What is Basal Eurasian?

[Tsakhur]

What is Basal Eurasian? I heard this term from time to time, but I want to know what does it really mean? Also what does it have to do with SSA admix or African ancestry?

[Tsakhur]

Anyone please?
Bump.

[Anabasis]

The question i wanted to ask. Thx lot for this thread.

[Megalophias]

Basal Eurasian is a hypothetical kind of ancestry from an unknown population that no longer exists in pure form, but is mixed into modern Europeans, Middle Easterners, South Asians, and North Africans (but not East Asians, Oceanians, or pure-blooded Native Americans). A Basal Eurasian would be more closely related to East Asians, Oceanians, Native Americans, and ancient European and Siberian hunter-gatherers (also known as Crown Eurasians) than he would be to sub-Saharan Africans, but all the Crown Eurasians would be more closely related to each other than they were to Basal Eurasians. So a hunter-gatherer from Western Europe would be more closely related to a Chinese or Australian Aborigine than he would be to a Basal Eurasian, but more closely related to a Basal Eurasian than he would be to a Sub-Saharan African.

Basal in this context means branching off at the base - so for instance your cousin is basal to you and your brother (supposing you have one) - you are more closely related to each other than you are to him. If you looked at a family tree, your cousin would branch off the tree before (basal to) the split of you and your brother. A Basal Eurasian is like a first cousin to the Crown Eurasians (imagining European hunter-gatherers, East Asians, etc are like brothers) while a Sub-Saharan African would be second cousin to both the Basal Eurasians and the Crown Eurasians.

The reason it is thought to exist is because Neolithic European farmers as well as modern West Eurasians (Middle Easterners, Europeans, South Asians etc) and North Africans are less closely related to East Asians etc than ancient European hunter-gatherers are - so they seem to have some ancestry which is earlier than the origin of Crown Eurasians - yet it doesn't seem to make them more closely related to Africans.

This would be some population that came Out of Africa but became isolated from the mainstream of migration into Eurasia, or maybe was related to the first people who left Africa but stayed behind there for a while before leaving. Since they first appear in Neolithic farmers, the usual view is that they came from the Middle East or maybe from North Africa.

However, it isn't actually entirely certain that they even existed, since we have no ancient or modern samples of them. It is possible that some kind of complicated mixture with East Asian-like people drove up the East Asian affinity of some ancient West Eurasians but not all of them, in which case the Basal Eurasian would really just be regular West Eurasians. But it is kind of hard to make this scenario work out. When we have more ancient Middle Eastern DNA we should know more.

[Tsakhur]

Basal Eurasian is a hypothetical kind of ancestry from an unknown population that no longer exists in pure form, but is mixed into modern Europeans, Middle Easterners, South Asians, and North Africans (but not East Asians, Oceanians, or pure-blooded Native Americans). A Basal Eurasian would be more closely related to East Asians, Oceanians, Native Americans, and ancient European and Siberian hunter-gatherers (also known as Crown Eurasians) than he would be to sub-Saharan Africans, but all the Crown Eurasians would be more closely related to each other than they were to Basal Eurasians. So a hunter-gatherer from Western Europe would be more closely related to a Chinese or Australian Aborigine than he would be to a Basal Eurasian, but more closely related to a Basal Eurasian than he would be to a Sub-Saharan African.

Basal in this context means branching off at the base - so for instance your cousin is basal to you and your brother (supposing you have one) - you are more closely related to each other than you are to him. If you looked at a family tree, your cousin would branch off the tree before (basal to) the split of you and your brother. A Basal Eurasian is like a first cousin to the Crown Eurasians (imagining European hunter-gatherers, East Asians, etc are like brothers) while a Sub-Saharan African would be second cousin to both the Basal Eurasians and the Crown Eurasians.

The reason it is thought to exist is because Neolithic European farmers as well as modern West Eurasians (Middle Easterners, Europeans, South Asians etc) and North Africans are less closely related to East Asians etc than ancient European hunter-gatherers are - so they seem to have some ancestry which is earlier than the origin of Crown Eurasians - yet it doesn't seem to make them more closely related to Africans.

This would be some population that came Out of Africa but became isolated from the mainstream of migration into Eurasia, or maybe was related to the first people who left Africa but stayed behind there for a while before leaving. Since they first appear in Neolithic farmers, the usual view is that they came from the Middle East or maybe from North Africa.

However, it isn't actually entirely certain that they even existed, since we have no ancient or modern samples of them. It is possible that some kind of complicated mixture with East Asian-like people drove up the East Asian affinity of some ancient West Eurasians but not all of them, in which case the Basal Eurasian would really just be regular West Eurasians. But it is kind of hard to make this scenario work out. When we have more ancient Middle Eastern DNA we should know more.

Thank you very much. I was confused because I heard it has something to do with SSA admixture in West Eurasians like in this thread: http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...ansfers/page2? (in the last post of the second page), http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...ransfers/page3 (in the first few posts of third page) and this http://www.theapricity.com/forum/arc.../t-125013.html (in the last post of the page)

I don't understand what they are saying, but if you know, can you help explain please?

Thank you again.

[King]

nvm....

[Megalophias]

They broke off from the same ancestor - first the Basal Eurasians and Crown Eurasians separated, then the different Crown Eurasian groups separated from one another.

[Kale]

1) People emerge from Africa 75-80kya and settle in the Middle East.
2) Shortly thereafter, the Out of Africa population splits into two (probably one in the Northern Middle East, the other one in Arabia).
3) The northern branch stays together until 50-55kya, at which time they split into West Eurasians and East Eurasians.
4) The Southern branch stays put, that is Basal Eurasian.

[Megalophias]

Thank you very much. I was confused because I heard it has something to do with SSA admixture in West Eurasians like in this thread: http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...ansfers/page2? (in the last post of the second page), http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...ransfers/page3 (in the first few posts of third page) and this http://www.theapricity.com/forum/arc.../t-125013.html (in the last post of the page)

I don't understand what they are saying, but if you know, can you help explain please?

Basal Eurasian might be some kind of African, basically. That and folks be trolling.

[Awale]

I once explained Basal Eurasian on my blog here (granted, I plan to edit this post a bit; feel there are a few inaccuracies afoot tbh). But if I had to explain it here and now and simply; it's for now understood to be something that diverged early from the original "Non-African" ancestors of all Out-of-Africa populations, not taking part in any more of the shared drift and ancestry between Eastern Non-Africans and groups like Ancient North Eurasians and European Hunter-Gatherers, an Out-of-Africa "isolate", if you will... It's as a result more "basal" to all Out-of-Africa groups than Ust-Ishim is as I mention here.

The idea for now seems to be that some groups in the pre-historic Near East (who in my humble opinion were likely rather similar to groups like WHGs) seemingly intermixed with these Out-of-Africa isolates. But the main thing to get here is that Basal Eurasian is mostly a statistical concept and seems to be a way of explaining how groups such as Early European Farmers or modern Europeans and West Asians who carry the West Asian/Near Eastern component it's associated with somehow don't fit well as completely descending from a common clade with European Hunter-Gatherers and Eastern Non-Africans. We as of yet don't have actual ancient DNA from West Asia or North Africa or any place of the sort confirming what it truly is but what I've shared so far is the current academic view.

Basal Eurasian is a hypothetical kind of ancestry from an unknown population that no longer exists in pure form, but is mixed into modern Europeans, Middle Easterners, South Asians, and North Africans (but not East Asians, Oceanians, or pure-blooded Native Americans). A Basal Eurasian would be more closely related to East Asians, Oceanians, Native Americans, and ancient European and Siberian hunter-gatherers (also known as Crown Eurasians) than he would be to sub-Saharan Africans, but all the Crown Eurasians would be more closely related to each other than they were to Basal Eurasians. So a hunter-gatherer from Western Europe would be more closely related to a Chinese or Australian Aborigine than he would be to a Basal Eurasian, but more closely related to a Basal Eurasian than he would be to a Sub-Saharan African.

Basal in this context means branching off at the base - so for instance your cousin is basal to you and your brother (supposing you have one) - you are more closely related to each other than you are to him. If you looked at a family tree, your cousin would branch off the tree before (basal to) the split of you and your brother. A Basal Eurasian is like a first cousin to the Crown Eurasians (imagining European hunter-gatherers, East Asians, etc are like brothers) while a Sub-Saharan African would be second cousin to both the Basal Eurasians and the Crown Eurasians.

The reason it is thought to exist is because Neolithic European farmers as well as modern West Eurasians (Middle Easterners, Europeans, South Asians etc) and North Africans are less closely related to East Asians etc than ancient European hunter-gatherers are - so they seem to have some ancestry which is earlier than the origin of Crown Eurasians - yet it doesn't seem to make them more closely related to Africans.

This would be some population that came Out of Africa but became isolated from the mainstream of migration into Eurasia, or maybe was related to the first people who left Africa but stayed behind there for a while before leaving. Since they first appear in Neolithic farmers, the usual view is that they came from the Middle East or maybe from North Africa.

However, it isn't actually entirely certain that they even existed, since we have no ancient or modern samples of them. It is possible that some kind of complicated mixture with East Asian-like people drove up the East Asian affinity of some ancient West Eurasians but not all of them, in which case the Basal Eurasian would really just be regular West Eurasians. But it is kind of hard to make this scenario work out. When we have more ancient Middle Eastern DNA we should know more.

I saw your post just after finishing up with mine... Seems I wasted my time as you've done a good enough job.

Thank you very much. I was confused because I heard it has something to do with SSA admixture in West Eurasians like in this thread: http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...ansfers/page2? (in the last post of the second page), http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/sho...ransfers/page3 (in the first few posts of third page) and this http://www.theapricity.com/forum/arc.../t-125013.html (in the last post of the page)

I don't understand what they are saying, but if you know, can you help explain please?

Thank you again.

Lol, I see you dug posts of mine from like a year ago back when I was still mostly getting into population genetics; don't make much of them. What Megalophias and I posted is pretty much what is known for now...