Tatsuya's archaeogenetics

The Iranian hunter-gatherers are among the more enigmatic lineages, with unclarified deeper roots. They fall broadly within the West Eurasian cluster, but are placed in an "extreme" position, displaying no strong genetic affilation with nearby Anatolian or Levant groups, pointing to deep divergence and or partial distinct ancestries. Their genetic makeup and formation remains unclear, but it has been agreed that they are primarily derived from a deep local, presumably Basal Eurasian source, and can be modeled via a four-way admixture, including a Caucasus_UP component, an Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) component, and Önge-like component, and an extra Basal Eurasian component (Amjadi et al. 2025, Allentoft et. al. 2024, Lazaridis 2018 etc.). Neolithic Iranians display the highest amount of Basal Eurasian ancestry of all sequenced populations. The inferred Basal Eurasian lineage is assumed to have split from other Eurasians after the OoA exit, but before the archaic introgressio...

A short summary on evidence for the southern dispersal route of the EEC, in contrast to the Northern IUP route. The Northern IUP sites can be associated with a specific microblade material culture, streching from Eastern Europe via Central Asia/Siberia to the Baikal region. In contrast, Eastern Asia, Southeast Asia, Australasia and South Asia are characterized by a different set of core & flake material culture, representing the southern route. A particular link between East Asian, Tibetan and Hoabinhian core & flake types has been noted. Those two types are associated with the dispersal of Ancient East Eurasians (c. 48kya) from the eastern Persian plateau. The northern type spreaded with an early diverged lineage or lineages, represented by the genomes of the Ust'Ishim man, the Oase specimens, the Bacho Kiro specimen, as well as sites in the Baikal region and northeastern Uzbekistan. This lineage(s) appearently went largely extinct without substantial contributing to moder...

While the phylogeny of East Eurasians is still not entirely clear, we have made significant improvements on our knowledge of Ancient East Eurasians and their diverging patterns. In this article we will try to summarize the availabe data as future reference for other posts. Basically, we have a deep clade of an Initial Upper Paleolithic (IUP) lineage or lineages affilated with the Ust'Ishim specimen in Northern Central Asia, the Bacho Kiro and Oase specimens in southeastern Europe, and the Kara Bom site in the Altai and Baikal region, which diverged from "proper East Eurasians" (c. 48kya to 46kya) shortly after their divergence from "Ancient West Eurasians" (c.50kya to up to 55kya), thus sharing minimal drift with modern East Eurasians. – The four major modern East Eurasian branches, which have been termed as "East Eurasian Core" (EEC), are: Australasians (Australo-Papuans) Paleolithic Tibetans (ghost) AASI/SAHG (Ancient South Asians) East/Southeast Asi...