refer to the haplogroups as “Descent Clusters” (DC) rather than haplogroups. You can see what the DCs are in the table at the top. DC2 is the familiar haplogroup R1a1a, of which I am a member. DC1 is the “Genghis Khan” haplogroup. Because they’re using fast mutating microsatellites the coalescence estimates have wide intervals. But, I am nearly 100% sure that R1a1a coalesces to a period more recently than 10,000 years ago in the past. The reason is that I saw some posters using whole genome sequences from the Y chromosome at ASHG. These should be more precise estimates because of the enormous marker set of more slowly mutating SNPs, and they too arrived at a relatively recent period for the last common ancestor of these common male lineages. In fact, if I recall correctly the divergence between R1b and R1a dates to ~10,000 years before the present in these studies, so R1a must have a much more recent coalescence. The TMRCA for the R1a1a expansion is suspiciously close to the most recent paper on the emergence of South Asians from an admixture between an indigenous group and West Eurasians to come out of the Reich lab, Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India. But, even in this paper there is evidence of distinct inputs of Y chromosomes from the west into South Asia, so I suspect it too supports the proportion that the admixture between West Eurasian and indigenous groups occurred between separate and diverse West Eurasians, and not just one group (i.e., the Indo-Aryans may have been the last West Eurasians who arrived in rapid succession over the period between 3000 and 1000 BC). These results also seem to support the conjecture that the ancestors of “Austro-Asiatics” ranged far and wide.

R1a1a

R1a1a resplendent

In the ultimate evaluation I am less interested in the specific stories than in the general one. Is this pattern of “super-male” lineages new? The “Altaic” DCs clearly are associated with the Turks and Mongols, and emerged in the light of history. R1a1a and its cousins are older, and live in the shadowy zone of archaeology on the precipice of history. But is this pattern primal to our lineage? My own conjecture is that on the whole this pattern was prefigured in the ancient past whenever founder events occurred. For example, in the expansion into Oceania and the New World. But what is different about the world after the Neolithic is that periodically the tree of patrilineages was “pruned”, as one branch would rise to rule them all for a moment. There would be an elimination of numerous ancient lineages as a new shining star would dominate the firmament. But the echoes of that moment reverberate down the millennia, as one can see in the haplogroups which are prevalent across vast swaths of Eurasia, and at a frequency far out of proportion to the norm. Like a thunderbolt, demographic revolutions explode onto the human cultural landscape, and reshape the future topology of lineages on a regular basis.

 
Hide 5 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I’m curious if you have any strong thoughts or speculations on R1b1b? Some very amateurish googling on my part shows some researches thinking it popped up between 10k years ago and 4k years as near as I can tell and moved form Asia into Europe, but I imagine this is quite different than the later WH R1a move right?

    Forgive any mistakes I’ve made in interpretation I’m very much an amateur on this. I do think there’s quite the field here for those willing to write “lay friendly” material on the recent findings of the last 10 years on this. If there’s any reading material you recommend I’d welcome the suggestion.

    Cheers and keep up the great work.

  2. The split between R1a and R1b is unlikely to be as recent as ~10,000 years. Estimates based on full R1a/R1b sequences and calibrated with the Mal’ta boy R* sequence show ~20,000 years or more.

    But that’s not as important as the structure within R1a, which shows that Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic R1a subclades are sister clades dating back to ~6,000 years ago. What this means of course is that they came from the same source population not that long ago, which was probably Indo-European speaking.

    The truly remarkable thing here I think is that decades ago linguists and archeologists identified the Poltavka culture of southern Russia as pre-proto-Indo-Iranian, and speculated that this culture had close contacts with the ancestors of the Balto-Slavs.

    It seems that Poltavka gave rise to Andronovo, which was probably the proto-Indo-Iranian culture. Now, there are six samples from Andronovo and related Scytho-Siberian Kurgans in this Y-chromosome paper, and four of them belong to the DC2 cluster, which shows a strong correlation with Indo-Iranian languages.

  3. Thanks for an interesting piece; I’m just speculating here but I’m also assuming that the Mongols got exceptionally “lucky” with the wholesale destruction of the Qanat system in Central Asia & Khorasan. I think that’s what precipitated the Turkisication of Turan? An interesting corollary could be the 11th century Banu Hillal invasions of the Maghreb that de-urbanised (and Arabised) the region. It could also be that the astonishing Ashkenazi Jewish pop growth rates in the middle ages were in the relatively fallow areas of Eastern Europe (I’m speculating here). Essentially the theme I’m thinking on is to what extent do geography and social niches contribute to the rise of super-lineages (which is why most of them seem to be pre-historical).

    I’d love to be enlightened on this matter because that’s the only historical event (I can think of) of a “super-lineage”. I wonder if either Charlemagne or the Holy Prophet have been nearly as successful as Genghis Khan?

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    Descent from Charlemagne is fairly easy to document genealogically, because royal and aristocratic genealogies have long been carefully recorded. I don't know if a genetic marker has been identified for such descent, comparable to that for Ghengis Khan.

    Virtually all past and present European royal families descend from Charlemagne, and surprisingly many people of native stock in each country can trace their ancestry to a past monarch, typically through a younger son's line or a daughter's. The usual connection in English genealogy is through Edward III, seven of whose twelve children had issue.
  4. @Zachary Latif
    Thanks for an interesting piece; I'm just speculating here but I'm also assuming that the Mongols got exceptionally "lucky" with the wholesale destruction of the Qanat system in Central Asia & Khorasan. I think that's what precipitated the Turkisication of Turan? An interesting corollary could be the 11th century Banu Hillal invasions of the Maghreb that de-urbanised (and Arabised) the region. It could also be that the astonishing Ashkenazi Jewish pop growth rates in the middle ages were in the relatively fallow areas of Eastern Europe (I'm speculating here). Essentially the theme I'm thinking on is to what extent do geography and social niches contribute to the rise of super-lineages (which is why most of them seem to be pre-historical).

    I'd love to be enlightened on this matter because that's the only historical event (I can think of) of a "super-lineage". I wonder if either Charlemagne or the Holy Prophet have been nearly as successful as Genghis Khan?

    Descent from Charlemagne is fairly easy to document genealogically, because royal and aristocratic genealogies have long been carefully recorded. I don’t know if a genetic marker has been identified for such descent, comparable to that for Ghengis Khan.

    Virtually all past and present European royal families descend from Charlemagne, and surprisingly many people of native stock in each country can trace their ancestry to a past monarch, typically through a younger son’s line or a daughter’s. The usual connection in English genealogy is through Edward III, seven of whose twelve children had issue.

  5. Thank you for the picture. A little adjustment of my monitor brings out the inner glow, manifesting the all-around excellence of R1a1.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Razib Khan Comments via RSS