Google

蓝海人类学在线 Ryan WEI's Forum of Anthropology

 找回密码
 注册
查看: 12665|回复: 56

eupedia的maciamo对y-R1a的最新解释

[复制链接]
发表于 2017-4-4 00:13 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA)
Author: Maciamo Hay.

Last update April 2017
(updated history)

Contents
1. Origins
2. Geographic distribution
3. Subclades & Haplotypes
4. History
The Germanic branch
The Baltic branch
The Slavic branch
R1a migration map
The Indo-Iranian branch
The Tarim mummies
Turkic speakers and R1a
The Greek branch
5. R1 populations & light pigmentation
6. MtDNA correspondance
7. Famous R1a individuals


Origins

Paleolithic mammoth hunters

Haplogroup R* originated in North Asia just before the Last Glacial Maximum (26,500-19,000 years before present). This haplogroup has been identified in the 24,000 year-old remains of the so-called "Mal'ta boy" from the Altai region, in south-central Siberia (Raghavan et al. 2013). This individual belonged to a tribe of mammoth hunters that may have roamed across Siberia and parts of Europe during the Paleolithic. Autosomally this Paleolithic population appears to have contributed mostly to the ancestry of modern Europeans and South Asians, the two regions where haplogroup R also happens to be the most common nowadays (R1b in Western Europe, R1a in Eastern Europe, Central and South Asia, and R2 in South Asia).


Haplogroup R1a probably branched off from R1* during or soon after the Last Glacial Maxium. Little is know for certain about its place of origin. Some think it might have originated in the Balkans or around Pakistan and Northwest India, due to the greater genetic diversity found in these regions. The diversity can be explained by other factors though. The Balkans have been subject to 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian Steppes, each bringing new varieties of R1a. South Asia has had a much bigger population than any other parts of the world (occasionally equalled by China) for at least 10,000 years, and larger population bring about more genetic diversity. The most likely place of origin of R1a is Central Asia or southern Russia/Siberia.


From there, R1a could have migrated directly to eastern Europe (European Russia, Ukraine, Belarus), or first southward through Central Asia and Iran. In that latter scenario, R1a would have crossed the Caucasus during the Neolithic, alongside R1b, to colonise the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. In the absence of ancient Y-DNA from those regions the best evidence supporting a Late Paleolithic migration to Iran is the presence of very old subclades of R1a (like M420) in the region, notably in the Zagros mountains. However these samples only make up a fraction of all R1a in the region and could just as well represent the descendants of Eastern European hunter-gatherers who branched off from other R1a tribes and crossed from the North Caucasus any time between 20,000 and 8,000 years ago.
The logic behind this is that most known historical migrations in Eurasia took place from north to south, as people sought warmer climes. The only exception happened during the Holocene warming up of the climate, which corresponds to the Neolithic colonisation of Europe from the Near East.
A third possibility is that R1a tribes split in two around Kazakhstan during the Late Paleolithic, with one group moving to eastern Europe, while the other moved south to Iran.


 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-29 11:57 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-29 12:01 编辑
我的看法,目前越来越多的迹象显示,原始印欧人(以R1a-Z93与R1b-Z2103)并不是青铜文明的创始者,不过得益于地理位置的便利性,他们无疑是最早一批学习者。但是青铜文明本身并不能显示明显的优势,唯有与马的驯化以及青铜马车结合才可以发挥巨大的优势,因此准确的说,至此人类进入了一个全新的‘青铜马车时代’。
按照现在西方主流学者的观点,人类农业其实也是...
imvivi001 发表于 2017-4-7 18:12


重新审视一下,感觉proto印欧人群的主要类型应该对应于新石器早中期的R1a-z645与R1b-M269二者的混合,地点极有可能在乌克兰至南俄大草原一带,之后逐步分化,其西部支系的主要类型衍化为R1a-z645-z283与R1b-M269-L51(当然可能还有一些土著的I2a等),之后在分阶段习得驯马、农业、马车以及青铜技术之后,逐渐向东西两个方向扩散。向西扩散的这一支不断地同化当地欧洲土著,成为现代欧洲人的主要祖先之一;而东部类型主要是R1a-z645-Z93与R1b-M269-Z2103(可能还包括J2aG2a土著类型),之后逐渐向东扩散,成为中亚与南亚印欧语族群的主要祖先。至于R1b-M269-PF7562,应该是最早分化的一支,可能与安纳托利亚语族人群有关(以赫悌人群为代表)。



以下是eupedia方面整理的考古文化变迁图,不过仍然还不完善,仅做参考。
印欧-东欧-考古文化-5kBC.gif 印欧-新石器中早期-文化-eupedie.png

印欧-东欧-新石器晚期-eupedia.gif 印欧-铜石-文化-eupedie.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:14 | 显示全部楼层
Did R1a come to Europe with Neolithic farmers ?

Some people have theorized that R1a was one of the lineages of the Neolithic farmers, and would have entered Europe through Anatolia, then spread across the Balkans toward Central Europe, then only to Eastern Europe. There are many issues with this scenario. The first is that 99% of modern R1a descends from R1a1a (M417), a subclade that clearly expanded from the Bronze Age onwards, not from the early Neolithic. Its phylogeny also points at an Eastern European origin. Secondly, most of the R1a in Middle East are deep subclades of the R1a-Z93 branch, which originated in Russia (see below). It could not have been ancestral to Balkanic or Central European R1a. Thirdly, there is a very strong correlation between the Northeast European autosomal admixture and R1a populations, and this component is missing from the genome of all European Neolithic farmers tested to date - even from Ötzi, who was a Chalcolithic farmer. This admixture is also missing from modern Sardinians, who are mostly descended from Neolithic farmers. This is incontrovertible evidence that R1a did not come to Europe with Neolithic farmers, but only propagated from Eastern Europe to the rest of Europe during the Bronze Age.
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:21 | 显示全部楼层
Bronze Age Proto-Indo-Europeans

R1a is thought to have been the dominant haplogroup among the northern and eastern Proto-Indo-European language speakers, that evolved into the Indo-Iranian, Thracian, Baltic and Slavic branches. The Proto-Indo-Europeans originated in the Yamna culture (3300-2500 BCE). Their dramatic expansion was possible thanks to an early adoption of bronze weapons and the domestication of the horse in the Eurasian steppes (circa 4000-3500 BCE). The southern Steppe culture is believed to have carried predominantly R1b (M269 and M73) lineages, while the northern forest-steppe culture would have been essentially R1a-dominant.


The first expansion of the forest-steppe people occured with the Corded Ware Culture (see Germanic branch below). The migration of the R1b people to central and Western Europe left a vacuum for R1a people in the southern steppe around the time of the Catacomb culture (2800-2200 BCE). The forest-steppe origin of this culture is obvious from the introduction of corded pottery and the abundant use of polished battle axes, the two most prominent features of the Corded Ware culture. This is also probably when the satemisation process of the Indo-European languages began since the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian language groups belong to the same Satem isogloss and both appear to have evolved from the the Catacomb culture.


Ancient DNA testing has confirmed the presence of haplogroup R1a1a in samples from the Corded Ware culture in Germany (2600 BCE), from Tocharian mummies (2000 BCE) in Northwest China, from Kurgan burials (circa 1600 BCE) from the Andronovo culture in southern Russia and southern Siberia, as well as from a variety of Iron-age sites from Russia, Siberia, Mongolia and Central Asia.
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:24 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:06 编辑

Geographic distributionDistribution of haplogroup R1a in Europe
欧洲-y-R1a-频度分布图.gif


Distribution of haplogroup R1a-M458 in Europe
欧洲-R1a-M458.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:26 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:10 编辑

Distribution of haplogroup R1a-M558 (CTS1211) in Europe



Distribution of haplogroup R1a-Z93 in Eurasia 亚欧-R1a-Z93-Asia.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:34 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 10:54 编辑

Nowadays, high frequencies of R1a are found in Poland (57.5% of the population), Ukraine (40 to 65%), European Russia (45 to 65%), Belarus (51%), Slovakia (42%), Latvia (40%), Lithuania (38%), the Czech Republic (34%), Hungary (32%), Norway (27%), Austria (26%), Croatia (24%), north-east Germany (24%) Sweden (19%), and Romania (18%).

SubcladesIf you are new to genetic genealogy, please check our Introduction to phylogenetics to understand how to read a phylogenetic tree.


R1a-M420-tree.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:37 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:12 编辑

R1a-L664-tree.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:40 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:13 编辑

R1a-Z284-tree.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 00:53 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:14 编辑

R1a-M458-tree.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 01:06 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:15 编辑

R1a-Z280-tree.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 01:47 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:17 编辑

亚欧-R1a-Z93-tree.png
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 01:55 | 显示全部楼层
99% R1a people belong to subclades of R1a1a1 (R1a-M417), which is divided in the following subclades:

R1a-L664 is essentially Northwest European, found chiefly in West Germany, the Low Countries and the British Isles.


R1a-Z645 makes up the bunch of R1a individuals from Central Europe to South Asia.


R1a-Z283 is the main Central & East European branch.


R1a-Z284 is a Scandinavian subclade with an epicentre in central Norway. It is found also in places colonised by the Norwegian Vikings, like some parts of Scotland, England and Ireland. Several subclades were identified, including L448, L176.1, Z287/Z288, Z66 and Z281 about which little is known at the moment.


R1a-M458, primarily a Slavic subclade, with maximum frequencies in Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, but is also fairly common in southeast Ukraine and northwest Russia.
its subclade R1a-L260 is clearly West Slavic, with a peak of frequency in Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, and radiating at lower frequencies into East Germany, East Austria, Slovenia and Hungary.


R1a-Z280 is also an Balto-Slavic marker, found all over central and Eastern Europe (except in the Balkans), with a western limit running from East to south-west Germany and to Northeast Italy. It can be divided in many clusters: East Slavic, Baltic, Pomeranian, Polish, Carpathian, East-Alpine, Czechoslovak, and so on.
its subclade R1a-L365 is a Pomeranian cluster found also in southern Poland.




R1a-Z93 is the main Asian branch of R1a. It is found in Central Asia, South Asia and Southwest Asia (including among Ashkenazi Jews). R1a-Z93 is the marker of historical peoples such as the Indo-Aryans, Persians, Medes, Mitanni, or Tatars, and pervaded the genetic pool of the Arabs and Jews.


R1a-F1345 is one of the main Middle Eastern clades.


R1a-CTS6 is the Jewish subclade of R1a, which formed 3500 years ago and has a TMRCA of 2800 years.




A lot of Western and Northern European R1a that is negative for the marker Z284 falls under the root R1a1a1* (M417), or even in the older R1a1a (M17) and R1a1 (SRY10831.2). The former are descended from the oldest known expansion of R1a out of the Forest-Steppe, the Corded Ware Culture (see below), which predates all the above subclades.
At present no subclade has been identified by a common SNP. However, Klyosov et al. (2009) found that a substantial percentage of R1a in Northwest Europe, particularly in Norway, England, Ireland and Iceland, had a repeat value of 10 (instead of 12) at the STR marker DYS388. Among them, some individuals were identified as carrying the mutation L664. The origin of the older subclades (M17 and SRY10831.2) is still unclear (perhaps Mesolithic hunter-gatherers roaming around Europe).
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 02:04 | 显示全部楼层
后面的故事还很长,其中不乏许多闪亮之处,尽管硬伤处处,再次凸显欧洲人有趣的思维模式的可爱之处,呵呵~
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 11:24 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-4 11:30 编辑
Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA)
Author: Maciamo Hay.

Last update April 2017
(updated history)

Contents
1. Origins
2. ...
...his haplogroup has been identified in the 24,000 year-old remains of the so-called "Mal'ta boy" from the Altai region, in south-central Siberia (Raghavan et al. 2013). This individual belonged to a tribe of mammoth hunters that may have roamed across Siberia and parts of Europe during the Paleolithic. Autosomally this Paleolithic population appears to have contributed mostly to the ancestry of modern Europeans and South Asians, the two regions where haplogroup R also happens to be the most common nowadays (R1b in Western Europe, R1a in Eastern Europe, Central and South Asia, and R2 in South Asia).imvivi001 发表于 2017-4-4 00:13


   很显然, 一开始著名的Maciamo就犯了先入为主的低级错误。因为咱们论坛的有心人都知道,马儿他男孩的族群对现在人群贡献最大的是至今仍然是西伯利亚土著的萨摩耶得族群与万里之外的纯种美洲土著,其次才是东北欧的欧洲人以及巴基斯坦的某些族群。十分不明白为何maci会犯如此低级错误? 估计是一看到与-R与mt-U就想当然以为是“俺们欧洲的”,呵呵
发表于 2017-4-4 11:33 | 显示全部楼层
   很显然, 一开始著名的Maciamo就犯了先入为主的低级错误。因为咱们论坛的有心人都知道,马儿他男孩的族群对现在人群贡献最大的是至今仍然是西伯利亚土著的萨摩耶得族群与万里之外的纯种美洲土著,其次才是东北 ...
imvivi001 发表于 2017-4-4 11:24
你的想法也过于简单了,你的这个假设是建立在东亚或者东欧亚起源单一或者迁徙路线按照你的想法那样固定的基础上的,问题是现在没有证据,所以也没有什么好反驳的,但这样简单的认定本就有问题。
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 11:43 | 显示全部楼层
Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA)
Author: Maciamo Hay.

Last update April 2017
(updated history)

Contents
1. Origins
2.…… the logic behind this is that most known historical migrations in Eurasia took place from north to south, as people sought warmer climes. The only exception happened during the Holocene warming up of the climate, which corresponds to the Neolithic colonisation of Europe from the Near East.
A third possibility is that R1a tribes split in two around Kazakhstan during the Late Paleolithic, with one group moving to eastern Europe, while the other moved south to Iran. ...
imvivi001 发表于 2017-4-4 00:13


逻辑大致是可以成立的,不过把近东与中东的农夫们北上,视为全新世后欧亚大陆的南方人唯一一次北上,只能说,唉,maci。你真的认真学习了欧亚大陆历史了吗?
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 15:23 | 显示全部楼层
对于三千多年前在咱们新疆出现的“楼兰美女”,欧洲学者与中国学者以及一帮瞎掺和的东突主义分子可是争得不可开交。 看看维基上是如何形容的吧。
一一一一一一一一一一一一一一一

A 2008 study by Jilin吉林 University showed that the Yuansha population has relatively close relationships with the modern populations of South Central Asia and Indus Valley, as well as with the ancient population of Chawuhu.[10]

In 2007 the Chinese government allowed a National Geographic Society team headed by Spencer Wells (威尔斯大牛这几年好像销声匿迹了,不知为何)to examine the mummies' DNA. Wells was able to extract undegraded DNA from the internal tissues. The scientists extracted enough material to suggest the Tarim Basin was continually inhabited from 2000 BCE to 300 BCE and preliminary results indicate the people, rather than having a single origin, originated from Europe, Mesopotamia, Indus Valley and other regions yet to be determined.[citation needed]

Between 2009-2015, the remains of 92 individuals found at the Xiaohe Tomb complex were analyzed for Y-DNA and mtDNA markers.(小河古人的y好像是一种在当时还很罕见的R1a-支系,我怀疑是一种最早扩散的印欧语人群支系,有可能与目前西欧人群中的Z284有关。当然,也有可能根本就不是印欧语人群,比如现在中东常见的F1345。感觉前者的可能性大一些。当然,一切都有待于进一步的全序检测证实)

Genetic analyses of the mummies showed that the Xiaohe people were an admixture from populations originating from both the West and the East. The maternal lineages of the Xiaohe people originated from both East Asia and West Eurasia, whereas the paternal lineages all originated from West Eurasia.[11]

Mitochondrial DNA analysis showed that maternal lineages carried by the people at Xiaohe included mtDNA haplogroups H, K, U5, U7, U2e, T and R*, which are now most common in West Eurasia. Also found were haplogroups common in modern populations from East Asia: B5, D and G2a. Haplogroups now common in Central Asian or Siberian populations included: C4 and C5. Haplogroups later regarded as typically South Asian includedM5 and M*.[12]

The paternal lines of male remains surveyed nearly all – 11 out of 12, or around 92% – belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup R1a1, which are now most common in West Eurasia; the other belonged to the exceptionally rare paragroup K* (M9).[13](这个K*会是哪一种类型呢? 难道是传说中的y-NO*? 还是某种不为人知的P?)

The geographic location of this admixing is unknown, although south Siberia is likely.[11]

It has been asserted that the textiles found with the mummies are of an early European textile type based on close similarities to fragmentary textiles found in salt mines in Austria, dating from the second millennium BCE. Anthropologist Irene Good, a specialist in early Eurasian textiles, noted the woven diagonal twill pattern indicated the use of a rather sophisticated loom and said that the textile is "the easternmost known example of this kind of weaving technique."(这个牛,如果确实,那corded ware culture起源地偏东的可能性明显增大)

Mair claims that "the earliest mummies in the Tarim Basin were exclusively Caucasoid, or Europoid" with east Asian migrants arriving in the eastern portions of the Tarim Basin around 3,000 years ago while the Uyghur peoples arrived around the year 842.[4] In trying to trace the origins of these populations, Victor Mair's team suggested that they may have arrived in the region by way of the Pamir Mountains about 5,000 years ago.(如果Mair说中了,那看来早期的印欧人群扩散远不止一波)

Mair has claimed that:

The new finds are also forcing a reexamination of old Chinese books that describe historical or legendary figures of great height, with deep-set blue or green eyes, long noses, full beards, and red or blond hair. Scholars have traditionally scoffed at these accounts, but it now seems that they may be accurate.[14](一看就知道以前的大牛Mair没认真读过中国正规史料,呵呵。噢对了,Mair这几年也不知道在干啥…)

Chinese historian Ji Xianlin季羡林 says China "supported and admired" research by foreign experts into the mummies. "However, within China a small group of ethnic separatists have taken advantage of this opportunity to stir up trouble and are acting like buffoons. Some of them have even styled themselves the descendants of these ancient 'white people' with the aim of dividing the motherland. But these perverse acts will not succeed".[4] Barber addresses these claims by noting that "The Loulan Beauty is scarcely closer to 'Turkic' in her anthropological type than she is to Han Chinese. The body and facial forms associated with Turks and Mongols began to appear in the Tarim cemeteries only in the first millennium BCE, fifteen hundred years after this woman lived.[15] Due to the "fear of fuelling separatist currents", the Xinjiang museum, regardless of dating, displays all their mummies, both Tarim and Han, together.[4](Barber这番话,可能会让东突分子们比较失望,呵呵)
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 15:27 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-4 15:37 编辑
你的想法也过于简单了,你的这个假设是建立在东亚或者东欧亚起源单一或者迁徙路线按照你的想法那样固定的基础上的,问题是现在没有证据,所以也没有什么好反驳的,但这样简单的认定本就有问题。
wanhuatong 发表于 2017-4-4 11:33


不知道你想表达什么观点??我只是阐述一个事实,而不是一个观点,明白?
发表于 2017-4-4 18:14 | 显示全部楼层
我一直有一个疑问,很多的观点都把希腊的R1a和多利安人之前入侵的第一波印欧人联系起来,不知道证据是什么?
我一直以为早期入侵者的R应该以R1b为主,而R1a应该是罗马灭亡后斯拉夫人的影响。
在网上找了各种资料,都没有说清楚希腊人的R1a类型,但R1b无疑是以M269+L51-(m269下游和L51上游,不知我这样表示对不对?)。
 楼主| 发表于 2017-4-4 20:41 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 imvivi001 于 2017-4-5 11:26 编辑
我一直有一个疑问,很多的观点都把希腊的R1a和多利安人之前入侵的第一波印欧人联系起来,不知道证据是什么?
我一直以为早期入侵者的R应该以R1b为主,而R1a应该是罗马灭亡后斯拉夫人的影响。
在网上找了各种资料, ...
lindberg 发表于 2017-4-4 18:14


   的确,现在公开的希腊(包括马其顿)的R1a与R1b全序数据极少,从一些个人的数据来看,很有可能是亚洲主流的Z93下游的小亚细亚类型的Z2122。这样也很好的解释了尽管希腊语在整个印欧语系中非常独特,但是在现存的印欧语中依然相对更接近伊朗-雅利安语。也正好可以解释为何古希腊神话中,第一个伟大的半印欧的迈锡尼文明的创始者家族,居然有一个伊朗雅利安名字Perse。(有一个有趣的现象,其实希腊神话中真正的印欧神祇并不多,多数还是本地神祇与腓尼基半神半人神明,也反映出印欧语人群融入当地社会的历史发展轨迹,正好与当地真正的印欧语y比例相对应)
      另外,从Perse王朝的希腊神话中也可以看出,印欧语人群是如何通过讨好、贸易、哄骗、战争以及内部结盟等各种手段强行与当地发达文明融合的,最终他们得以在当时的世界文明中心的边缘处,整出了一个高度混合的印欧语文明...
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|人类生物学在线 ( 苏ICP备16053048号 )

GMT+8, 2020-12-6 06:08 , Processed in 0.115942 second(s), 20 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表