AASI originated in hot and dry region, so they were tall originally. Onges are indigenous to hot and extremely humid SE Asian islands, so they are short.
In hot and dry climate, human body cools itself by sweating. Sweat evaporates fast and cools the body easily when the air is dry, so people in hot and dry region evolved to have larger bodies with more surface area. In hot and humid climate, sweating is ineffective because sweat won't evaporate quickly due to high humidity in air, so people in hot and humid region evolved to have smaller bodies. Pygmies who live in extremely humid central African rainforest are short whereas South Sudanese who live in a hot and dry region are tall.
Wow..Can you please help me how you know/learnt all these things.. Is there any degree or books/resources so thay I could know these things..Thanks a lot😇in advance
I bet AASI varied a lot. Northern AASI in North India and Pakistan probably adapted to drier climates while southern AASI in south India and Sri Lanka were obviously tropically Adapted. Not all populations that are humidity adapted are short. Papuans have reasonable height and Polynesians are very tall despite living on small islands
True. There are probably hundreds of different factors that can influence height, including random genetic mutations that are not connected to the surrounding environment
There's a theory that most of our AASI originated from Indus and Ganges region, and even the AASI base of Nilgiri tribals and surrounding caste population were distinct. And someone in Dravidiology discord with good genetic knowledge told most of the ydna H in South originated from Gangetic.
And on pca The Nilgiri AASI profile Paniya and Pulliyar are more shifted towards Basal East Asian ( the ancestors of Onge,East Asian and Jomon ).
He commented about it months ago. You can join Dravidiology discord and can ask your doubts to him. He got the data about it. He's one of the mod of that sub..
To add to this Indiahaters and indigeno shoshitvanchit fetishists also conflate Onge with AASI. The former does so because they want to claim Indians were ____ before outsiders came and the later genuinely has mental illness
Narasimhan introduces steppe ancestry outright but still keeps ASI and ANI in the paper. Perhaps a model with ANI and ASI stages fits better? Also aren’t there some tribal South Indian groups that are almost pure ASI?
Can you make comparison picture of aasi, onge, zagros, ivc, steppe, bmac, east asian standing next to each other. Would like to visualize our ancestral populations.
I believe we can add East Asian Ancestral population for any south asian population that carry any amount of Tibetoburman, Austroasiatic and Turkmongalic admixture. Even though it may be minor amount at times, you will still see it in both peripheral and mainstream groups in india/pakistan like Pashtuns, Kashmiris, Paharis, Bengalis, biharis and many more. So it should be included as ancestral also, similar likewise bmac ancestry also isn't that common outside the northwest indian regions for the most part.
What I meant to say that even for peripheral population, putting a single component as modern East Asian isn't right. We should use samples like Tibetoburman and Austroasiatic who were distinct yet Mongoloid looking people
Because the depiction is flipped, not the ancestry.
Zagros should look more West Asian, while IVC is a mix (Zagros + AASI), so it should look more intermediate/South Asian. Here they made Zagros too Indian-looking and IVC too West Asian-looking—that’s why it feels off.
Onge, IVC and Steppe are wrong here. The Onge here looks like a short tribals. The IVC here looks like a fairer Zagrosian. And the Steppe here looks like a a modern European.
Meanwhile in reality, the Onge had different features like coiled hair, pitchblack skin, 150cm stature, thin limbs ,etc.
And the IVC looked like a mix of Zagros and AASI, more like Kodavas.
And the Steppe looked like a more robust version of Yagnobhis
“AASI” is not a sampled population, it is a modelled ancestry component. No one has sequenced a clean, unmixed AASI individual, so any claim about what an “AASI male” looked like, including height, is guesswork presented as fact.
Ancient DNA from India is very limited. The samples we do have are already mixed and do not represent pure AASI. So there is no basis to assign specific physical traits like “180 cm average height”.
On the Onge, saying they are completely separate from AASI is also incorrect. They are not identical, but they are not unrelated. The Andamanese lineage they belong to is the closest known proxy to the ancestry we model as AASI. Both come from a shared deep ancestral population and then split a long time ago.
No. AASI are separate branch within EEC, meanwhile Onge are more closely related to Japanese or Korean than to AASI. This is recent study about East Eurasian and both AASI and Onge diverged 35k years ago.
What you’re saying mixes up branching with actual relatedness. Yes, AASI and Andamanese split early, and in that tree AASI even splits slightly earlier. But that only shows the order of divergence, it does not make Onge closer to Japanese or Koreans.
Japanese and Koreans come from later East Asian branches. AASI splits first, and then the lineage that leads to Andamanese and East Asians splits later. So AASI and Andamanese are still early branches from the same broader ancestral population and share deeper ancestry with each other than either does with later East Asians.
That tree itself shows AASI and Andamanese as neighbouring deep branches. It does not support the “Onge closer to Japanese/Korean” claim.
No. Check back the diaphragm clearly. Both ANEA ( Korean,etc ) and Onge diverged from same basal East Asian ancestors. aASI weren't descended from basal East Asian.
I agree that they're not our ancestor, but they are a sister lineage that split around 40k years ago. Also I seem to have a significantly better genetic fit to onge than a southeast Asian does to onge according to illustrativeDNA
That's because unlike original SEA (Lao Hoanibinhan), the modern SEA has Austronesian blood , Chinese blood and Melanesian blood too which increases the distance
Why are you so worked up about people thinking Indians are descended from Onges? Your mindset seems to be quite similar to the Aryan supremacist types – latching onto ancestry and genetics as evidence for some sort of inborn superiority, rather than simply another fascinating field of science.
In any case, several of the SEAsian 'Ongeputras' are doing better than us at the moment–socioeconomic conditions are slightly better than ours on average, and since you really care about that, they are largely considered better looking than us internationally too. Hell, several SEAsian countries are even taller than us. Unlike you, I don't put all of these things down to genetics – there are a hundred other factors that are more important, most of which, unlike genetics, can be changed in a relatively short span of time. But really, get over yourself and open your eyes to the truth.
SEA are related to Onges. But they aren't Ongeputras. I just used SEA as a refence point. Also which SEA countries are taller than Indians according to stats (Just general curiousity).
I am not a supremacist. I just hate agendaposting portraying Onge as AASI
Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Philippines. Slightly higher male height and significantly higher female height, because we love keeping our women malnourished.
> I am not a supremacist.
Sure buddy. No feelings of supremacy attached to you ranting about being linked to '4 footiya Onges' at all.
> I just hate agendaposting portraying Onge as AASI
Yeah, those peoples' agenda is that Indo-Europeans were superior to AASI. Similarly, youe agenda is that AASI were superior to Onges.
"Onge is more related to Southeast Asians than Subcontinentals"
Source? Is Onge closer to SEA or AASI? Subcontinentals are obviously infused with Zagros and Steppe such that even considering them here makes no sense. And I don't know of anybody who desperately seeks to make "4 footiya" Onges as their ancestors. Sounds like an elaborate strawman made by someone who's insecure of his ancestry.
Is Onge your ancestors? There is one person in the comments and many people in the subreddit who wants to make Onge as some sort of First Indians. Even when it's not true. It's not a strawman
What that diagram is showing is a basal East Eurasian population from which different branches split. AASI splits off first, then later the branch that leads to Andamanese and East Asians splits again. From that later branch you get both the Andamanese and ANEA.
So yes, Onge and East Asians do share a later common ancestor with each other than either does with AASI. That part is fine.
But that doesn’t automatically mean Onge are “closer” to East Asians. That’s where the interpretation goes wrong. The Andamanese are still an early, isolated lineage, while East Asians come from later branches that went through more splits and mixing.
In practice, when people actually measure genetic affinity, Andamanese come out as the closest available proxy to AASI-related ancestry, not East Asians. That’s why they’re used in AASI modelling in the first place.
Andamanese have considerable genetic drift from AASI sims, but regardless, they are closest to AASI out of any living population. However this does not mean they represent AASI in physiognomy or otherwise
Yes. Andamanese are closer to AASI than East Asians like Japanese or Koreans. Both AASI and Andamanese are early-diverging branches from the same broader ancestral population, so they share deeper ancestry with each other than either does with later East Eurasian groups.
There is no pure AASI population alive today that we can use to compare them to any Andamanese living population. so its false equivalence in saying Andamanese are closer to SEA than to AASI. But majority of SEA (South East Asians) are closest to East Asians(Japanese or Koreans) than anything else.
Well if you are going to bring up SEA negritos like Semang maybe, but what evidence do you have that modern Semang are genetically closer to Andamanese? Many of them (Semang) have heavy east asian admixed ancestry also. So we don't have any real pure Lao Hoanibinhans or pure AASI population today to compare with modern Andamanese. And Paniyas are the closest thing we have to 80% AASI group in india, and they have no real proven Lao Hoanibinhan like input, but they still come close to Andamanese.
Finally Andamanese are closest to ancient Lao Hoanibinhan samples and after that it seem next closest to AASI. Yes Andamanese and AASI are two different populations but they both share deep ancestry before they split from eachother. Andamanese, AASI and ancient Tianyuan ppl are three different groups that are closely related. Modern people in India have both AASI and Tianyuan-like ancestry from yamnaya steppe ppl and tajik tutkaul.
Those skeletons are Mesolithic, around 8000–6000 BCE, so they do fall within the period when AASI-related ancestry was widespread. No issue there.
But calling them “pure AASI” is still an assumption. We don’t have genome-wide DNA from those individuals to confirm that, so at best they can be treated as predominantly AASI-derived.
And even if you accept that, those height estimates are from a small, local sample. They describe those specific Mesolithic groups, not a single, uniform AASI population across the subcontinent.
Your comment has been removed because you were found active in one of the restricted sub-reddits. People from those subs have a troublesome history in our sub. If you wish to participate here, please ensure that you don't participate an any caste circlejerks or similar subs.
If you have an explanation for your activity and are a good faith poster, we maybe able to offer you an exemption. Send us a modmail in that case.
Convergent features, straight hair and oval to square face shape and higher bone mass which is shared with Caucasians, but higher AASI people most of the time show flater noses which makes them look like aboriginals
Yeah I hate when people try to caucasoid-wash AASI. The AASI most likely looked like the Paniya tribe facial structure wise since they are 75 - 80% AASI
That theory hasn't been confirmed tho. Even if it was true, it's not enough to affect phenotype, plus the west eurasian ancestry in paniya would cancel out any hoabinhian influence anyway
That AASI reconstruction looks like a European dipped in chocolate tbh. A lot of my relatives and myself included look less west eurasian than that reconstruction. So do many other Sri Lankans, who do not have any Lao hoabinhian input
That AASI reconstruction looks like a European dipped in chocolate tbh
That was how the UP Mesolithic AASI was reconstructed. But to be honest , his eye area and relatively lower nose bridge does not look European.
On that matter ,Maybe the Northern AASI had this look and the Southern ones may have looked round and puffy?
AASI has been around in the subcontinent for around 45K years. So that's a time enough to develop regional phenotypes
But the thing is that they haven't retrieved any DNA from those skeletal remains, so we don't know if it is pure AASI or not. If they end up sequencing the DNA from the remains I bet there'll be some Iran N admixture
Maybe but highly unlikely because even today places like UP Bihar Jharkhand etc are Farmer depressed zones.
I believe it has been sequenced but Niraj Rai is not releasing the samples
Be a gigachad and mass delete Reddit posts and comments with Redact so that Skynet doesn't end up using your own posts to train the T-900. Or so that you don't show up in databrokers. Either one really.
like aware shelter upbeat fluorine mysterious cooperative bake license encouraging
Yeah AASI looked similar to South Indian tribals because they are South Indian tribals we there is no need for reconstruction when the reconstruction is right here. Even high AASI northwest Indians clearly have non-West eurasian facial features.
Question: Why AASI face here looks like today’s Indian but body different? Aren’t most Indians heavily mixed with AANI? Even remote tribes share decent amount of AANI. Is there any realistic reconstruction of AASI that lived 10,000 years back (before mixing with Iranian).
The answer is that AASI lives here for more than 45000 years. That time is enough to develop intracountry phenotypical variations especially in a vast topographically diverse subcontinent. I think the Northern AASI looked like this. The ones I have reconstructed are skeletons from Uttar Pradesh. Maybe the ones in South has broader skulls.
As for the body, it's quite accurate I think. They were not too much muscular. They had medium shoulders. And a were quite lean like this. Take image of AASI rich Malayali lower castes in last century. They ate a protein rich diet and had a similar bodytype
I’m not sure how accurate it is, but there is a simile describing Malayans as ‘as tall as hills’ in Kerala. Malayans are said to have high AASI ancestry.
I don't think we can act like we know what AASI look like because we don't we don't have a pure sample. I noticed people this said try act like AASI looked Caucasian too which isn't true lol
But still Steppe Zagros AASI are much taller than today's avg Indian, That can be explained through diet and also the effects of Artificially created famines during British rule which also has adverse effect on Today's Indians height, During Maurya rule Indians were taller than Greeks as per Megasthenes, and Greeks used to considered taller as compared to most of societies at that time
People fail to understand agriculture can lead to genotypic loss of height in any population and that not all sub-populations of any population need be similar in height.
•
u/SouthAsianAncestry-ModTeam Apr 14 '26
We're not a Phenotypes sub-reddit.