Talk:Basal Eurasian

Reviewer Note

There is enough information here for an article that is referenced by the parent article. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:02, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Basal Eurasian Timeline

"Basal Eurasians may have been present in the Near East, as anatomically modern humans resided in the Levant approximately 100,000 years ago and African-related tools in Arabia were likely developed by modern humans;[3]" According to Laziridis et al:

"The ‘Basal Eurasians’ are a lineage hypothesized13 to have split off prior to the differentiation of all other Eurasian lineages, including both eastern non-African populations like the Han Chinese, and even the early diverged lineage represented by the genome sequence of the ~45,000 year old Upper Paleolithic Siberian from Ust’-Ishim11." (NATURE) Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East, Laziridis, Reich et al. For a visual depiction of the Basal Eurasians in the chain of human migrations, see Figure 1. The First Human Diaspora: Basal Eurasians and the Horn of Africa Background: Out of Africa Migrations and Early Population Structure, DNA Tribes Digest March 1, 2014. 2001:1C00:1E31:5F00:45A8:E16D:1486:BBAE (talk) 11:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Map And Dates

"Hypothetical migration of Eurasian-associated lineages, after diverging from contemporary Africans."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_Eurasian#/media/File:Human_migration_out_of_Africa.png

This map pushes the migration of people out of Africa back to 100-90k year ago. Most scientists put the migration of people today's people are related to at 60-50kya. Also, why the emphasis of divergence from contemporary Africans? 2001:1C00:1E31:5F00:709A:7717:D3E7:F17F (talk) 11:52, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Another problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_Eurasian#/media/File:BasalEurasianMbuti_DG.jpg

The problem with the chart is that it has the Basal Eurasians preceding the Ancient North Eursians and Western Hunter Gatherers in time. Most geneticists posit the arrival of Basal Eurasians from Ancient Non-Africans 20-30,000 years after the Western Hunter Gatherers and Ancient North-Eurasians left Africa 50,000 years ago. This map says they predate them.

"According to one study, Basal-Eurasian ancestry peaks among Eastern Arabs (Qataris) and Iranian populations, at 45% and 35% respectively, and is also found in significant amounts among Ancient Iberomarusian samples and modern Northern Africans, "

I'm sure...

"in accordance with the Arabian branch of West-Eurasian diversity,"

Actually both the Iberomaurussians and the Neolithic population of Arabia were 1/3 Yoruba/YRI/Sub-Saharan African by dna.

"the ancient Iberomaurusians appear to be related to Middle Easterners and other Africans: They shared about two-thirds of their genetic ancestry with Natufians, hunter-gatherers who lived in the Middle East 14,500 to 11,000 years ago, and one-third with sub-Saharan Africans who were most closely related to today’s West Africans and the Hadza of Tanzania." (SCIENCE) Oldest DNA from Africa offers clues to mysterious ancient culture, by Ann Gibbons, Mar. 15, 2018.

People whose dna today is most unadmixed in West Africans or Yoruba dna, was once the dna of Arabia. At the start of the Neolithic, "In the Arabian Peninsula, EEF farmers mixed with ancestral Sub-Saharan Africans related to modern Nigerian, Gambian, and Botswanan populations." Source: Ancient Eurasian and African Ancestry in Europe, DNA Tribes Digest, April 2, 2014.

"which expanded into Northern and Northeastern Africa between 30 and 15 thousand years ago.[5]"

No. Unless we're still talking about the Iberomaurussian component of modern North Africans, other genetic components are from the Levant, Iberia (Portugal), Horn of Africa (Somalia) and West Africa. In other words, they're not the exact same people. See: Figure 2, The North African Region, DNA Tribes Digest February 1, 2012. 2001:1C00:1E20:D900:283B:1451:6C9F:264C (talk) 16:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Vallini et al. 2022

@Tewdar: I know, you only have rephrased the lede and added some structure to the article, most of it was written by others. But have you noticed that the final paragraph (now section "Alternatives") is completely OR? The opening and the end of the first sentence are not supported at all by the source: "The existence of the Basal-Eurasians and own population lineage is questioned by more recent genetic and archaeogenetic data [...] with the least archaic admixture among Middle Eastern populations." The paper does not talk about Middle Eastern populations at all and does not question the hypothesis of Basal Eurasian admixture in West Asia. Vallini et al.'s models are completely independent from the latter. They only connect extant Upper Paleolithic genomes without postulating any ghosts (except in the part that discusses Papuan ancestry sources). This lovely review[1] co-authored by Vallini shows that he still reckons with the possibility of Basal Eurasian ancestry sources that contributed to West Eurasian populations. I think we can delete the complete section as OR (if we remove the OR, it becomes COATRACK). What do you think? Austronesier (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good, rewrites are always easier than fixing stuff. The whole article needs looking at...  Tewdar  20:06, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

The PCA: "Source: Own work" LOL! 😂  Tewdar  20:10, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

We could just as well add something about the archaic creature in the northern Pacific in Fig. 1 of Vallini & Pagani's paper 😂 –Austronesier (talk) 20:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

"Vallini et al. state that ancient Papuans hunted Morgawr, explaining why he only turns up in Falmouth harbour these days..."  Tewdar  20:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Source: "Excessive inhalation reveals archaic admixture into near-coastal Atlantic crypto-taxa", Nature 1234(56). –Austronesier (talk) 20:36, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Excessive inhalation - well, we've got to do something for fun around here in the winter, it is Dry January after all...  Tewdar  20:47, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Checking the history, I believe most of this article was written by an ip from Austria...  Tewdar  22:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Using an unmasked IP (without proxy or VPN) actually is the most honest thing they can do (or editing from one fresh account without a sockfarm). For my part, I intend to concentrate on the merits of content regardless of its author—unless the content is pushed into WP by means of dirty tricks or in a combatative mode. While it looks like weaponizing, selectively applying WP:BANREVERT is fully supported by policy (unlike you, I'm a half-hearted anarchist 😂). –Austronesier (talk) 12:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

No contact with Neanderthals

@Tewdar: The closest I could find so far is this: "Interestingly, both Natufian and Iberomaurusian specimens show a high level of Basal Eurasian ancestry, which was a population isolated > 50 ka in a Late Pleistocene refugium of the Arabo-Persian Gulf without contacts with the Neanderthals [58]." from Diallo et al. (2022). Their reference 58 is Ferreira et al. (2021) who go very deep into the topic of Basal vs Neanderthal-admixed Eurasian populations, but phrase things more carefully: "No such evidence [for contacts between Neanderthals and AMH] was found in the southern parts of southwest Asia, although absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Austronesier (talk) 10:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks, I'll change that bit later. Do you think that anything pertinent was lost in the rewrite?  Tewdar  10:18, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

West-Eurasian vs. East-Eurasian Neanderthal components

This following statment looks incorrect and the citation at the end of the paragraph (behind a pay wall) might not reference it. AFAIK Europeans AKA West-Eurasians have the highest percentages of Neanderthal ancestry in contemporary populations. Also, the archaic ancestry in East and South-Eurasia is more frequently Denisovan. I am hoping someone with more history with this page might fix it, by reviewing and adding sources, then restating the facts. If this is merely faulty reasoning found within literature on the 'basal Eurasian' theory, then citing it better would also be helpful.

Currently the (incorrect?) statement reads:

"In modern populations, Neanderthal ancestry is around 10% to 20% lower in West Eurasians than East Eurasians, "

Ellisun (talk) 05:09, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

It is correct and supported by multiple sources, so there is basically nothing in need to be fixed. From the Neolithic to this day, Europeans have had lower levels of Neanderthal ancestry than East Asians (what probably needs to be fixed is the naive application of the terms "West Eurasians" and "East Eurasians" to modern populations). This a fact that is in no way linked to the Basal Eurasian hypothesis; to the contrary, the Basal Eurasian hypothesis is just one way among others to explain the observed facts about the spatiotemporal distribution of Neanderthal ancestry. But as of now, it is the preferred working hypothesis. For a recent, non-paywalled source about the topic there's e.g. this article[2]. –Austronesier (talk) 19:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

More sources to be found here: Interbreeding_between_archaic_and_modern_humans#Subpopulation_admixture_rate. –Austronesier (talk) 19:25, 9 November 2023 (UTC)