Ancient DNA from siberia bolsters native american back migration into west Eurasia

A couple of weeks ago I posted a thread about the Paleoamerican Odssey conference, in Santa Fe Nm.
It was the biggest gathering on notable anthropologists and archeologists in the last ten years. I so wanted to attend, but alas as usual work reared it's ugly head and I was to busy to take the time off. And just like I thought there was great deal new work being discussed, one such piece was a paper on the complete sequencing on an ancient Siberian modern human's genome, the oldest yet at 24k years old.
The genome comes from a child buried in Mal'ta Siberia. The surprising thing is that the work shows a strong affinity with native American populations.

Dr. Dziebel discusses it on his blog,

Now that Michael Balter’s news piece is out, I can retrieve my original post inspired by Eske Willerslev’s presentation at the Paleoamerican Odyssey in Santa Fe.

Eske Willerslev presented an interesting paper on ancient DNA from the Mal’ta and Afontova Gora sites in South Siberia (24,000 and 17,000 YBP). Apart from the fact that Eske was supposed to report on ancient DNA from the Anzick (Clovis) site in North America and not on Mal’ta in Siberia and that he’s somewhat of a controversial figure in genetic circles, his paper may be the major breakthrough in our understanding of the prehistory of Siberia in the past 20 years. Pending further testing, Willerslev assigned the Mal’ta sample to hg U (mtDNA) and hg R (Y-DNA). This is the earliest attestation of these haplogroups in Siberia suggesting that these West Eurasian lineages were much more widely distributed in Eurasia in pre-LGM times and common in Eastern Eurasia, too. The results are consistent with the finding of hg U2 in 30,000-year-old Kostenki remains in Central Russia and support the pattern whereby the earliest ancient DNA samples (Tianyuan Cave in China with hg B, Kostenki with hg U2 and now Mal’ta with hg U) have so far turned up members of mtDNA macrohaplogroup R. While the dates of all these samples are consistent with 50,000 YBP chronological frame proposed by geneticists for the divergence of mhg R, it’s still noteworthy that not only is the most downstream mtDNA macrohaplogroup also the most widely spread among human populations, but also that it seems to be more wide-spread in the past than now.

anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org...

reply to post by punkinworks10


An article from science magazine also discusses the work

SANTA FE—Where did the first Americans come from? Most researchers agree that Paleoamericans moved across the Bering Land Bridge from Asia sometime before 15,000 years ago, suggesting roots in East Asia. But just where the source populations arose has long been a mystery.
Now comes a surprising twist, from the complete nuclear genome of a Siberian boy who died 24,000 years ago—the oldest complete genome of a modern human sequenced to date. His DNA shows close ties to those of today's Native Americans. Yet he apparently descended not from East Asians, but from people who had lived in Europe or western Asia. The finding suggests that about a third of the ancestry of today's Native Americans can be traced to "western Eurasia," with the other two-thirds coming from eastern Asia, according to a talk at a meeting* here by ancient DNA expert Eske Willerslev of the University of Copenhagen. It also implies that traces of European ancestry previously detected in modern Native Americans do not come solely from mixing with European colonists, as most scientists had assumed, but have much deeper roots.[/ex

m.sciencemag.org...

I am so kicking myself for not making the trip, as there were so many influential people prsenting work.
Dr. Dziebel presented a paper on an out of America theory,
And in it I found this intersting snippet,

. In a similar fashion, an extensive ancient DNA study suggests that around 60,000 years ago there took place a major colonization of the Eurasian landmass by woolly mammoths originating in the New World (Palkopoulou et al. 2013) – something that paleontology has never been able to document. If mammoths spread across the Eurasian landmass from an American source, it would not be hard to imagine human hunters following in their footsteps. From this angle, the surprising discovery of the most basal B0006 lineage on human X chromosome at highest frequencies in the Americas (see Zietkiewicz et al. 2006) parallels the basal position of North American Clade I in the mammoth phylogeny.

anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org... ussions/

If one looks at the totality of evidence , it is certain that the current model of human dispersal into the new world is lacking.

reply to post by kdog1982


Hi there kdog,
What I'm saying is that ,if you read the work presented and take it in light of other work in different disciplines, to me it's clear that humans entered the new world very very early, and subsequently migrated back into the old world.
Linguistics has shown for quite some time that occupation of the new world reaches far into antiquity. In old world anthropology the diversity of papuan languages is taken as a sign of extreme age of occupation. If that's the case then how does one correlate that with the fact that the new world held 2/3 of all language stocks and California held half of those.
Here in my home county there were over thirty different languages within a few days walk of each other.
Taken with the disputed sites in Mexico and the desert south west, I think it's clear humans have been in the new world far longer than the posited less than 50 k years.

reply to post by punkinworks10


Sorry I deleted my post because I had misread it.
You know of the Topper site ,right?

allendale-expedition.net...

reply to post by kdog1982


Hey kdog,
Yes I am familiar with topper, and topper reinforces the very early entrance into the new world.
Add to that the 68k year old mammoth tooth found in an central cal shell midden.

reply to post by punkinworks10

Nice thread thanks . Languages being one of the things that bind the different peoples around the globe has always nagged at me .Another is the time that the different groups put on artifax .How did they decide a 68K time on this stuff ? I know there are different theories about where we came from but they tend to lead back to a time of division in our modern world .I like to look at things in a simpler way .ie. the french are from France ,the Italians are from Italy and the English are from England .Today its a different story what with the different European groups trying to colonize the planet while infusing their language on the different indigenous groups .

Would you have a good link you can share that has a good historical context factoring the language side of things into the different groups .I am from the east coast of Canada and the main language seems to be Algonkin with the different dialectic groups making the different tribes . Its a subject I would like to dig deeper into but I find it hard to get a good source ..tks ...peace

reply to post by the2ofusr1


Hi,
The tooth was uranium/thorium dated and was found in an excavation of a huge shell midden, that was once on the west shore of the long gone lake tulare, in southwest Fresno county,ca.
The site also yielded human bones 15k yrs old and various faunal remains going back in age to that 68k yr old tooth.
There is very little literature about this site on the web, the only one of substance is a study of fish remains found at the site.

Here is the link to the pdf on the fishes

www.ucmp.berkeley.edu...



Here's a discussion of Na dene and it's origins

anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org...
And several discussions on various subjects that touch on linguistic diversity
anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org...

reply to post by kdog1982


Hey kdog

Thanks for that link, I hadn't seen that one yet
.