Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Tianyuan man" in English language version.
The high crural indices and tibial robusticity of Tianyuan 1 may well indicate some combination of equatorial ancestry and an emphasis on mobility (37, 38).
...ancient people perhaps of the "first layer" with Australo-Papuan features moved into Siberia and subsequently adapted to the extremely cold climate during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) of 24–16 kya.
...the ESEA lineage differentiated into at least three distinct ancestries: Tianyuan ancestry which can be found 40,000-33,000 years ago in northern East Asia, ancestry found today across present-day populations of East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Siberia, but whose origins are unknown, and Hòabìnhian ancestry found 8,000-4,000 years ago in Southeast Asia, but whose origins in the Upper Paleolithic are unknown.
The Tianyuan genetic cluster disappears from the record, and not far from where AR33K lived near the Songua River, remains from a 19,000-year-old individual, AR19K, were identified instead to be more closely related to present-day East Asians. AR19K, who was also found without any archeological context, lived at the last years of the LGM when warming temperatures were beginning to return to what was still a cold steppe environment of northern East Asia, yet it is currently unclear when the AR19K-related population first migrated to the area, or when Tianyuan ancestry vanished, and what role the severe climatic and environmental changes of the LGM played in this population replacement. Several statistical models show that AR19K ancestry is basal to younger ancestries found throughout ancient coastal northern East Asia, and also that AR19K clusters more closely to ancient coastal northern East Asia populations than to ancient coastal southern East Asian ancestry (Mao et al. Reference Mao, Zhang and Qiao2021). This prominent genetic distinction between northern and southern East Asian populations had been observed earlier with younger samples (Yang et al. Reference Yang, Fan and Sun2020), but these results indicate that by 19,000 years ago this population structure was already in place.
Tianyuan and AR33K form a clade with respect to all other Asians, indicating that they are sister groups carrying the same Basal Asian Ancestry, denoted Tianyuan ancestry (1). First, we find that ancient lowland northern and southern East Asians (nEA/sEA) shares genetic connections to both Tianyuan/AR33K and Xingyi_EN, i.e f4(Mbuti, Xingyi_EN; Tianyuan/AR33K, nEA/sEA)>0 (2.2<Z<5.6) and f4(Mbuti, Tianyuan/AR33K; Xingyi_EN, sEA/nEA)≥0 (0.5<Z<4.6, Data S2c). Comparing ancient northern and southern East Asians directly to Xingyi_EN and the Tianyuan/AR33K group shows that most ancient East Asians are similarly related to both, i.e. f4(Mbuti, nEA/sEA; Xingyi_EN, Tianyuan/AR33K)~0 (-2.9<Z<0.5, Data S2c), with the exception of AR14K (-3.5<Z<-1.7), Qihe3 (-3.8<Z<-3.5), and Tanshishan (-4.5<Z<-3.7) potentially indicating a slight connection between some ancient East Asians and Xingyi_EN. Overall, these patterns indicate that Xingyi_EN is not related to individuals carrying Tianyuan ancestry, and Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations.
Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations. ... In the Treemix analysis with 1,000 bootstrap replicates, Tianyuan as outgroup to Xingyi_EN, La368, and all East Asians is strongly supported (97.8%, Fig. 2a, Supplementary Text S6). In the outgroup-f3-analysis, Xingyi_EN shows a slightly higher affiliation with East Asians than Tianyuan and the Hòabìnhian La368 (Fig. 2c). Overall, we find that Tianyuan ancestry, Hòabìnhian ancestry, and ancestry related to Xingyi_EN are generally equidistant to each other, though other analyses (e.g. Treemix and outgroup-f3) show some connections of Xingyi_EN and La368 with recent East Asians.
Tianyuan and AR33K form a clade with respect to all other Asians, indicating that they are sister groups carrying the same Basal Asian Ancestry, denoted Tianyuan ancestry (1). First, we find that ancient lowland northern and southern East Asians (nEA/sEA) shares genetic connections to both Tianyuan/AR33K and Xingyi_EN, i.e f4(Mbuti, Xingyi_EN; Tianyuan/AR33K, nEA/sEA)>0 (2.2<Z<5.6) and f4(Mbuti, Tianyuan/AR33K; Xingyi_EN, sEA/nEA)≥0 (0.5<Z<4.6, Data S2c). Comparing ancient northern and southern East Asians directly to Xingyi_EN and the Tianyuan/AR33K group shows that most ancient East Asians are similarly related to both, i.e. f4(Mbuti, nEA/sEA; Xingyi_EN, Tianyuan/AR33K)~0 (-2.9<Z<0.5, Data S2c), with the exception of AR14K (-3.5<Z<-1.7), Qihe3 (-3.8<Z<-3.5), and Tanshishan (-4.5<Z<-3.7) potentially indicating a slight connection between some ancient East Asians and Xingyi_EN. Overall, these patterns indicate that Xingyi_EN is not related to individuals carrying Tianyuan ancestry, and Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations.
The high crural indices and tibial robusticity of Tianyuan 1 may well indicate some combination of equatorial ancestry and an emphasis on mobility (37, 38).
...ancient people perhaps of the "first layer" with Australo-Papuan features moved into Siberia and subsequently adapted to the extremely cold climate during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) of 24–16 kya.
Tianyuan and AR33K form a clade with respect to all other Asians, indicating that they are sister groups carrying the same Basal Asian Ancestry, denoted Tianyuan ancestry (1). First, we find that ancient lowland northern and southern East Asians (nEA/sEA) shares genetic connections to both Tianyuan/AR33K and Xingyi_EN, i.e f4(Mbuti, Xingyi_EN; Tianyuan/AR33K, nEA/sEA)>0 (2.2<Z<5.6) and f4(Mbuti, Tianyuan/AR33K; Xingyi_EN, sEA/nEA)≥0 (0.5<Z<4.6, Data S2c). Comparing ancient northern and southern East Asians directly to Xingyi_EN and the Tianyuan/AR33K group shows that most ancient East Asians are similarly related to both, i.e. f4(Mbuti, nEA/sEA; Xingyi_EN, Tianyuan/AR33K)~0 (-2.9<Z<0.5, Data S2c), with the exception of AR14K (-3.5<Z<-1.7), Qihe3 (-3.8<Z<-3.5), and Tanshishan (-4.5<Z<-3.7) potentially indicating a slight connection between some ancient East Asians and Xingyi_EN. Overall, these patterns indicate that Xingyi_EN is not related to individuals carrying Tianyuan ancestry, and Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations.
Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations. ... In the Treemix analysis with 1,000 bootstrap replicates, Tianyuan as outgroup to Xingyi_EN, La368, and all East Asians is strongly supported (97.8%, Fig. 2a, Supplementary Text S6). In the outgroup-f3-analysis, Xingyi_EN shows a slightly higher affiliation with East Asians than Tianyuan and the Hòabìnhian La368 (Fig. 2c). Overall, we find that Tianyuan ancestry, Hòabìnhian ancestry, and ancestry related to Xingyi_EN are generally equidistant to each other, though other analyses (e.g. Treemix and outgroup-f3) show some connections of Xingyi_EN and La368 with recent East Asians.
The high crural indices and tibial robusticity of Tianyuan 1 may well indicate some combination of equatorial ancestry and an emphasis on mobility (37, 38).
...ancient people perhaps of the "first layer" with Australo-Papuan features moved into Siberia and subsequently adapted to the extremely cold climate during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) of 24–16 kya.
Tianyuan and AR33K form a clade with respect to all other Asians, indicating that they are sister groups carrying the same Basal Asian Ancestry, denoted Tianyuan ancestry (1). First, we find that ancient lowland northern and southern East Asians (nEA/sEA) shares genetic connections to both Tianyuan/AR33K and Xingyi_EN, i.e f4(Mbuti, Xingyi_EN; Tianyuan/AR33K, nEA/sEA)>0 (2.2<Z<5.6) and f4(Mbuti, Tianyuan/AR33K; Xingyi_EN, sEA/nEA)≥0 (0.5<Z<4.6, Data S2c). Comparing ancient northern and southern East Asians directly to Xingyi_EN and the Tianyuan/AR33K group shows that most ancient East Asians are similarly related to both, i.e. f4(Mbuti, nEA/sEA; Xingyi_EN, Tianyuan/AR33K)~0 (-2.9<Z<0.5, Data S2c), with the exception of AR14K (-3.5<Z<-1.7), Qihe3 (-3.8<Z<-3.5), and Tanshishan (-4.5<Z<-3.7) potentially indicating a slight connection between some ancient East Asians and Xingyi_EN. Overall, these patterns indicate that Xingyi_EN is not related to individuals carrying Tianyuan ancestry, and Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations.
Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations. ... In the Treemix analysis with 1,000 bootstrap replicates, Tianyuan as outgroup to Xingyi_EN, La368, and all East Asians is strongly supported (97.8%, Fig. 2a, Supplementary Text S6). In the outgroup-f3-analysis, Xingyi_EN shows a slightly higher affiliation with East Asians than Tianyuan and the Hòabìnhian La368 (Fig. 2c). Overall, we find that Tianyuan ancestry, Hòabìnhian ancestry, and ancestry related to Xingyi_EN are generally equidistant to each other, though other analyses (e.g. Treemix and outgroup-f3) show some connections of Xingyi_EN and La368 with recent East Asians.
The high crural indices and tibial robusticity of Tianyuan 1 may well indicate some combination of equatorial ancestry and an emphasis on mobility (37, 38).
...ancient people perhaps of the "first layer" with Australo-Papuan features moved into Siberia and subsequently adapted to the extremely cold climate during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) of 24–16 kya.
Xingyi_EN-related ancestry is as deeply diverged from ancient East Asians as populations carrying Tianyuan ancestry. The patterns may also suggest that the ancestor of ancient East Asians is a mixture of different ancestries related to both of these deeply diverged populations. ... In the Treemix analysis with 1,000 bootstrap replicates, Tianyuan as outgroup to Xingyi_EN, La368, and all East Asians is strongly supported (97.8%, Fig. 2a, Supplementary Text S6). In the outgroup-f3-analysis, Xingyi_EN shows a slightly higher affiliation with East Asians than Tianyuan and the Hòabìnhian La368 (Fig. 2c). Overall, we find that Tianyuan ancestry, Hòabìnhian ancestry, and ancestry related to Xingyi_EN are generally equidistant to each other, though other analyses (e.g. Treemix and outgroup-f3) show some connections of Xingyi_EN and La368 with recent East Asians.
...ancient people perhaps of the "first layer" with Australo-Papuan features moved into Siberia and subsequently adapted to the extremely cold climate during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) of 24–16 kya.
