It's not a big deal that a population raised in one place and migrated to other areas.In any nations antiquity witnessed this kind of peopling. But the question is how far suchmovements made impact in the genetic archeology of a nation. In india's case the socalled western influence is minimal.The high frequencies of M observed across population suggest a deep founder effect of M in the evolution of Indian population. However, R and U too have their contribution in fixing the ancestral antiquity of Indians.
The Y lineages of India are also detected as of pre Holocene origin.. The above genomic revelations on Indian’s maternal and paternal ancestry since Paleolithic times emancipate the question of archeolinguistic history of India.The frequency of haplogroup M is the highest in India (60%) and drops abruptly to about 5% in Iran, marking the western border of the haplogroup M distribution (Metspalu et al 2004). The distribution of Indian-specific mtDNA haplogroups sharply demarcates the eastern and northern borders of the subcontinent.The maternal gene flow in and out of India have been limited since the initial settling of Indian maternal lineages. An eastern and western Eurasian lineage
ranges from 10-12 percent in India (Metspalu et al 2004). Western Eurasian haplogroups in India at low frequencies (Passarino et al. 1996; Kivisild et al. 2003; Quintana-Murci et al. 2004 ) must have a recent entry date [<10 thousand years ago (Kivisild et al. 1999)]. mtDNA haplogroups native to East Eurasia are also highly frequent in the northern states of India, reaching a peak of nearly 50% among the Kanet of Himachal Pradesh (Metspalu et al 2004). The East Asian haplogroups account for 35% in the Khasi-Khmuic populations of northeast India. Infact that the initial mtDNA pool established in the peopling of South Asia has not been replaced but has been reshaped in situ. Current Indian gene pool galvanized by relatively minor events of gene flow from the West and major from the East in to north east India. These genes established in India through admixture by major demographic transitions.whaever M lineage is there in out of India has a deeprooting in India.
The matter of IndoEuropean origin in India needs to be checked thouroughy as the existing information is apparently not in favour to argue that of its origin. But it doesn't always mean that a language and its genetic grouping should have the same place of Origin.
the questions raised by Prof.Witzel on archaic Indian linguistic substratum is more valid and the ancestral migrations needs to be corroborated with multiple evidences, till date the confusion prevails.
sreenathan
From: tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...>
To: cybalist@...
Sent: Saturday, August 1, 2009 1:37:22 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: Aryan invasion theory and race
--- In cybalist@... s.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@ ....> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- On Fri, 7/31/09, sree nathan <sreenathan. ansi@...> wrote:
>
> From: sree nathan <sreenathan. ansi@...>
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Aryan invasion theory and race
> To: cybalist@... s.com
> Date: Friday, July 31, 2009, 12:35 PM
>
> Dear all
>
> I feel ashamed to hear about Old versions of Arayan invasion.
> Let me know under which scientific evidences one can argue that
> the Indo Aryans belong to a superior race.
> The present Genomic explorations reveal the fact that Indian Gene
> poool has not been
heavily influenced by a punctuation like Aryan
> invasion
> About language replacement of south Asia- It is an ongoing process.
> eventoday there are enough evidences for communities shifting from
> one language to other or many.
> so it is not based on any racial structure.
>
> sreenathan
>
> [HTML and excess quoted matter deleted. -BMS]
> So tell me, how many Hindustani gene markers are found in Europe
> (except for recent immigrants)? Virtually none. How many Dravidian,
> Burushaski and Munda loanwords are found in early IE? none.Why is
> the greatest diversity of Indo-Aryan in far-northern
> Hindustan? Because IE arose outside of India and entered the
> subcontinent c. 1500 BCE.
>
>
> Note that there is very little diversity in Indo-Aryan languages compared to the rest of IE. If IE originated in India, then
Panjabi, Guju, Hindi and Bengali would be as far apart as English, Albanian, Russian, Portuguese and Armenian BUT THEY'RE NOT.Only a narrow-minded dogmatic racist could disregard obvious facts and common sense.
>
One of the best arguments for AIT I heard at the Copenhagen conference: Sanskrit has Uralic loanwords (actually they might be ar-/ur- language). OIT proponents would have to posit the presence of Uralic speakers in India.
Torsten