tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post2262250727969897998..comments2024-03-27T22:28:06.861-06:00Comments on Dispatches From Turtle Island: Denisovan Dilution Revisited: People Of The Dog?Andrew Oh-Willekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02537151821869153861noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post-71557458771254616812012-09-01T03:46:42.448-06:002012-09-01T03:46:42.448-06:00"Y-DNA haplogroup O must have arisen sometime..."Y-DNA haplogroup O must have arisen sometime after first contact with the Denisovans. Its phylogeny makes clear that it isn't as old as the Sahul Y-DNA lineages". <br /><br />A recent paper puts to separation of the three O haplogroups at 27,000 years ago and the separation between N and O at 33,000 years ago. That last date is suspicioulsy close to the arrival of the Upper Paleolithic in northern China. <br /><br />"one of these mainland Southeast Asian populations probably gave rise ot the Y-DNA haplogroup O lineages". <br /><br />The mainland Southeast Asian populations gave rise to M, NO, P and S. NO separated some time after those haplogroups had separated. And probably didn't separate in SE Asia. <br /><br />"The high level of homogeneity of the Y-DNA haplogroups of East Asia similarly argue the point that extreme levels of dilution of prior Sahul-like waves of migrants though multiple waves of Paleolithic and Neolithic migration of populations who can trace their origins to Denisovan-free Southeast Asia" <br /><br />To me the 'high level of homogeneity of the Y-DNA haplogroups of East Asia' argue for a major, rapid and recent expansion, not a Paleolithic one. <br /><br />"The proto-Sahuleans did not settle the remainder of Oceania". <br /><br />Distances between groups of islands get progressively greater as you move beyond New Guinea itself. The Sahulian boating technology gradually improved as it seems that people gradually moved further and further out into Melanesia. Sahulian boating capabilities were quite substantial, especially when compared to such capabilities elsewhere in the world at the time. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post-16283805079258524512012-09-01T03:46:24.424-06:002012-09-01T03:46:24.424-06:00"One plausible time for the non-Austronesian ..."One plausible time for the non-Austronesian lineages of Y-DNA haplogroup O to arrive in Western Indonesia would have been when Sundaland was attached to mainland Asia. The region where non-Austronesian lineages of Y-DNA haplogroup O are common correspond to the territory of Sundaland which was a continuous land mass attached by land to mainland Asia during the Last Glacial Maximum around 20,000 years ago". <br /><br />But that is not really correct. O2 is especially common in Sulawesi, never attached to Sunda. O2's expansion is most easily explained as being late Hoabinhian which looks to have spread round SE Asia by open water dispersal, and is certainly post the maximum lowered sea level. O1 is even more recent: Austronesian. And I am sure that O3's spread through island SE Asia is also most closely associated with the Austronesian expansion. <br /><br />" But, how can we explain how first wave migrants kindred to the Sahul population wave, could be totally dominated by the people who were bears of non-Austronesian lineages of Y-DNA haplogroup O?" <br /><br />To me the most likely explanation is that the pre-O SE Asian population was quite sparse. The relatively recent extinction of orangutan and panda suggest that to be so. Haplogroup O expanded with the spread of slash-and-burn agriculture, which allowed a denser population to develop in the mountainous rainforest region. <br /><br />"O apparently needed a land bridge and never managed to cross the Wallace line in large numbers" <br /><br />Well, once they crossed Wallace's line they encountered more densely populated regions. And it is not true that O 'never managed to cross the Wallace line in large numbers'. Merely that they never crossed 'far' in large numbers. <br /><br />"So, what could the Paleolithic Y-DNA haplogroup O people have had twenty thousand years ago that gave them a decisive advantage over the awesome hunters of the first wave migrants who were kin to the Sahul people in Western Indonesia that left the first wavers totally marginalized even before the Austronesians arrived?" <br /><br />You're making the unjustified assumption here that O arrived in SE Asia 'twenty thousand years ago'. O1 and O3 are certainly nowhere near that ancient in SE Asia. And O2 is probably barely 12,000 years old in SE Asia. <br /><br />"The Sahul people did not have dogs until an archaeologically well documented moment when a handful of dingos migrated to Australia around 8,000 years ago from a stock found in Southeast Asian wild dogs". <br /><br />Presumably shortly after O people with dogs had arrived in SE Asia. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post-57744158295647467602012-08-31T22:24:23.461-06:002012-08-31T22:24:23.461-06:00thx to denisovan girl for genetic sequence and to ...thx to denisovan girl for genetic sequence and to you for provocative scenarios. these are interesting times.Hallie Scott Klinenoreply@blogger.com