Scientists Reveals Surprising Tibetan Genetic Composition
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 09. 2024
- Two major questions about Tibetans are yet to be resolved. First, who are the ancestors of Tibetan. And second how long have humans lived on the Tibetan Plateau? Archaeological and genetic evidence suggests that humans have been present on the plateau for at least thirty thousand years.
Additionally, linguistic studies indicate that Tibetans and Chinese people share a common ancestor, with their split occurring around six thousand years ago. The origin of Tibetans remains one of the most contentious puzzles in history, anthropology, and genetics. Recent studies uncover a complex web of ancient and modern DNA.With traces from Denisovans, and other mysterious ancestors. This intricate genetic tapestry, shaped by early settlers, continues to fuel debates and challenges our understanding of Tibetan ancestry.Recent genetic research estimates a divergence time between Tibetans and Han Chinese at about two thousand seven hundred and fifty years ago. The discrepancy between various studies highlights the need for more comprehensive data.
Research Link
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
You've got me thinking. I'd love to see a study of ancient DNA links btw First Americans, specifically Inuit and Arctic peoples and the Asian continent.
thanks for your interest in topic , i will have a look at your suggestion for future episodes ...
2:30 I really didn't want to see MTG today.
They really captured her, didn't they 😂
Tibet is always a fascinating subject, thank you for genetic analysis!
thanks for your continued support and kind words ...
WHAT GENETIC ANALYSIS. OBVIOUS JUST GUESSING, TALKING NONSENCE
Thanks for uploading a series of the informative video clips. You seem really hard-working.
Hmm ... Denisovans, from whom Tibetans likely inherited their ability of high-altitude
adaptation. These topics, or the name of Denisovans, are all new to me.
Of course, I have little idea of Tibet or Tibetans except small knowledge of Tibetan
Buddhism or China-Tibet conflict.
Even if that's the case, there are too many things I don't know in this world.
As I got a little confused about these mysterious story, I'm going to talk about a lighter
topic here.
Some Tibetans imagine that "Tibetans and Japanese people must have shared the same
ancestory in the distant past" on the basis that these two peoples look quite like each
other, and both are "pious" Buddhists. ( ... hahaha)
Moreover, there is a legend in Turkey that "Turks and Japanese were originally siblings."
According to a Turkish legend, there were two brothers who were intimate with each other
long time ago.
One day, however, the brothers separated on the Mongolian plateau, and the one
who followed the sun to the east founded Japan, while another who followed the moon
to the west founded Turkey.
In Kyrgyzstan, too. There is an anecdote in Kyrgyzstan that says "Japanese and Kyrgyz
people were once brothers, but those who liked fish went to the eastern seas and
became Japanese, and those who liked meat went to the western steppes and became
Kyrgyz."
In addition to this, there is also a dubious hypothesis called 'The Japanese-Jewish
common ancestry theory', which says that the ancestors of the Japanese people are
one of the 10 lost tribes of Israel who were exiled by the Assyrians 2700 years ago.
Needless to say, the Koreans persist in saying that "the Japanese and the Koreans have
the same ancestry. They were originally Korean."
Japanese people have indeed various ancestories in the world.
The idea that Turks and Japanese people were originally siblings is more of a legend than a fact. Genetic and historical studies show that Turks and Japanese come from different ancestral lineages. The Turks have roots in Central Asia, while the Japanese have their origins in East Asia, with significant contributions from ancient Jomon and Yayoi cultures.
The voice indicates a South Indian background with a Convent/English medium accent.
Subject is interesting. Some papers evidence a Eurasian language family model. Sino-Tibetan language family is not related to this Eurasian family.
Genetics, there's D y-haplogroup in Tibetan populations. Also a Denisova connection.
Tibetan genetic split from Han population and language split is the reason for watching the video. Thanks.
Thanks for your comment and interest in my background ..
I thought I detected a slight Tibetan accent 😊
My answer to why ancient humans lived on such high altitudes as the Tibetan Plateau was that the Plateau is a physical oasis for survival against the ice ages. The ice failed to reach such altitudes.
you make a very interesting point, though the denisovan heritage provided greater ability to survive in these conditions and some prey that might be extinct now could also be a reason ...
very ineresting, thank you. Plenty of food for thought.
thanks for your kind words and support to channel ...
People do not go to live on high, unwelcoming plateaux unless they have to.
Who was chasing the Tibetans? What climate upheaval caused wars and subsequent Tibetan migration?
There are more Tibetans living in the flatter lower areas though.
They build the holy temples up high.
The Tibetan Plateau's early settlers likely moved there during a period when climate conditions were more favorable, and over time, they developed unique adaptations to the high-altitude environment. The presence of ancient Denisovan DNA in Tibetans suggests that these early inhabitants were particularly well-suited to thrive in low-oxygen conditions, allowing them to successfully settle and survive in such a challenging landscape.
Interesting enough the elusive y_haplogroup d of the tibetans is the same as the andaman_people the onge and the ainu of japan and a extreme ancient separate lineage of other out_of_africa lineages that perhaps as early as 70 a100.000 years ago leaving this modern humand africa for asia and relatively closely related yet at a distance the almost and today dominant subsaharan y_haplogroup_e perhaps even predating others to also migrating into eurasia where most modern_humanity today descent from from more recent out_of_africa migration.
it's important to note that Y-haplogroup D is distinct from Y-haplogroup E, which is more common in sub-Saharan Africa and spread to other regions in later migrations. Y-haplogroup E likely emerged after the initial migration, but its expansion into Eurasia came later, and it has a different lineage from Y-haplogroup D.
Chinese is not an ethnicity.
Your statement "Chinese is not an ethnicity" can be both correct and misleading, depending on how the term "Chinese" is being used.
It is.
I agree. China is an empire made of many different people, nations, countries in their own right.
I had a girlfriend in college named Denise Sovan
i could not stop laughing, sorry for being uncivilised but i had to tell you ..
My question would be why would anyone go up there to live?
There were hardly any people on this planet thirty thousand years ago so they weren't driven there from overcrowding.
There's barely any resources, they weren't farming, they weren't herding-
Why?
유목민들 대다수는 높은 산지를 끼고 생활하는게 대다수입니다. 한국의 조상도 그러하였습니다. 큰 조직이 형성되면 말도 안되게 강력해지지만 평상시에는 작은 그룹을 형성하여 이동하는 인구가 대부분이었기 때문에 대피나 방어를 위해 일부러 험악한 산지를 끼고 생활하였습니다.
It's important to remember that the conditions on the Tibetan Plateau weren't always as harsh as they are today. Thousands of years ago, during certain periods, the climate was more favorable, making the environment less hostile and more suitable for early human habitation. These early settlers likely found the plateau to be a rich hunting ground with access to seasonal resources.
Yeti .... where is it now ,hiding in tibetan ....?😅
do not derail the discussion on genetics with such statements ...
チベット人のDNAが昔から日本人と一番近いと聞いていたけど、そうでもない？チベット人とシベリア人が日本人かと思うほどそっくりだった・・・親しみがわくほど。
話がありますが、実際には遺伝子的には異なるグループです。チベット人は、特にデニソワ人のような古代の人々からの遺伝的な影響を受けていますが、日本人にはそのような影響は見られません。外見の類似性は、共通の東アジアの祖先や文化的な交流から来ているかもしれませんが、遺伝的には異なる歴史を持っています。それでも、親しみを感じるのは自然なことだと思います！
@@evoinception はい。この動画を観て、聞いていた程近くはないことが分かりました。外見は凄く似てましたね
No surprise there.
There are indeed surprises, like Tibetans having the highest ancestry from now-extinct human species at such high altitudes, and their divergence from Han being much earlier than previously believed. These are truly fascinating findings, but if you're hard to surprise, that's okay too ..
Funny, I didn’t see ‘Israeli’ in the list of people starting at 6:20 🤨….Palestinian was there though 😁🇵🇸
We were only seeing a part of the wheel and there were Ashkenazi as well as Yemanite, Georgian, Turkish and Iraqi Jew and I imagine Sephardi is there somewhere. Modern Israel has a substantial proportion of its poulation from those groups and would therefore not yet have its own distinctive shared set of markers.
Facial morphology does not preserve, therefore reconstructions are not useful and are anthropomorphisms as Danny Vendramini points out.
While it's true that facial morphology doesn't perfectly preserve over thousands of years, reconstructions are based on scientific methods that use available skeletal data, muscle attachment sites, and comparisons with living humans to create educated estimates of ancient appearances. A recent example is Shanidar Z ...
Any facial morphology is sructured by the facial bones. If the bones are preserved, reconstruction can be done and be fairly accurate as modern police methods demonstrate.
❤️🤍💙
thanks for your like and support to channel ....
And yet Tibetan history starts for 6 century ad and have forgotten their old monpa and bon heritage 😊😅
Tibetan history stretches back much further than the 6th century AD. Archaeological evidence shows that the Tibetan Plateau has been inhabited for tens of thousands of years, with human presence dating back to at least 21,000 years ago, and possibly even earlier. The early inhabitants of Tibet were likely part of ancient cultures that eventually gave rise to the Tibetan people.You need to watch the video before commenting ...
@@evoinception Bon we accept but what Mon heritage ? Tibetans trace their history to Zhangshung confederacy and than Yarlung empire. This is the core of modern Tibetan.
You back with this bs again🤦♂️
@@Zoogy_zoo so there was nothing before 6 h century , yall living in bs , no king of zangzung ? Know where you come from and only then will you know where you going pango , and yall complaining about Chinese wiping out history , clown world go pick up donations in Tibetan plight name and eat you shrooms
@@Zoogy_zoo hey pango did you ever think as the dl says that he and the gelug schools were chased away by the same benefactor , the Chinese and Mongolian armies they used to destroy the red hat druk schools and chase away the mimosa masters . Gelug school came into being by support of outside forces monhols and stayed in power by using Chinese armies and now complaining when chines took over , is is that not history or is even do lying ?
Pango living abroad eating shrooms and making money through donations by selling the Tibetan plight , sold ur selves sold ur souls and sold it history and now profiting from selling Tibetan question, go join the army but I guess even the sakypas were not Chinese installed .
Always the out side help and exploit the Tibetan people , did u know 90 Tibetans were serfs under the sakypas and gelug , guess they remembered compassion and universal love only came when they ran away and were chased away by their Chinese masters , or do I want to deny that also pango .
Karma khenno
First
Neanderthal were no more differentiated from us than today living subsaharans.
If you look at a reconstruction of a neanderthal's face @3:32 , it could easily pass as a modern human. Now if you look at a subsaharan it is more different than modern human. Also neanderthal was our grand grand.. fathers. But subsaharans were not and mixed with an unknown archaic hominid called Naledi that we do not have in our genes. This concludes that Neanderthal is closer to us than subsaharans the latter should be considered a different hominid.
Neanderthals were indeed close relatives of modern humans, and they share a common ancestor with us. Also they both interbred. This interbreeding resulted in some modern humans, particularly those of non-African descent, carrying small amounts of Neanderthal DNA. However, this does not make Neanderthals "closer" to some modern humans than others. All modern humans, regardless of their geographic origin, are part of the same species, Homo sapiens, and share a very recent common ancestry.
You misunderstand the data. Sub saharan black africans ARE THE MODERN HUMANS.
All races of people today descend from a small group of sub saharan black africans that left from Egypt 70,000-38,000 years ago. ALL non black africans descend from this founder population.
This founder population that first emigrated from North East Africa then interacted and interbred with all of these other archaic forms of humans. That's where thendiscrepancy in race comea from. It comes from the ratio of archaic homonin admixture in modern populations.
The sub saharan black africans that interbred with homo naledi would have left descendants in the form of Khoi Khoi and San people, and then other sub groups of hunter gatherer populations.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
@DustinHawke And you are talking about nothing.
🤦♂ Can't tell if this is from sheer racism or from astonishing ignorance.
What? Chinese and Tibetans share ancestors ... so do Chinese and Mongols/Chinese and Koreans. This is so misleading. Chinese Hans are closer to Japanese/Koreans/Innermomgols/Hmong/Yi and so many other before Tibetans. Only Uyghurs/Kazakhs/Tajiks are more distant than Tibetans to Hans.
The genetic split between the ancestors of Han Chinese and Tibetans occurred around 15,000 to 9,000 years ago. This split led to the development of distinct genetic traits in each group, especially as Tibetans adapted to the high-altitude environment of the Tibetan Plateau. Despite this split, Han Chinese and Tibetans still share a deep genetic connection. Studies show that Tibetans and Han Chinese share a large portion of their ancestry, reflecting their shared history before the divergence.
@@evoinceptionAnd Chinese and Koreans share more .. so do Chinese and Inner Mongols ... so do Chinese and Hmongs and Chinese and Vietnam. Studies also shows this. I am not in anyway disbelieving that Chinese and Tibetans share an ancestor .. my gripe is that you are not showing what they share with other groups. almost all ethnic groups are closer to han than the Tibetans
얘들아 중국 북쪽애들은 한국이나 몽골과 가깝지만 남쪽은 아니야.
they make neathertals look european middle eastern asian etc. make up your mind I would say
@@candleproducer Northern China is closer to Korea and Japan. South China is closer to Vietnam and Thailand. China as whole is closer to Hmong.
Tibetan males belong to Haplogroup D, Chinese belong to Haplogroup O. How can they have the same ancestry?
The presence of different haplogroups does not preclude shared ancestry. Both haplogroups D and O can trace their origins back to common ancestors who lived tens of thousands of years ago. The divergence into different haplogroups occurred due to mutations and subsequent geographic isolation and adaptation. For instance, while haplogroup D is more common in Tibet due to geographic and cultural isolation, haplogroup O spread widely across East Asia due to different migratory patterns...
@@evoinception You are by-passing the main points. D is an older Haplogroup, that belongs to the cluster CD, O comes from cluster NOP, which is comparatively new and is from South-East Asia.
@@subhodipbanerjee6699 You're correct in the point you make however, it’s important to understand that these haplogroups represent only the paternal lineages, tracing back through the Y-chromosome, which accounts for a very small part of the entire genetic picture.The fact that Tibetan males belong to Haplogroup D and many Han Chinese males belong to Haplogroup O simply reflects different branches of the human family tree that diverged tens of thousands of years ago. However, shared ancestry is about more than just Y-chromosome haplogroups. The vast majority of our DNA, autosomal DNA, is inherited from both parents and provides a much more comprehensive picture of ancestry.
중국은 남쪽과 북쪽이 달라요.
@@candleproducer Not just in China :) even little Switzerland has people looking quite different in different areas, so i can imagine really big differences between people in China :)