6 ms·

More than a decade ago I submitted my DNA to the National Genographic Project [1] which was an attempt to trace ancient human migration using Y chromosome and

More than a decade ago I submitted my DNA to the National Genographic Project [1] which was an attempt to trace ancient human migration using Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA from a sampling of people around the world. My paternal Y-chromosome line showed an ancient mutation (>50K year ago) carried by humans who had likely spread through a coastal migration from Africa around coasts of the Arabian Sea down to South India and eventually thousands of years later to Australia. My ancestors are from the west coast of India. About 5% of Indians carry this mutation (shared with indigenous australians) according to the data that was available at that time. As we gather more data our understanding of human migration inevitably clashes with identity politics/nationalism and previous simplistic pre-scientific classifications based on skin color and facial features: Aryan invasion, Dravidian etc. Human migration appears to be much richer. There have been many migrations of humans groups both in and out of the Indian subcontinent going on for more than 50K years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genographic_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genographic_Project

runsWphotons 4y ago
That there is some Indian introgression into Aborigibal genomes is completely not surprising based on phenotypic characteristics of their faces as well as other aspects of their cultures like language. It was remarked upon by "previous simplistic pre-scientific" British settlers, who it turns out were quite right. Many other older theories have turned out to get support from the genetic evidence.
- viewtransform 4y ago
  India was just a waypoint on the journey of human genes from Africa to Australia.
  - runsWphotons 4y ago
    The study above argues convincingly for later contact though. There were probably several waves, theres other (disputed) circumstantial evidence for this. When we sequence more (if allowed) we will find richer picture as the OP alludes to.
  - stOneskull 4y ago
    apparently india used to be connected to australia. and it split off and hit asia. india ramming into asia may have caused the himalayas.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - undersuit 4y ago
      That was 100MYA though.
valarauko 4y ago
If you have the raw sequence, services like yfull.com can help provide more detailed information. At this point, new haplotypes are being called every month. When I sequenced my own haplotype about 20 years ago (I was in the Indian lab partner of the Genographic Project at the time), the best we could do was call a few handfuls of mutations by hand (I used to run the gels myself) and my own haplotype was characterized out to maybe 3 mutations - the current haplotype is perhaps out to 20?
- viewtransform 4y ago
  I don't have the raw sequence. The project handled DNA data in total privacy. I did send my DNA swab a second time about 5-6 years later, this time to look at my maternal line (mitochondrial dna). The report had changed quite a bit possibly because the project had gathered more data in the intervening years. . I've stopped looking into this further - I really don't care about my ancestors or genetics. More interested in humans as a whole - and for that we need more data.
  - valarauko 4y ago
    The field has advanced incredibly since then - uniparental markers like mitochondria or Y are a helpful clue, but we have so much genome wide information now. Indian population genetics is still in its infancy, though, since Indian government rules around the export of biomaterial means only Indian labs can work on them, and honestly most of them have strong biases they're looking to confirm. So much of the Indian population information in databases is simply extrapolated from tiny, non-representative samples collected from Indians abroad.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
nhchris 4y ago
> As we gather more data our understanding of human migration inevitably clashes with identity politics/nationalism and previous simplistic pre-scientific classifications based on skin color and facial features Does it? Because most studies find that people living in the same country are indeed more closely related to each other than to people of different countries, roughly according to what you would expect from geography, and the simplistic categorization of humans into ~5 races corresponds well to clusters on a genetic map. See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Individual-level_human_population_structure2.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Individual-level_hum... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_component_analysis_of_human_genetic_diversity https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_compon... For a longer examination, see https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/12/does-race-exist-does-culture/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/12/does-race-exist-does-c...
- eastof 4y ago
  It might support the prescientific racial classifications, but it definitely undermines the idea of a nationally pure identity for any country. The "Aryan race" comes from the mixture of several different ancient cultures. The same can be said for north Indians, and other groups which claim to have some pure ancient genetic lineage.
- ImaCake 4y ago
  Yes, ppl in the same country have more similar genomes. But modern population genetics has found that 1. There is more similarity than difference between any 2 humans on earth (there are africans and europeans who share more dna than with others of their own ancestry. And, 2. People move around, a lot! We knew this already but there are a huge number of undocumented migrations that are being revealed by these studies. Turns out 20th century multiculturalism is just an acceleration of what we already did.
  - nhchris 4y ago
    > there are africans and europeans who share more dna than with others of their own ancestry You're probably referring to the "greater variation within than between races" argument. But it's only true when looking at single genes, not collections of genes - that is how genetic tests can accurately determine race. And most traits are polygenic, so it does not even make sense to compare using only individual genes. That's the reason Asian couples don't spontaneously give birth to European-looking children, and vice versa. And genes not expressed in superficial appearance were exposed to selection pressure just as much. Whenever you see a theory so obviously contradict the evidence of your eyes, you should be at least skeptical of it (though not dismissive - e.g. quantum mechanics are true, however counterintuitive)
dankwizard 4y ago
The only thing more boring than hearing about peoples' dreams is hearing about their ancestral history.
- viewtransform 4y ago
  Agreed, ancestry is boring. I focused on ancient human migration which I find interesting.
- zen_1 4y ago
  You should try talking to people with interesting ancestors (or views of their ancestors). I won't go into too much detail here to avoid doxing myself, but I've had a few decent discussions about some of my and my friends' ancestors/likely ancestors as historical figures. Depending on who you're (un)fortunate enough to be descended from, you might find yourself viewing certain historical events in a different light.
  - dankwizard 4y ago
    "Did you know I'm related to Benjamin Franklin?" "Cool"
  - Zurrrrr 4y ago
    Why would finding out you were related to a figure from history at all change how you would view that history?
    - zen_1 4y ago
      Personally as a child it helped me humanize these historical figures and view them as I would an uncle or grandfather, as opposed to the sometimes one-dimensional treatment notable figures would get from the educational system or culture you learn about them from. Now as an adult it's perhaps less interesting, but I still know significantly more random trivia about historical figures I'm distantly related to compared to others.
      - 4y ago
jgalt212 4y ago
> As we gather more data our understanding of human migration inevitably clashes with identity politics/nationalism It's funny you should mention this, as I saw the documentary and I seem to remember some North American indigenous tribes refusing to participate. Their reasoning was the Nat Geo was just trying to prove they were immigrants like everyone else.
- tyjen 4y ago
  You probably know this having watched the documentary, but I'm just adding context for others. It's primarily because many American tribes try to maintain religious beliefs in conflict with an immigrant identity. Although, evidence points to most of the earliest American humans immigrating across the Bering Land Bridge ~20,000 years ago. The religious stories tribes tell depict that they came from American caves, soil, water sources or other nature-related points of origin. It's religious-based denialism, no different than what other major religions do when their beliefs conflict with reality.
  - jgalt212 4y ago
    > It's religious-based denialism, no different than what other major religions do when their beliefs conflict with reality. Except it's no longer 1610.
vishnugupta 4y ago
In terms of progress in DNA sequencing this is quite an old news. Quite a lot of studies have been conducted since then with better sequencing techniques. David Reich, a well known researcher in the field, a student of Svante Pääbo who was awarded the Nobel Prize[1] for pioneering this field and technique, has authored a terrific book[2] synthesising all these findings. The details are fascinating a nuanced, highly recommend this book if you would like to pursue this rabbit hole. The book from Svante Pääbo [3] is equally fascinating which goes into the details of how DNA sequencing works to determine ancient ancestry. In a way it takes off from where the Y-chromosome study ends. [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2022/paabo/facts/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2022/paabo/facts/ [2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35749414-who-we-are-and-how-we-got-here https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35749414-who-we-are-and-... [3] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19243883-neanderthal-man https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19243883-neanderthal-man

runsWphotons 4y ago

That there is some Indian introgression into Aborigibal genomes is completely not surprising based on phenotypic characteristics of their faces as well as other aspects of their cultures like language. It was remarked upon by "previous simplistic pre-scientific" British settlers, who it turns out were quite right. Many other older theories have turned out to get support from the genetic evidence.

viewtransform 4y ago
India was just a waypoint on the journey of human genes from Africa to Australia.
- runsWphotons 4y ago
  The study above argues convincingly for later contact though. There were probably several waves, theres other (disputed) circumstantial evidence for this. When we sequence more (if allowed) we will find richer picture as the OP alludes to.
- stOneskull 4y ago
  apparently india used to be connected to australia. and it split off and hit asia. india ramming into asia may have caused the himalayas.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - undersuit 4y ago
    That was 100MYA though.

valarauko 4y ago

If you have the raw sequence, services like yfull.com can help provide more detailed information. At this point, new haplotypes are being called every month. When I sequenced my own haplotype about 20 years ago (I was in the Indian lab partner of the Genographic Project at the time), the best we could do was call a few handfuls of mutations by hand (I used to run the gels myself) and my own haplotype was characterized out to maybe 3 mutations - the current haplotype is perhaps out to 20?

viewtransform 4y ago
I don't have the raw sequence. The project handled DNA data in total privacy. I did send my DNA swab a second time about 5-6 years later, this time to look at my maternal line (mitochondrial dna). The report had changed quite a bit possibly because the project had gathered more data in the intervening years. . I've stopped looking into this further - I really don't care about my ancestors or genetics. More interested in humans as a whole - and for that we need more data.
- valarauko 4y ago
  The field has advanced incredibly since then - uniparental markers like mitochondria or Y are a helpful clue, but we have so much genome wide information now. Indian population genetics is still in its infancy, though, since Indian government rules around the export of biomaterial means only Indian labs can work on them, and honestly most of them have strong biases they're looking to confirm. So much of the Indian population information in databases is simply extrapolated from tiny, non-representative samples collected from Indians abroad.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

nhchris 4y ago

> As we gather more data our understanding of human migration inevitably clashes with identity politics/nationalism and previous simplistic pre-scientific classifications based on skin color and facial features Does it? Because most studies find that people living in the same country are indeed more closely related to each other than to people of different countries, roughly according to what you would expect from geography, and the simplistic categorization of humans into ~5 races corresponds well to clusters on a genetic map. See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Individual-level_human_population_structure2.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Individual-level_hum... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_component_analysis_of_human_genetic_diversity https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_compon... For a longer examination, see https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/12/does-race-exist-does-culture/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/12/does-race-exist-does-c...

eastof 4y ago
It might support the prescientific racial classifications, but it definitely undermines the idea of a nationally pure identity for any country. The "Aryan race" comes from the mixture of several different ancient cultures. The same can be said for north Indians, and other groups which claim to have some pure ancient genetic lineage.
ImaCake 4y ago
Yes, ppl in the same country have more similar genomes. But modern population genetics has found that 1. There is more similarity than difference between any 2 humans on earth (there are africans and europeans who share more dna than with others of their own ancestry. And, 2. People move around, a lot! We knew this already but there are a huge number of undocumented migrations that are being revealed by these studies. Turns out 20th century multiculturalism is just an acceleration of what we already did.
- nhchris 4y ago
  > there are africans and europeans who share more dna than with others of their own ancestry You're probably referring to the "greater variation within than between races" argument. But it's only true when looking at single genes, not collections of genes - that is how genetic tests can accurately determine race. And most traits are polygenic, so it does not even make sense to compare using only individual genes. That's the reason Asian couples don't spontaneously give birth to European-looking children, and vice versa. And genes not expressed in superficial appearance were exposed to selection pressure just as much. Whenever you see a theory so obviously contradict the evidence of your eyes, you should be at least skeptical of it (though not dismissive - e.g. quantum mechanics are true, however counterintuitive)

dankwizard 4y ago

The only thing more boring than hearing about peoples' dreams is hearing about their ancestral history.

viewtransform 4y ago
Agreed, ancestry is boring. I focused on ancient human migration which I find interesting.
zen_1 4y ago
You should try talking to people with interesting ancestors (or views of their ancestors). I won't go into too much detail here to avoid doxing myself, but I've had a few decent discussions about some of my and my friends' ancestors/likely ancestors as historical figures. Depending on who you're (un)fortunate enough to be descended from, you might find yourself viewing certain historical events in a different light.
- dankwizard 4y ago
  "Did you know I'm related to Benjamin Franklin?" "Cool"
- Zurrrrr 4y ago
  Why would finding out you were related to a figure from history at all change how you would view that history?
  - zen_1 4y ago
    Personally as a child it helped me humanize these historical figures and view them as I would an uncle or grandfather, as opposed to the sometimes one-dimensional treatment notable figures would get from the educational system or culture you learn about them from. Now as an adult it's perhaps less interesting, but I still know significantly more random trivia about historical figures I'm distantly related to compared to others.
    - 4y ago

jgalt212 4y ago

> As we gather more data our understanding of human migration inevitably clashes with identity politics/nationalism It's funny you should mention this, as I saw the documentary and I seem to remember some North American indigenous tribes refusing to participate. Their reasoning was the Nat Geo was just trying to prove they were immigrants like everyone else.

tyjen 4y ago
You probably know this having watched the documentary, but I'm just adding context for others. It's primarily because many American tribes try to maintain religious beliefs in conflict with an immigrant identity. Although, evidence points to most of the earliest American humans immigrating across the Bering Land Bridge ~20,000 years ago. The religious stories tribes tell depict that they came from American caves, soil, water sources or other nature-related points of origin. It's religious-based denialism, no different than what other major religions do when their beliefs conflict with reality.
- jgalt212 4y ago
  > It's religious-based denialism, no different than what other major religions do when their beliefs conflict with reality. Except it's no longer 1610.

vishnugupta 4y ago

In terms of progress in DNA sequencing this is quite an old news. Quite a lot of studies have been conducted since then with better sequencing techniques. David Reich, a well known researcher in the field, a student of Svante Pääbo who was awarded the Nobel Prize[1] for pioneering this field and technique, has authored a terrific book[2] synthesising all these findings. The details are fascinating a nuanced, highly recommend this book if you would like to pursue this rabbit hole. The book from Svante Pääbo [3] is equally fascinating which goes into the details of how DNA sequencing works to determine ancient ancestry. In a way it takes off from where the Y-chromosome study ends. [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2022/paabo/facts/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2022/paabo/facts/ [2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35749414-who-we-are-and-how-we-got-here https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35749414-who-we-are-and-... [3] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19243883-neanderthal-man https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19243883-neanderthal-man