yDNA J2b2a2b2a ancient specimen and northeastern yDNA O

[CLTVTE]

In “Ancient genomes revealed the complex human interactions of the ancient western Tibetans”, it was said that the 2000-year-old yDNA J2b2a2b2a ancient outlier specimen from the Sandalongguo site, Ngari, Western Tibet had had a connection to the population of the Indus Valley civilization:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y950/
 
On the PCA of “Ancient genomes revealed the complex human interactions of the ancient western Tibetans”, the  yDNA J2b2a2b2a ancient specimen from the Sandalongguo site aligned with the yDNA J specimen from Shandong, which in his turn clustered extremely closely to  an yDNA O1b2 specimen from Shandong.
 
The derived lineage of yDNA J2b2a2b2a is yDNA J2-Z8344:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z8344/
yDNA J2-Z8344 is also characterized by mutation FGC86221, which appears in yDNA J1-A18468 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-A18468/), which is a branch of yDNA J1-Y5322 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y5322/)
 
yDNA O1b2-47z> O1b2-CTS713 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/O-K2/) is mainly observed in Japan, and yDNA O1b2-47z> O1b2-CTS713 is also characterized by mutation CTS11067, which appears in yDNA J1- Y182875 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y182875/), which is a branch of yDNA J1-Y5322 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y5322/) as well.
 
yDNA J1- Y5322 is a “child” of yDNA J1-Y10887 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y10887/), which has a case from the rice-farming Hunan Province of China.
 
The above-mentioned cases of yDNA J1 and their “parents” are predominantly observed in Arabic populations, but they are also observed in other populations of the Near Eastern origin.
 
Regarding such lineages, for example, there is a hypothesis on some Near Eastern elements in Austroasiatic languages, but the less known author suggests the penetration of Near Eastern elements to a much more northerly language via the language, spoken by some rice farmers.

[Sephesakueu]

Iran neolithic network embracing the himalayas.

Sample ID : I11480
Date : 2900-2800 BCE
Y-DNA : J2b2a2-Z2444(Y33893+)
mtDNA : W6
Archaeological Context : Indus_Periphery, 424, IRR Grave 22e (Central-E), Period I/II, phases 8-7
Autossomal Profile : Iran_ neolithic + 30% AASI
Site : Shahr-e Sūkhté
Source:
NarasimhanPattersonScience2019
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample ID : I4157
Date : 1450 BCE
Y-DNA : J2b2a2-Z2432
SNPs : Z557-, Z8226-, Z8246-, Z8238, BY1954-.
mtDNA : T1
Archaeological Context : BMAC
Site : Bustan, UZ-BST-005, Site 7, Grave 60, 56-63
Source : NarasimhanPattersonScience2019

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample ID : C3315 / L6135
Date : 2102-1973 BP
Y-DNA : J2b2a2b1a
mtDNA : M3
Archaeological Context: Xinjiang Iron Age
Site : Caishichang
Source : https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1534

[CLTVTE]

Sample ID : C3315 / L6135
Date : 2102-1973 BCE
Y-DNA : J2b2a2b1a
mtDNA : M3
Archaeological Context: Xinjiang Iron Age
Site : Caishichang
Source : https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1534

However, in Table S1 of “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history” (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1534) the age of Sample ID : C3315 / L6135 and the age of other samples is measured in /cal BP/ ("calibrated before present"). Consequently, it should read

Sample ID : C3315 / L6135
Date : 2102-1973 calibrated before present
Y-DNA : J2b2a2b1a
mtDNA : M3
Archaeological Context: Xinjiang Iron Age
Site : Caishichang
Source : https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1534

[CLTVTE]

Whereas the Paleolithic relative of mtDNA D4f from the Korean Peninsula is observed in Kazakhastan of Central Asia (https://www.yfull.com/mtree/D4-b/), and the Korean language (unlike Japanese) clustered with a cluster, comprising Tai-Kadai languages in “Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment”, in another article, such as "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", a genetic cline, relevant for the separation of yDNA O1b2-P49-related population from yDNA O1b-M268-related population (while basal yDNA O1b* is in an ancient Tai-Kadai individual in that article), proceded via the most remote Jiangsu Province’s individual in the direction of Baikal ancients, towards an ancient individual, whose relatives contributed to Central Asia’s Botai culture of Kazakhstan, and, additionally, having separated from the East Asian cluster, comprising Tai-Kadai languages, the Korean language showed a lexical affinity to the Burushaski language of Central Asia in the same language tree from “Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment” (https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1500331112). The cline of the isolated Jiangsu Province’s specimen and yDNA O1b2-affiliated specimens of Korea and Japan does not show evident contributions to other individuals from China in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”. In another article, the IVPP researchers came to the conclusion, that after the drying out of the Bohai Bay more than 25000 years ago because of the Last Glacial Maximum, the migration to Korea and Japan increased along this new route, and the largest concentrations of settlements, available to Chinese researchers, formed in the easternmost part of Northeast China, adjacent to this new Bohai Bay route and to Korea (which is consistent with the observation of the “main” branch of yDNA O1b2-P49 in Korea and Japan and observation of mtDNA D4f in Korea (https://www.yfull.com/mtree/D4-b/).

The above described situation, concerning yDNA O1b2-P49, is extremely different from hypothetical allegations about the Chinese agricultural or even rice-farming origin for yDNA O1b2-P49-related populations. On the contrary, in the new article “Ancient genomes revealed the complex human interactions of the ancient western Tibetans”, some Japanese individuals, whose Jomonese and non-Jomonese mtDNA lineages carry mutations, shared with mtDNA lineages of Tarahumara and Charrua Native Americans (whose languages were the “linguistic neighbours” of the Japanese language in the macrocluster of the study Jager, 2017 (“From words to features to trees: Computing a world tree of languages from word lists”) formed a cline with an individual (who did not have relatives in China), carrying the Amerindian ancestry (the lower amount of such a component is observed in the Japanese individual, sharing an mtDNA mutation with the lineages of the Charrua Native Americans, whose language is more remote from the Japanese language in Jager, 2017, while the higher amount of such a component is shared by the Japanese, having a Jomonese mtDNA lineage and a mutation, shared with Tarahumara Native Americans, whose language is closer to the Japanese language in the macrocluster of Jager, 2017).

Concerning yDNA O1b2-P49, the IVPP researchers more elaborate upon their input to the Korean population, but not to the Japanese population, and it is the Korean-related yDNA O1b2-P49-affiliated individual that participated in the mtDNA A-related genetic cline (which also includes individuals, akin to East Asian lineages of mtDNA A+16362 https://www.yfull.com/mtree/A-a1/), which united speakers of similarly agglutinating languages in Korea and Tibet (as opposed to the speakers of old Chinese languages, related to such an ancient individual as WGM43 from the Yangshao culture, belonging to yDNA O-M134) in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”. Prior to the existence of the 19000-year-old AR19K individual, such an mtDNA A+16362-related population brought the component to the vicinity of Korea along the Tibet – pre-Miaozigou Neimenggu trajectory, and this component (with which yDNA O1b2-related individuals had to interact in Korea) contributed to the Paleosiberian ancestry, which separated prior to the split of Northern and Southern East Asians, and later waves of mtDNA A-related populations or yDNA C2-F1067-related populations continued to use this route, uniting Tibet and Korea during the later period, though it should be remembered that the Koreans did not form any more recent genetic clines with Tibetan populations in “Ancient DNA indicates human population shifts and admixture in northern and southern China”, which implies earlier connections.

Despite the coexistence of mtDNA A and yDNA O1b2-P49 in Korea in Chinese works, the Japanese research implies the unrelatedness of speakers of the Japanese language to diverse mtDNA A-related populations (only 2% of mtDNA A is observed in Japonic-speaking Ryukyuans in Tanaka et al, 2004). Indeed, in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" and in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, there are some “19000-year-old AR19K period” mtDNA D4 lineages, whose individuals from North China, located to the south of mtDNA A-related populations, do not show any genetic connections to yDNA O1b2-P49-related groups in general, but only show genetic connections to different groups within the Japanese population as a whole, of which yDNA O1b2-P49 individuals, who became the part of the Japanese population, are only single representatives within each of such groups, which means that the ancestry of such mtDNA D4 bearers from North China is connected to particular ancestries of the groups within the Japanese populations, but not to the ancestry of the yDNA O-P49-related population as a whole. In the newer article “Ancient genomes revealed the complex human interactions of the ancient western Tibetans”, bearers of such mtDNA D4 lineages showed the connection to the Afghanistan’s Hazara population, some of whose representatives had both Australasian and Native American components in “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, which points to the existence of the extremely ancient ancestral component in Eastern Eurasia, which was once shared by ancestors of some Australasians and ancestors of some Native Americans. Additionally, in both older "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" and newer “Ancient genomes revealed the complex human interactions of the ancient western Tibetans”, bearers of such mtDNA D4 lineages experienced a certain Myanmar-like influence (another kind of such a Myanmar-like influence is in the Houli culture’s population, such as Bianbian, Boshan, and in the Shamanka_EN population (whose component was classified as East Asian in “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history”, but not as "Paleosiberian"), etc, in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago"). The remnants of such mtDNA D4-related lineages from Paleolithic North China are observed in some Siberian, Japanese and some American populations, whose languages share certain similarities in the formation of the verb with each other. Unlike the Japanese population, in whose formation such Paleolithic individuals should have participated, the bearers of the Korean language probably borrowed some later resulting innovations from some speakers from the Hongshan culture, which contributed to later Korean and later Altaic populations, and developed on the earlier substratum, another form of which was distributed in ancients, who shared an affinity to AR19K (who clustered with the Japanese) with Boshan and Xiaogao in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” and who had relatives in the Jilin Province of China, where a language, called "Para-Japonic" by Christopher J. Beckwith, was distributed on the territory of the Kingdom of Puyo, which means that the Paleosiberian affinity in that article comes through an AR19K-related population, whereas the ancient AR19K clustered with the Japanese in that article. In North China, such mtDNA D4-related populations were not related to yDNA O1b2-P49 in accordance with the materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", which is the difference between the formation of ancestors of speakers of the Japanese language and the formation of ancestors of yDNA O1b2-P49-related speakers of the Korean language.

[CLTVTE]

In North China, such mtDNA D4-related populations were not related to yDNA O1b2-P49 in accordance with the materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", which is the difference between the formation of ancestors of speakers of the Japanese language and the formation of ancestors of yDNA O1b2-P49-related speakers of the Korean language.

The meaning of the AR19K-affiliated population, whose 19000-year-old AR19K individual, belonging to yDNA C-L1373, clustered closer to the Japanese as opposed to the Koreans in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” (that is, Mao et al, 2021), should be explained in terms of archaeological distributions and tied to the history of ancient yDNA Q and yDNA P* individuals in Northeast Asia.

In the article "Diachronic shifts in lithic technological transmission between the eastern Eurasian Steppe and northern China in the Late Pleistocene", it was stated that the technological transmission from the indigenous Middle Upper Paleolithic (that is, 32000-23000 years ago) non-microblade technology of Mongolia and Siberia “along the east margin of the Gobi Desert” to North China led to the in situ development of the East Asian microblade technology in North China. If the temporal scope is widened to the earlier period than the Middle Upper Paleolithic, it was mentioned by Chinese, Korean and Western archaeologists that certain isolated cases of techniques, used for the much later microblade production, had been appearing in China, Korea and the pre-mountainous area of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan (adjacent to Afghanistan) of Central Asia since at least ca. 40000 years ago (which is already close to the period of the Tianyuan individual, belonging to yDNA K2b).

While Afghanistan’s Hazara individuals produced some calls for yDNA K2b>yDNA P*, the new article “Ancient genomes revealed the complex human interactions of the ancient western Tibetans” revealed the “Hazara-Japanese” genetic cline, which included the individual, who, in Mao et al, 2021, clustered extremely close to the yDNA Q-M120 Xiaowu XW-R1M18 ancient individual and who, in Mao et al, 2021, participated in the genetic cline, comprising southern Nicobar Islands <=> mainland Southeast Asia <=> Guangxi< => 40000-year old yDNA K2b Tianyuan near the Yellow River basin <=>“Yellow River Xiaowu”< => Inner Mongolia’s yDNA C2-F1067 Miaozigou. The closest individual to the Nicobar Islans, belonging to yDNA K2b, is the ancient HistAndaman of the Andaman Islands, belonging to yDNA P-M1254* (https://www.yfull.com/tree/P-M1254*). Regarding the directionality, the peculiarities of the genetic cline in Mao et al, 2021 stronger support the southern origin of HistAndaman-related yDNA P-M1254* and Tianyuan-related yDNA K2b, which was introgressed into “autosomally “Yellow River region”-like Early Upper Paleolithic 40000-year-old” population, termed “Basal Eastern Eurasian” rather than “ancient East Asian”, which occupied the eastern part of the Yangtze River basin in “Ancient genomes reveal the complex genetic history of Prehistoric Eurasian modern humans”. The Western article “The genomic formation of First American ancestors in East and Northeast Asia” tries to model yDNA P-M1254*-related HistAndaman using Native Americans and Australasians. However, in both cases, HistAndaman-related yDNA P-M1254* and Tianyuan-related yDNA K2b became a “link”, joining Australasian and America/Beringia-related populations.

The oldest western contact (Goyet Q116-1 of yDNA C1a and mtDNA M32’56 (https://www.theytree.com/mttree/M32'56)), which the Tianyuan individual had, was inferred to have been contacted via the mediation of a BachoKiro-related population, whose ancient individual belonged to yDNA C1*, which makes the BachoKiro-related population a relative for the Japanese yDNA C1a-M8 individuals, who separated more than 45000 years ago from other yDNA C1a members and, consequently, had to separate from a population, which was still close to a parental yDNA C1*-related population. While BachoKiro was characterized by the Initial Upper Paleolithic (IUP) stone technology, Youping Wang concluded in "Diachronic shifts in lithic technological transmission between the eastern Eurasian Steppe and northern China in the Late Pleistocene" that the denticulate tools (which were also encountered in the Japanese Archipelago and Korea, according to Shinji Kato) should be related to the IUP technology from the West.

Since yDNA C1a distributed between Japan and western locations, the “Hazara-Japanese” genetic cline from “Ancient genomes revealed the complex human interactions of the ancient western Tibetans” supports the distribution of at least some yDNA P* members between Korea, China and the pre-mountainous area of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan (adjacent to Afghanistan) of Central Asia, from where the earliest certain isolated cases of techniques, used for the much later microblade production, were reported. Consequently, prior to the Middle Upper Paleolithic period, the migration network of yDNA P* individuals, being northern relatives of Tianyuan (yDNA K2b), might have served as a network for distribution of certain isolated cases of techniques, used for the much later microblade production, while it is the technological transmission from the indigenous Middle Upper Paleolithic (that is, 32000-23000 years ago) non-microblade technology of Mongolia and Siberia “along the east margin of the Gobi Desert” to North China that led to the in situ development of the East Asian microblade technology in North China. The most “Mongolian” specimen in this respect is ancient Yumin.

Both Afghanistan’s Hazara individuals, belonging to yDNA Q, and the ancient AR9.2K_outlier of the Amur (Heilongjiang) River basin, related to yDNA Q-M120 individuals in Mao et al, 2021, produced some calls for yDNA K2b>yDNA P* or preferred to be determined as yDNA P instead of yDNA Q. It implies that the western part of yDNA P* individuals, being northern relatives of Tianyuan (yDNA K2b), contacted the yDNA Q-related population, and yDNA Q-related individuals started to distributed along the migration network of yDNA P* individuals during the later period. However, since the Tianyuan-related population died out in China during the Last Glacial Maximum (according to Mao et al, 2021), Northeast China and Northeast Asia, where Tianyuan-related populations had also distributed, became the primary destination of yDNA Q individuals. Indeed, the yDNA Q-related ancient AR9.2K_outlier of the Amur (Heilongjiang) River basin, related to yDNA Q-M120 individuals in Mao et al, 2021, had the same affinity to the Western component, as the 19000-year-old AR19K individual did (the 19000-year-old AR19K individual belonged to yDNA C-L1373 and clustered closer to the Japanese as opposed to the Koreans in Mao et al, 2021). However, in such a case, the influence of the most ancient yDNA Q individuals, arriving to Northeast Asia, could not have been universal (for example, yDNA Q-related AR9.2K_outlier could not be modeled, using the most widely distributed AR14K population in Mao et al, 2021), because they had to arrive to such yDNA P* Tianyuan-related populations in the first place, with which their earlier relatives already had some ties, while yDNA P* Tianyuan-related populations were not already the mainstream populations in Northeast Asia as compared to ancient East Asian populations.

According to “Microblades in MIS2 Central China: Cultural Change and Adaptive Strategies”, “the northern group is mainly distributed in the Russian Far East, Northeast China, the Korean Peninsula, northern Japan, and eastern Beringia, being characterized by the wedge-shaped, Yubetsu method. These populations appear to have been highly mobile with a heavy reliance on large-sized animals, and their movement was triggered by fluctuations in temperature and the migrations of large mammals in response”. The northern “yDNA Q-affiliated” yDNA C2-L1373 should have contributed from this northern group of microblade makers to the population of the 19000-year-old AR19K individual, belonging to yDNA C-L1373, who clustered closer to the Japanese as opposed to the Koreans, in Mao et al, 2021.


Unlike the above, the “multiethnic” population, which contributed to the 19000-year-old AR19K individual via inland North China, but not via more southern “Sino-Tibetan-Astronesian” populations, another part of which “contributed” mtDNA F1d population’s ancestry to a Yumin-related population (according to Laurent Sagart, Sino-Tibetan and Austronesian languages are related, while yDNA O-M122 is more prominent in Sino-Tibetan speakers), should be treated as a population, related to the makers of indigenously developed boat-shaped and prismatic microblades of North China. According to “Microblades in MIS2 Central China: Cultural Change and Adaptive Strategies”,” the southern group encompasses Central China, southwestern Japan, and the submerged continental shelf in between, where boat-shaped and prismatic core technologies are dominant. These populations had less mobility and a longer tradition of more intensive utilization of plant resources, more readily influenced by fluctuations in humidity caused by the rise and decline of sea level.” Very ancient 17000-24000-year-old Shizitan and Xiachuan sites of Central China can boast the appearance of one of the oldest pre-agricultural implements for plant gathering and plant processing in East Asia. According to the material of “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, this Central China’s microblade-making population could have been influenced primarily by more geographically close yDNA C2-F1067, but also by populations, related to yDNA O2a-L465* (splitting from ancestors of Sino-Tibetans), “Para-Tai-Kadai” yDNA O1b*, “Para-Austroasiatic” yDNA O1b1*, who had already separated into distinct populations, migrating to the south of the ancient East Asian homeland in the eastern part of the Yangtze River basin during the Last Glacial Maximum, but some representatives could have entered the southern part of the Huanghe River basin because of the geographic proximity. According to the material of “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, this Central China’s microblade-making population could not have been influenced by yDNA O1b2 population, which had been migrating in the direction of Korea. Moreover, according to the material of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", the “ancient East Asian population” had a geographically close genetically rather similar neighbor, whose cline spanned from the westernmost part of Southern China to the western part of the Yangtze River basin, and individuals, related to the most basal members of the yDNA N-M231-related population, formed a cline in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", which had to separate in the very beginning from the “ancestral ancient East Asian” population in the eastern part of the Yangtze river basin and more southern eastern areas to this neighboring population, whose cline spanned from the westernmost part of Southern China to the western part of the Yangtze River basin in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", and today this neighboring population’s autosomal component can be said to have reached the population of Myanmar, though, during the quite ancient Paleolithic, it should have been previously distributed in the western part of the Yangtze River basin outside the “ancient East Asian homeland” of the eastern part of the Yangtze River basin. However, it should be noted, that numerous indigenous mtDNA M lineages of Myanmar from “Ancient inland human dispersals from Myanmar into interior East Asia since the Late Pleistocene” should not be treated as totally representing Neolithic migrants from China. According to “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, some of individuals, related to the most basal members of the yDNA N-M231-related population, formed a cline, which reached the representatives, whose ancestors were related to this Central China’s microblade-making population, in which boat-shaped and prismatic core technologies were dominant, but this cline of some of individuals, related to the most basal members of the yDNA N-M231-related population, reaching relatives of microblade makers, is quite remote from representatives of all yDNA N1 and yDNA N2 modern types of yDNA N-M231. Indeed, the more modern yDNA N-M231-related Bianbian individual derived from the location of the Yi river basin of the Huai river system, where small flake tools, made out of medium-sized cobbles, were observed, but not microblades, and even representatives of the deep branch, which differentiated 11.9±2.5 to 12.6±3.1 thousand years ago in Rootsi et al and distributed to Cambodia and Japan, were also makers of such small flake tools in accordance with the materials of "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago".

According to “Microblades in MIS2 Central China: Cultural Change and Adaptive Strategies”, “with warming climate during the B/A event, a more developed lithic technology including pencil-shaped and wide wedge-shaped microblade cores, utilization of new food resources, and more sedentary lifeways emerged in Central China. It should be noted, however, that almost all of these innovations had an earlier origin in southwest Japan (e.g., southern Kyushu; Iizuka and Izuho 2017), indicating a potential southern path of introduction across the continental shelf.” It supports the fact that makers of boat-shaped and prismatic core microblades, who migrated to Japan along the Paleo-Huanghe, were more relevant for the formation of populations, contributing to ancestors of the Japanese, but not to the ancestors of the Koreans, and the 19000-year-old AR19K, who was influenced by such populations, clustered closer to the Japanese in Mao et al, 2021, but not to the Koreans. On the Kyushu island of Japan, according to Iizuka and Izuho 2017, there were some more “pre-agricultural” developments in the Paleolithic, and more advanced microblade makers backmigrated to China, which resembles very much the arrival of the so-called “second-layer population”. According to “Microblades in MIS2 Central China: Cultural Change and Adaptive Strategies”, the potential southern path of introduction across the continental shelf was important, which means the introduction via the now-submerged continental shelf to China (while some western researchers insisted that there should have been a northern route of the introduction of pre-agricultural innovations to Japan and the consequent introduction of Japan-related pre-agricultural innovations to China). However, it is already known that such pre-agricultural innovations of microblade makers were not related to the origin of agriculture in China, which was initiated by makers of small flake tools, made of small flint raw materials.

According to Fumiko Ikawa-Smith, boat-shaped microblades reached America, analogues of prismatic microblades reached America and Siberia. Interestingly, the Myazedi Pyu inscription of Myanmar (Myanmar’s population’s autosomal component was previously observed in the western Yangtze River basin-affiliated populations, but reached ancestors of the population of boat-shaped and prismatic microblade makers of Central China in the Huanghe River basin), contains a word, whose lookalikes are extremely productive in the Japanese language (but not in the Korean language), but they are also observed (though mainly to a lesser degree) in some Siberian and American languages. In Northeast China, the 19000-year-old “yDNA Q-affiliated” yDNA C2-L1373 AR19K-related population of makers of boat-shaped and prismatic microblades, which clustered with the Japanese in Mao et al, 2021, should have become a genetic substratum for later neolithic populations in accordance with “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”.

[CLTVTE]

The data of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology of China suggest that only yDNA O1b* individuals (that is, representatives of a special kind of the basal yDNA O1b*, akin to the Lower Yangtze river basin) of the population, akin to yDNA O1b1, contributed to the Korean population, which was related to yDNA O1b2 and was selected by them, and it should have resulted in the split of the linguistic component, representing this mixture of Tai-Kadai-Austronesian (https://www.pnas.org/action/downloadSupp...2.sd01.svg) in "Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment" by Gerhard Jäger and the "Korean-Burushaski" node, splitting from the discussed Tai-Kadai-Austronesian mixed cluster (see the same file: https://www.pnas.org/action/downloadSupp...2.sd01.svg). Thus, the IVPP data suggest that the mediation by the basal yDNA O1b*, reaching the Lower Yangtze river, according to their data, was needed for the interaction with the population of the Korean Peninsula, where the y chromosome haplogroup, which has today acquired the name "yDNA O1b2", is found.

The IVPP data suggest that, ca. 41900 years ago, the population of the basal mtDNA M39'70*, separated to the Kostenki14-related population. The defining mutation of mtDNA M39'70 (A8679G) is observed in a Japanese sequence of mtDNA B4, related to mtDNA B4a1 (HNsq0153(Japanese)). In “Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China”, the undivided mtDNA M39'70 was reported from the Andh population of India , which for some reason acquired the connection to the Indo-Europeans and shifted to the Indo-European languages, unlike other Dravidian populations, containing so many indigenous mtDNA lineages.
mtDNA B4a1 is widely observed in the Austronesians. Lexicons of Austronesian languages share a few linguistic similarities to the Western Eurasian languages, mostly unobserved in other East Asian languages.

Unlike the above, mtDNA M70 with no apparent Neanderthal or Denisovan mutations in its main sequence, appears to have circulated between the borderland of China and Southeast Asia (e.g. Vietnam, which is not so far from the Hainan Island of China) on the one hand, and mostly resurfaced in the substratum population for Tibeto-Burman in Tibet. It is not closely related to the ancestral Kostenki14 population in accordance with the IVPP data, which suggests a much more limited distribution of such a ca. 38100-year-old variant of the related ancient East Asian population and much more limited external linguistic connections of this ca. 38100-year-old related population, which was limited to East Asia and contributed to one of Tai-Kadai populations of East Asia (this Tai-Kadai population does not share any special sounds with Eskimo-Aleut and Chukotko-Kamchatkan languages) in accordance with the IVPP data.

https://www.theytree.com/mttree/M70