返回列表 回复 发帖
80# imvivi001
我觉得单凭染色体不能决定人种,因为R和Q如此亲缘,而现在却属不同人种,那么在古时候,R和Q究竟是什么人种?贝加尔古人是否可能揭示谜底?
80# imvivi001
而且在K以后,除了R,基本上都是黄种人,我想R最初也是黄种人。
82# jinyufei

  把y染色体与人种挂钩是一个严重的错误
物格而后知至,知至而后意诚,意诚而后心正,心正而后身修,身修而后家齐,家齐而后国治,国治而后天下平...
82# jinyufei

  把y染色体与人种挂钩是一个严重的错误
imvivi001 发表于 2017-5-1 18:55
是的,非常同意
相貌复原这种东西不可太当真,眼睑、皮肤褶皱,法令纹之类的是无法复原的,这种也就仅仅提供一点依据

wanhuatong 发表于 2017-4-24 14:24
但复原是按一张东方人的脸来做的,不似俄国人相貌。
>>>不患贫而患不均,不患寡而患不安。
>>>不持立场、不站队、不妄议、视万物皆为刍狗。
82# jinyufei

  把y染色体与人种挂钩是一个严重的错误
imvivi001 发表于 2017-5-1 18:55
我也这么认为。
>>>不患贫而患不均,不患寡而患不安。
>>>不持立场、不站队、不妄议、视万物皆为刍狗。
80# imvivi001
而且在K以后,除了R,基本上都是黄种人,我想R最初也是黄种人。
jinyufei 发表于 2017-5-1 18:43
是吗?澳大利亚土著,新几内亚的M,S都被你忘了
三界无安,犹如火宅。众苦充满,甚可怖畏
                            --------《法华经》
是以法从心生。名因法立
                      ------------《宗镜录》
我不认为乌拉尔语系的使用者早期是蒙古人种,父系可能是N的某些下游,但是不代表不是奠基者效应的产物,如果是这样,他们实际上可以有0%的东欧亚成分,比如波罗的海一些人群那样,高频的N,却没有东欧亚成分。乌拉尔语系人群最初应该是一群西欧亚人,至于西伯利亚有一些更加东欧亚的人群使用乌拉尔语,先不说他们的人口规模,光是多样性,也没法与欧洲的乌拉尔语比。何况最大的突厥语集团在土耳其吧,似乎没人认为土耳其人能代表最初的突厥人
There is surprisingly little evidence that the Uralic languages must have been spoken by some group with the same pool of ENA ancestry from Siberia. The Saami, for example, have an entirely different kind of ENA ancestry from all other Uralics, and other Uralics in turn do not seem to have the same kind of ENA ancestry as Saami and Finnics.





FU groups other than Finnics do not have increased rare allele sharing with Saami at all, but with other East Siberian and Eastern Steppe groups like Mongolian.
Extremely surprising to me, but it is what it is. It may well be that Kristiina was right and proto-Ur or pre-Ur was originally spoken by something like a Latvian_HG population or Latvian_HG-Steppe mixed population that was 100% West Eurasian, and the Saami-Finnics and other FUs received multiple, different waves of ENA ancestry from non-FUs, including from waves of IE scythians and Altaics, which causes them not to have rare allele sharing with each other above and beyond that mediated by West eurasian ancestry, as we see in the above analyses by M Myllyla. In other words, even though the FU groups are united in having ENA ancestry, they are not unified genetically by this pulse of admixture from the East.
三界无安,犹如火宅。众苦充满,甚可怖畏
                            --------《法华经》
是以法从心生。名因法立
                      ------------《宗镜录》
欧洲主要的几个芬乌语系语言与东欧亚语言一样,名词都是没有性的(阴性阳性中性),比如他/她不分,其中爱沙尼亚语最神奇,他/她的发音居然是ta,与现代汉语一模一样,呵呵~
物格而后知至,知至而后意诚,意诚而后心正,心正而后身修,身修而后家齐,家齐而后国治,国治而后天下平...
周末无聊,摘取一段几个欧洲分子人类学爱好者 就‘欧洲的E.E.成分’展开的激烈讨论

...
09-11-2014, 10:59 PM
#37 Fire Haired


Originally Posted by Jusarius  
That calculator based on Lazardis et al. included only three components so of course you can't directly compare components from it. Some of the WHG in the 3 components calculator maybe broken into different components in different populations. I mean it's not that simple that you just divide the three components with some fixed numbers as you are suggesting should be the case with the English.
---------------------------------------
Most Europeans don't have identifiable east Asian ancestry. IF they score in anything besides ENF, WHG, and ANE it's probably noise. Finns and BAlts are scoring almost no ENF, which is ridiculous because they defiantly have a big chunk of that form of ancestry.  (这哥们开始发飙,不同意芬兰坛友关于欧洲EE成分的看法,并且对包括芬兰人在内的波罗的海族群身上明显的EE成分露出嘲弄语气,似乎在嘲弄他们的东方祖先背景)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



09-11-2014, 11:39 PM
#39 Black Wolf
Veteran Member
Ethnicity:European-Canadian
Y-DNA:J2a
mtDNA:U5b2
Religion:Pagan


Originally Posted by Fire Haired  
Most Europeans don't have identifiable east Asian ancestry. IF they score in anything besides ENF, WHG, and ANE it's probably noise. Finns and BAlts are scoring almost no ENF, which is ridiculous because they defiantly have a big chunk of that form of ancestry.
---------------------------------------------------
Finns and North Russians do have identifiable East Eurasian ancestry. It can be called ENA (Eastern Non-African) in the words of Laz.   (这位欧洲裔加拿大人加入,指出芬兰人与俄国北部人的E,E成分比较高).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


09-12-2014, 12:01 AM
#40 Fire Haired
Veteran Member


0   
   Originally Posted by Jaxman  
   Finns and North Russians do have identifiable East Eurasian ancestry. It can be called ENA (Eastern Non-African) in the words of Laz.
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes I know that, but if for example Irish are scoring 2% east Eurasian we know that's noise.(他继续表示难以接受爱尔兰人携有2% east Eurasian成分这个事实)
--------------------------------------------------------------------



      09-12-2014, 12:01 AM
#41 Fire Haired
Veteran Member

0   
Originally Posted by Jusarius  
Again, try to understand that as you increase the resolution (more components), most of the original ones are broken into separate new ones. For example WHG+UHG isn't equal to WHG in Lazardis. No population in Europe perfectly fitted the three populations model of Lazardis which means that the components in that masked something else.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read Laz? Europeans fitting as descending from three ancestral populations was their big discovery. Maybe they don't trace every last drop of their blood to those populations, but we shouldn't see scored at 1% in east Eurasian or Sub Saharan.(这哥们继续明显对凯尔特人带有东亚或次撒哈拉血统表示不可接受)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


09-12-2014, 12:11
AM #42 Jusarius
Senior Member
Ethnicity:Finnish
Ancestry:Savonia
Country:
Y-DNA:N1c1
mtDNA:H3g

0   
    Originally Posted by Fire Haired  
    Did you read Laz? Europeans fitting as descending from three ancestral populations was their big discovery. Maybe they don't trace every last drop of their blood to those populations, but we shouldn't see scored at 1% in east Eurasian or Sub Saharan.
--------------------------------------------
That would be the case if the components in Polako's K7 were identical to the three ancestral components used in Lazardis. But they aren't! Polako himself said that for example ANE in K7 is not based on the MA-1 genome as in Lazardis. These calculators look at the truth from different angles and with different resolutions.  (芬兰人继续耐心解释ANE)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

....
imvivi001 发表于 2016-10-23 18:22
某欧洲知名分子人类学论坛上坛友们的热烈讨论,不妨拿来参考一下~
物格而后知至,知至而后意诚,意诚而后心正,心正而后身修,身修而后家齐,家齐而后国治,国治而后天下平...
日本以D1b和C1为父系的人群无疑是比较早期进入的,但在其与东亚的其他现代人群分化时可能还非常早,我不认为有理由将其与现代其他地区的“人种”挂钩,因为都是四万五千年前大分化后独立演化的,将其看做一种或两种独 ...
豢龙氏 发表于 2017-4-28 14:34
但是日本人的mtDNA和大陆、半岛上的mtDNA分化时间并不长,大部分不超过1万多年时间,阿伊努-绳文人的mt-M7a,在大陆上也可以找到。所以,没有理由认为日本人的某一支祖先人群和大陆上的祖先人群分离时间达到4万年之久。
NRY: O2a1c1a1a1a1a1a1-002611,F11,F17,F856,F1495(源自粤西云浮)
mtDNA:B4d1(源自浙北慈溪)
百越人的人类学文集 http://blog.sina.com.cn/baiyueren
但是日本人的mtDNA和大陆、半岛上的mtDNA分化时间并不长,大部分不超过1万多年时间,阿伊努-绳文人的mt-M7a,在大陆上也可以找到。所以,没有理由认为日本人的某一支祖先人群和大陆上的祖先人群分离时间达到4万年之 ...
baiyueren 发表于 2017-5-4 00:35
线粒体对共祖时间的估算貌似并没有Y染色体清晰。大部分不超过一万多年,这个大部分的比例是多少呢?从父系来看,日本人Y染同大陆人分开的时间也是大部分不超过一万多年。
认为绳文人的母系是M7a的依据是什么呢?古DNA证据吗?M7a的共祖时间又是多少呢?不考虑共祖时间,D和C1同样能在大陆找到。
认为日本人有澳-美人种的影响,那么日本和澳-美人群又共享哪些共祖时间在一万年的线粒体呢?
C-M130交流群:542136235
本帖最后由 baiyueren 于 2017-5-4 12:20 编辑
认为日本人有澳-美人种的影响,那么日本和澳-美人群又共享哪些共祖时间在一万年的线粒体呢?
豢龙氏 发表于 2017-5-4 08:19
你又理解错了,我前贴说的澳美人种指的是体质人类学概念。并不是常染概念。比如下面几张图,你认为更接近什么人种?

[attach]51128[/attach][attach]51129[/attach]

换言之,在常染分析上,日本人似乎只是与东北亚和远东有直接的关联。但是实际上日本人的常染中大部分的古老成分是那些绳文时代和更早时期在日本列岛上近乎隔离状态下形成的。并不与半岛或者东亚腹地接近。在电脑软件进行分析的时候,因为在亚洲找不到这些隔离形成的岛国成分,所以造成了日本人常染更接近东北亚的假象。
NRY: O2a1c1a1a1a1a1a1-002611,F11,F17,F856,F1495(源自粤西云浮)
mtDNA:B4d1(源自浙北慈溪)
百越人的人类学文集 http://blog.sina.com.cn/baiyueren
本帖最后由 baiyueren 于 2017-5-4 12:48 编辑

再发两张冲绳发现的港川人(约1.7万年前)的复原图。这又接近哪个人种?
NRY: O2a1c1a1a1a1a1a1-002611,F11,F17,F856,F1495(源自粤西云浮)
mtDNA:B4d1(源自浙北慈溪)
百越人的人类学文集 http://blog.sina.com.cn/baiyueren
本帖最后由 baiyueren 于 2017-5-4 12:47 编辑

92# 豢龙氏
M7a的确很古老,在2万前的琉球人骨中就有出现。所以M7a是绳文人典型的母系成分应该是被做实了。
http://www.ranhaer.com/redirect.php?tid=35101&goto=lastpost

还有,2万年前在琉球和M7a一同出现了B4e。这说明当时至少琉球是与华南-南陆的遗传密切相关的。反而跟东北亚没什么关联。
NRY: O2a1c1a1a1a1a1a1-002611,F11,F17,F856,F1495(源自粤西云浮)
mtDNA:B4d1(源自浙北慈溪)
百越人的人类学文集 http://blog.sina.com.cn/baiyueren
95# baiyueren 我现在上不了外网。印象中B4e好像是和美洲的B2在一个大的分支上,不知是不是这样?
本帖最后由 baiyueren 于 2017-5-4 13:17 编辑

96# wolfgang
不是,B2在系统树上是B4b的下游。B4e和B4b是并列关系。再往上是B4b'd'e'j。
我的B4d1也是这个B4大支的下游。
NRY: O2a1c1a1a1a1a1a1-002611,F11,F17,F856,F1495(源自粤西云浮)
mtDNA:B4d1(源自浙北慈溪)
百越人的人类学文集 http://blog.sina.com.cn/baiyueren
97# baiyueren 我的意思是B4e和B2都属于B的北方分支,现在好像日本人中还有一定比例的B4e.B的北方分支恐怕不能等同于华南。
本帖最后由 baiyueren 于 2017-5-4 13:25 编辑
97# baiyueren 我的意思是B4e和B2都属于B的北方分支,现在好像日本人中还有一定比例的B4e.B的北方分支恐怕不能等同于华南。
wolfgang 发表于 2017-5-4 13:18
那么请问B4e还在别的什么东北亚人群中高发?这个我没研究过。但是根据这个古DNA检测,2万年前的B4e是在琉球发现的,而不是东北亚。
换言之,我认为所有现代东北亚地区发现的mt-B4,其实都是南方人群北上的结果。美洲人跨越白令海狭的历史也不超过1.4万年,肯定比港川人要晚,更遑论2万多年前的琉球古人。

你这么说只能说明你的思维里存在一个误区,认为B4的某些分支很可能早就在东北亚本土化了。但实际上最具蒙古人种特点的就是古蒙古高原类型,而不是古东北亚类型。
NRY: O2a1c1a1a1a1a1a1-002611,F11,F17,F856,F1495(源自粤西云浮)
mtDNA:B4d1(源自浙北慈溪)
百越人的人类学文集 http://blog.sina.com.cn/baiyueren
99# baiyueren 貌似很古老的乌拉尔人也是B*,所以我觉得简单的说B是华南起源恐怕欠妥。B其实是随着蒙古人种的扩张而扩张的,而很久以前,华南是澳洲人种和矮黑人的家园,不是蒙古利亚人种的。从华南到澳洲,有很多稀有类型,在很久以前,它们的分量是和B差不多的。
返回列表
baidu
互联网 www.ranhaer.org