What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2

[ramana]

Thanks Dhu.

Thanks Husky for the diligence to ensure I read Dhu's post.

[ramana]

Husky for you diligence:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarama

In Hindu mythology, Sarama (Sanskrit: सरमा, Saramā; Tamil: Carapai; Thai: Trichada; Malay: Marcu Dewi) is a mythological being referred to as the bitch of the gods, or Deva-shuni (देव-शुनी, devashunī). She first appears in one of Hinduism's earliest texts, the Rig Veda, in which she helps the god-king Indra to recover divine cows stolen by the Panis, a class of demons. This legend is alluded to in many later texts, and Sarama is often associated with Indra. The epic Mahabharata, and some Puranas, also make brief reference to Sarama.



Early Rig-Vedic works do not depict Sarama as canine, but later Vedic mythologies and interpretations usually show her as a bitch. She is described as the mother of all dogs, in particular of the two four-eyed brindle dogs of the god Yama, and dogs are given the matronymic Sarameya ("offspring of Sarama"). One scripture further describes Sarama as the mother of all wild animals.



....

[Husky]

Many thanks for the excerpt on Sarama. [Yama's dogs sadly tend to be pounced on by aliens for PIE-ism, since they choose to draw a straight line to Kerberos dwelling in Hades. Kerberos BTW is where Tolkien obviously plagiarised his Carcharoth from.]



It's not that there are no ancient references to dogs (hence domesticated) among Hindus, it's that research has not (yet) found any ancient founding lineages of domesticated dogs in India. So that was the source of my disappointment. I don't know why it should matter, why I should be so petty about it. But on the bright side, India and Nepal natively have the Lesser Pandas aka Red Panda. core: The Hindu variants have a browner coat than their redder Daoist counterparts in China.



There were some very good documentaries on the domestication of the dog - it's a fascinating story, on the extent that dogs contributed to (and instigated, and even controlled) the process of their domestication.







[color="#0000FF"]Concerning post 600[/color], here are some of the excerpts from that blog page that mention the relevant mutations that lightened Europeans (I searched for the gene name prefix and chose mostly comments by one Tobus since at least he sounds like this may be closer to his field - well, at least more than in the case of the others who mentioned the gene there - plus he sounded like he would let the data lead him on the matter of La Brana man's skintone):

Tobus said...

@Eurologist:

> Of course - but not in the European context, as I have stated numerous times



I'm not sure what you mean by "in the European context" here... do you mean skin colour differences between "white" Europeans? Nearly all of the difference in European skin colour is environmental - studies of unexposed skin show very similar melanin levels from Ireland to Spain. It's tanning ability that largely produces the North/South difference, although both TYR and SLC45A2 show a slight cline (from 100-80% frequency) as you move south, which may explain what you are talking about.



There is no way these alleles come even close to being responsible to extant Central or N/ NW European skin color.



What do you base this on? Those populations are fixed for the light skin SLC24A5 and SLC45A2 variants and most of them have the TYR allele as well... every study on these alleles has confirmed that they are directly responsible light skin, so on what basis do you claim the opposite?



> there are populations in NE Asia that rival the lightest in the world and don't harbor those mutations.



Which populations are you talking about? Jablonski (2000) took skin reflectance measurements from all over the world and found the darkest Europeans are lighter than the lightest East Asians. Is this just a subjective observation you've made yourself or do you have some evidence to support it?



In any case, East Asian populations evolved a separate genetic mechanism for light skin (proven in OCA2 and possibly in MC1R and DCT) so phenotype comparisons between East Asians and Europeans doesn't contradict the role of the SLCs and TYR in Europeans - you'd need to find a dark-skinned population that has the European alleles to do that.



> It is mind-bogglingly ridiculous to assert that Mesolithic Europeans at the common 50 to 60+ degree (i.e., easily-habitable Northern-most PNW and Alaska-like)latitudes had anything else but light skin color



Why do you say it's ridiculous? It'd be much more mind-bogglingly ridiculous to ignore the facts just because they don't agree with our preconceived notions... all the evidence I've seen says that La Brana and Loschbour had dark skin - do you have any actual facts that show they had light skin, or is it just a personal theory of yours?



For the record I'll also point out that the two "dark-skinned" mesolithics found were in Spain (43 degrees) and Luxembourg (49 degrees), so (just) outside your 50-60+ range, and that people don't immediately change colour when they enter a new enviroment - it takes a random mutation plus scores of generations to spread it. People could retain dark skin in high UV enviroments for thousands of years before experiencing depigmentation on a population-wide scale.



Thursday, February 06, 2014 2:34:00 pm





Tobus said...

@Grey:

Which ancient writers are you talking about? Since farming came first then writing, I suspect the references to "red hair, light skin, grey/green eyes" are relatively recent, thousands of years after the depigmentation. There are several variants of MC1R are responsible for red hair and non-tanning (pale) skin but none of them are widespread and none show signs of positive selection.



The Neanderthal MC1R variant that suggests they had red hair/pale skin is not one that is found in Sapiens.



The East Asian alleles for light skin are different to the Europeans - light skin evolved separately via different genetic pathways in those two populations, European skin colour isn't due to East Asian admixture.





Tobus said...

> @eurologist: Nothing could be further from the truth. We know that extant Northern Europeans are much, much lighter in skin color than N Africans, SW Asians, or S Asians that share their SLC24A5 allele. Ergo, we know that the SLC24A5 allele is not responsible for the light pigmentation of N Europeans.



There have been a number of papers directly associating SLC24A5 (along with SLC45A2 and TYR) with melanin levels in a number of admixed** populations with a range of skin pigmentations (such as Stokowski 2007 on South Asians) - there is simply no question that each derived allele of these genes will lighten the carrier's skin colour to some degree. I note that all the populations you refer to as "sharing SLC24A5" show a range of skin colours as well as a range of SLC24A5 frequencies - and you can be 100% sure that those individuals with derived SLC24A5 (and/or SLC45A2/TYR) alleles directly coincide with those individuals exhibiting lighter pigmentation, since that's how the connection between these alleles and skin colour was determined in the first place. Given that each allele acts differently, independently and additively and that any individual can have one of 3 configurations of each of the 3 genes (both dark, both light or one of each), this gives us 27 possible pigmentation phenotypes - Europeans are at one extreme with all derived, Sub-saharan Africans, Sri Lankans and Melanesians are at the other with all ancestral, and populations in North Africa, West Asia, South Asia etc are in between with various combinations of ancestral/derived, typically becoming more derived as you move towards Europe. Most studies attribute the bulk of the African/European melanin difference to these 3 genes however one study (Belaza 2012 on Cape Verdeans) suggested the combined effect was less than half.



It's certainly possible (probable even) that further genes will discovered in the future that will give us a better picture of La Brana's skin colour than we do now, but given what we know at this point we have to accept the possibility (and perhaps I should stress possibility) that La Brana had the same skin colour as modern Papuans and Australian Aborigines - he certainly has the same genetic profile as these populations in terms of skin colour alleles known to science today. If this DNA was from a murder weapon recovered in NY this morning, the police would definitely be looking for a black man, it's only our presupposed notion of Europeans being "white" that makes us question these results in regard to La Brana.



I'm happy to post links to the papers that confirm what I'm saying but you should be able to find most of them with Google/Pubmed - the "Human Skin Color" page on Wikipedia cites most of them in it's Genetics section as well.



Tuesday, February 04, 2014 9:30:00 am



[color="#800080"](** Isn't 'admixed' when used concerning Indians in such a context [such as for skin-lightening mutations, which Europe seems to claim exclusively for themselves] a euphemism for miscegenation, i.e. specifically an allusion to AIT? Has the final/conclusive genetic data already come in, did I just miss it, or are they just still assuming that it is the case? But there can have been no oryan invasions in 1800 BCE or later, and I doubt they've looked for anything in much earlier periods, since they have never thought of looking there: if there had been any oryan migration or invasion - but telepathic knowledge transfer for the telepathic super-oryans leaves no trail of course - they'd have to be looking for such things at a much earlier timeframe. But they won't, since they're oh-so-certain that AIT happened and moreover happened in 1800 BCE+, because they've been indoctrinated into this. Sigh.)[/color]





Tobus said...

> @Grey: If SLC24A5 is 100% fixed in Europeans then you're just assuming that the underlying color was brown and these alleles lightened it.



I suggest you read some scientific papers on the topic - SLC24A5 (as well as SLC45A2 and TYR) has been conclusively associated with light skin multiple times in multiple admixed populations (African-Americans, South Asians and Melanesians). There is simply no doubt that each ancestral allele you have will lighten your skin to a noticable degree - it's a fact, not an assumption. The assumption is to what degree, not if it has an effect. Given what we know at this point in time, La Brana and Loschbour share the same skin pigmentation alleles as Australian Aboriginals, Sri Lankans and Papuans. We may undercover futherer contributors in the future, but at present we have to accept the possibility that Mesolithic inhabitants in Europe had very dark skin.



Freckle/tanning genes like EFR1 and MCR1 variants are also found in dark-skin populations - freckling is not a "white" person phenomenon and neither is tanning, although both are obviously more visible on depigmented skin.



Sunday, February 02, 2014 3:52:00 am





Tobus said...

Typo: You say "SLC45A5" in the text but but I think you mean SLC24A5 judging by the link... The other "SLC" gene associated with European light skin is SLC45A2 and these results show La Brana had the ancestral allele at this site too.



Monday, January 27, 2014 3:06:00 am





Mark D said...

As the article is behind a pay wall, can someone verify what the authors mean by carrying "ancestral alleles" in what I assume are, as Dienekes mentions them, the SLC24A5 and SLC24A2 genes. SNPedia has this regarding the SNP rs1426654(A)on the SLC24A5 gene:



[color="#0000FF"]"It appears as if this SNP is a relatively new one in human evolution; one estimate [PMID 17182896] is that the rs1426654(A) allele, in other words, light skin pigmentation, spread through the European population around 6,000 - 12,000 years ago. Prior to that, "European ancestors" were most likely relatively brown-skinned. Another study ([PMID 24048645OA-icon.png]) has concluded that almost individuals carrying the A111T variant can trace ancestry back to a single person who most likely lived at least 10,000 years ago."[/color]



Is the "ancestral alleles" A,G or G,G rather than A,A?



SNpedia's chart on allele frequency shows Europeans as having practically no A,G or G,G.



The answer begs the question, did those with the A,G or G,G alleles simply die off and were replaced by, as "barackobama" suggests, Near Easterners, or did the SNP originate with this individual's descendants, or someone similar, who spread throughout Europe?





Monday, January 27, 2014 6:57:00 pm







Tuesday, January 28, 2014 1:30:00 am

Tobus said...

@Terry: It's not just SLC24A5, La Brana also has the ancestral alleles of SLC45A2 and TYR as well. There may well be other undiscovered factors to European light skin, but based on what we know about the genetics of skin pigmentation at this point in time we'd expect him to have dark skin. He has the same genetic skin pigmentation profile that we see in Australian Aboriginals, Papuans and Sri Lankans.



Tuesday, January 28, 2014 2:02:00 am





Tobus said...

@Grey:

Loschbour has pretty much the same pigmentation genetics as La Brana, dark skin, blue/light eyes. Stuttgart has one and a half of the light skin alleles so was probably a bit lighter. SLC24A5 is fixed in Ireland and Scotland, but I agree the 8 plex system isn't particularly comprehensive.



Friday, January 31, 2014 1:08:00 am

[Husky]

1. About this:

[quote name='Husky' date='18 March 2014 - 09:42 PM' timestamp='1395158672' post='117136']

BTW: [color="#0000FF"]from memory, Stephen Oppenheimer said that migrations could be dated with genetics.(IHJ-4-24)[/color] But no mention of the degree of accuracy/amount of leeway for dates: 100s of years, 1000s? (May paste a literal quote eventually.)[/quote]

In the following excerpt, SO stands for Dr Stephen Oppenheimer. And Dr AR is the anatomist/medical doctor and anthropologist who is the narrator. Oppenheimer and Bradshaw foundation - or one Paul(?) Bradshaw certainly - were mentioned in the credits, with the latter being instrumental in commissioning this, I think.



(In the excerpt below, AR is the narrator where none is mentioned. At this point she's looking at how and when the Semang of Malaysia got there, as part of a larger story of how and when the native Australians got to Australia.)

Amazingly, through their DNA, it might be possible to trace that first great journey through Malaysia.



Genetics expert Stephen Oppenheimer has flown in from Oxford. His work is helping revolutionise the story of our human journey.

[Dr Stephen Oppenheimer, University of Oxford:] "I guess it's something tile a detective story where you've got a very specific trail that you can measure, just like traditional trackers will follow a trail no one else can see."



Combining genes and geography, Stephen has mapped out a route from Africa, across the Red Sea and around the edge of the Indian Ocean.

By looking at the DNA of the Semang [ancient natives of Malaysia], Stephen hopes to find evidence of that early migration towards Australia.



[color="#0000FF"]SO: "The new genetics is extraordinarily powerful for looking at ancient migrations, because not only can you trace very specific migrations, but you can actually attempt to date them as well."[/color]

[color="#800080"](Again, I can't work out the degree of precision with the dating. How far off can they be, max? For such early migrations, being off by a few 1000 years is not a terrible deal. E.g. "60,000 years +/- 5000". But in proving or disproving post/neolithic migrations at a certain date, such large margins can hardly be helpful.)[/color]



Stephen has been looking for unique genetic markers that will tell him when the ancestors of the Semang first arrived here.



AR: "What about dates?* Because they certainly think they've been here forever. You know**, they think they're ancient."

SO: *"Well..."

SO: **"Yes, well, I agree with them."

AR: "You do?"

SO: "Yes." [SO laughs good-naturedly.]

[color="#800080"](Comments after this blockquote.)[/color]



AR: "So they've been here 60,000 years? Their ancestors have been here..."

SO: "At least 60,000. I suspect it was much much more."

AR: "I mean that's amazing, because if their uniqueness goes back that far and if they, you know, if we can say that they have probably been here in this sort of area for 60,000 years, that means they were very close to the wave of colonisation, doesn't it?"

SO: "They were part. They were part of it. They were the vanguard. They were just a colony dropped along the way as the vanguard advanced (*) towards New Guinea and Australia.

[color="#800080"][* Can't make out the (1 or 2) words here, because she interrupts him with a "yeah" and he therefore takes down the volume of what he is saying to allow for her interjection. The missing word may be "then", but sounded like 2 syllables. (?)][/color]



AR: It's incredibly frustrating that the first family groups pushing through these new lands left so little for us to find. But genetics has come to the rescue.



Stephen's research tells us that the ancestors of the Semang were probably amongst the first Modern Humans to come through here. And not only that: the genetics suggests that that vanguard

moved surprisingly rapidly, getting all the way from Africa to Malaysia in a space of just a few thousand years.

[color="#800080"][Map showing arrow incoming from African direction into India into the SE coast where 3 sites (of early settlement) are marked in Red (one labelled Jwalapuram). Another site in red in Sri-Lanka and then Red dots in SE Asia incl. Malaysia.][/color]



There are other tribes thought to have ancient roots as well. Together, they're the distant echoes of that first migration, a journey that began in Africa, continued through India* and round the coast to Malaysia.

[color="#800080"][*Map shows Modern Humans/ancient Africans' entry from NW into SE coast of India - where the original settlements were marked in red - with subsequent movement up India's E coast, into the coastal areas of neighbouring SE Asian lands (what was human movement via I think Burma and S Thailand, in the direction of Malaysia).][/color]

Note, in an exchange between Oppenheimer and AR in the middle somewhere above, Stephen starts responding to AR's questions at the points marked with * and **. The timing of his responses matter IMO, because they show exactly what question by AR he is responding to at each point:

That is, she asks "What about dates?" ("Well") "Because they certainly think they've been here forever." And it is then at this point that the Dr Oppenheimer answers rather genially - and not remotely insincerely - with "Yes well, I agree with them". And then he repeats "Yes" to her subsequent question to confirm the view he just expressed yet again, with the aforementioned good-natured laugh. If he'd been a heathen, I'd have said it was a heathen response by Oppenheimer.



Of course, in doing so he's talking about the larger picture of the Semang's ancientry being indeed so ancient in their Malaysian homeland - in terms of Modern Humans - that, where human history is concerned, it could reasonably be expressed as sort of "forever". But I liked the quickness and eagerness of his response, because you could really see he was very consciously and willingly chiming in with their self-perceptions and their view of their history in the place. It was just a few brief moments but I really liked that about him.

I've not read either of his books - I so should buy them hereafter - but when reading his articles for ProspectMagazine.uk and Spiegel.de, his advocacy for the ancient nativeness of the current population of the British Isles seemed even then to indicate someone who was pleased to discover that the locals were indeed largely local - even if they've been brainwashed out of it - and have long been natives together. People don't seem to realise not just the Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Viking and Norman invasions but that "IE" invasions themselves make lots of Europeans non-natives and set up indigenous vs alien strifes and offer little in return for the theory. Well, owing to IE-ism there was a last boost to white supremacism and a 'respectable' looking one at that - to give it the definition of all of Europe including the Irish, the Slavs and even the Serbian Slavs now, but not Yesterday - but little else that Europe got out of IE-ism as far as I can tell. Even most of their ancient religions are dismissed as IE-derived, and with that the seal is forever placed on heathenisms in Europe.





2. Back in post 589, excerpts were posted from the Wacky Talk Page for the PCT (Palaeolithic Continuity Theory for PIE). Concerning this statement from the excerpts:



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talkaleolithic_Continuity_Theory/Archive1

The consensus in genetics is now fairly solid that 80% of the population is pre-farming and if you study the models of diffusion advanced e.g. by Zvelebil, then you come to the clear conclusion that it was very much a piecemeal process. Hence, as Alinei points out, Renfrew has a real problem in explaining why there's no substrate in the last areas to be neolithicised e.g. Norway, why there's a long-standing linguistic boundary in N Latvia (i.e. why don't the farmers manage to impose IE on the "Estonians", etc.

Estonians are no less Baltic than their Lithuanian and Latvian counterparts (and my childhood book of Baltic folk tales - many of which are pre-Christian, IIRC showed what looked like common pre-Christian traditions - common themes and patterns - which perhaps indicates kinship), BUT Estonians are Finno-Ugric speakers unlike modern Lithuanians and Latvians. Personally, I suspect that IE languages are not the native/ancestral languages of any of the Baltic population, but that the two more southern populations did adopt IE languages unlike Estonians. The alternative is less likely IMO: Finno-Ugric does seem native to at least the Estonian region as these do seem somewhat related to the Finns, besides, unless they are next going to claim that farming (or some other major early technological innovation) dispersed with Finno-Ugric, why would Estonians have "adopted" Estonian? It seems far more likely to wonder why Lithuanians and Latvians gave up their own ancestral tongues to adopt the languages of others.





3. About these 2 statements stolen from comments at that blog entry on the La Brana man:

Tobus said...

[...]

It's certainly possible (probable even) that further genes will discovered in the future that will give us a better picture of La Brana's skin colour than we do now, but given what we know at this point we have to accept the possibility (and perhaps I should stress possibility) that La Brana had the same skin colour as modern Papuans and Australian Aborigines - he certainly has the same genetic profile as these populations in terms of skin colour alleles known to science today. If this DNA was from a murder weapon recovered in NY this morning, the police would definitely be looking for a black man, it's only our presupposed notion of Europeans being "white" that makes us question these results in regard to La Brana.



Tobus said...

@Terry: It's not just SLC24A5, La Brana also has the ancestral alleles of SLC45A2 and TYR as well. There may well be other undiscovered factors to European light skin, but based on what we know about the genetics of skin pigmentation at this point in time we'd expect him to have dark skin. He has the same genetic skin pigmentation profile that we see in Australian Aboriginals, Papuans and Sri Lankans.

(I think his Sri Lanka reference as implied in his sequence is to the Veddas alone and not any other kinds of Sri Lankans.)



It's really disturbing to think that the KKK and other early slave-holder types (and all extant white-supremacists too, since the phenotypic descriptions of La Brana and other such are quite recent) would have lynched their own recent ancestors in European space living around say 7000 years ago, after first screeching various racial slurs at them. Which would prove my contention that Africans - if they're ever in the mood to annoy just for the hell of it - should claim European populations right until (the rather recent time) these turned homogeneously white. After all, Africans didn't invent the one-drop rule, but to the KKK etc, "if it looks African, it's an African", right? Hold them to it.





4. A pity the following doesn't sound like it will be very effective in conclusively or at least further narrowing down the phenotype of comparatively very ancient human remains, else it may have helped resolve the lay-level controversy surrounding La Brana man's appearance (the "was he or wasn't he" dark in an uncharacteristically European sense):



huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/dna-hair-color-eye-human-remains_n_2475208.html

DNA Reveals Hair, Eye Color Of Centuries-Old Human Remains, Researchers Say

Posted: 01/15/2013 8:22 am EST



By analyzing genes from a tooth of Polish Gen. Wladyslaw Sikorski, researchers confirmed he had the blue eyes and blond hair seen in portraits painted many years after his death in 1943.



By: Charles Choi, LiveScience Contributor

Published: 01/14/2013 03:58 PM EST on LiveScience



The color of the eyes and hair of ancestors dead for hundreds of years can now be revealed from their DNA alone, researchers say.



These findings suggest investigators not only can uncover new details from centuries-old human remains, but can also help identify crime victims, scientists added.



By comparing genomes across thousands of people, researchers identified genetic variations at 24 different points in the human genome that are linked with eye and hair colors, which past studies used to help determine the appearance of people who had died relatively recently. Now a team of researchers from Poland and the Netherlands have developed this system further to reveal the appearance of people long dead.



"We were able to look at the appearance of people who died several hundred years ago," researcher Wojciech Branicki, a geneticist at the Institute of Forensic Research and Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland, told LiveScience.



For instance, the researchers analyzed DNA from Gen. Wladyslaw Sikorski, who was born in 1881 and died in 1943. During World War II, Sikorski was commander-in-chief of the Polish Armed Forces and was also prime minister of the Polish government in exile. He died in an airplane crash at Gibraltar. By analyzing genes from one of his teeth, the researchers confirmed he had the blue eyesand blond hair seen in portraits painted many years after his death.



"This system can be used to solve historical controversies where color photographs or other records are missing," Branicki said.



The researchers say their system, called HIrisPlex, can predict either blue or brown eye colors with about 94 percent accuracy. When it comes to hair color, it has accuracies of 69.5 percent for blond, 78.5 percent for brown, 80 percent for red and 87.5 percent for black.



For medieval samples, where DNA is relatively degraded, [color="#0000FF"]this system was still capable of predicting eye and hair color from remains about 800 years old.[/color] For instance, the researchers identified one mysterious woman from between the 12th and 14th centuries A.D. who was buried in a crypt of the Benedictine Abbey in Tyniec near Kraków, where only remains of male monks were expected. The results hint that she had dark blond or brown hair and brown eyes. [Science of Death: 10 Tales from the Crypt & Beyond]

[color="#800080"](So, is it merely that the above method has not yet been tried out on 7000+ year old remains such as La Brana - or even various mummies - or that its accuracy goes to below a point where it ceases to be useful when applied to earlier and/or more degraded samples?)[/color]



Although this research can help reveal what ancient human ancestors might have looked like based on their DNA alone, Branicki thinks the most practical aspect of their work is how it can help identify corpses for forensic analysis. For instance, "some of our samples were from unknown inmates of a World War II prison," he said. "In these cases, HIrisPlex helped to put physical features to the other DNA evidence."



In the future, the system may look at more than 24 points in the human genome — "from research carried out on the mouse, we estimate that 127 genes may be involved in human pigmentation," Branicki said. Still, "although research on eye and hair color prediction is ongoing, and we may expect some new predictors, it seems that the main predictors have been already identified, and especially in case of eye color, we should not expect any breakthrough in prediction in the near future."



The scientists detailed their findings online Jan. 13 in the journal Investigative Genetics.

[Husky]

The last posts actually on thread topic were #583 and #584 on the previous page.