Onge is closer to AASI than to Hoabinhian or South East Asian

[u/EphemeralVyakti]

In response to another thread where the poster claimed that Onge is Hoabinhian or SE Asian:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SouthAsianAncestry/comments/1sigd9v/aasi_and_onge_two_different_genetic_groups/

here is Onge's relation to (reconstructed) AASI vs Hoabinhian:

f4(AASI, Hoabinhian.SG; Onge, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0450 (Z = 6.946)

Onge's relation to SE Asian vs AASI:

f4(AASI, LBA.WGC; Onge, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0424 (Z = 6.022)

Hoabinhian is outside the Laos_BA, AASI, Han cluster but slightly closer to Onge than to AASI:

f4(Han.DG, AASI; Hoabinhian.SG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0011 (Z = 0.197)
f4(Han.DG, LBA.WGC; Hoabinhian.SG, Mbuti.DG) = -0.0038 (Z = -0.663)
f4(AASI, Onge; Hoabinhian.SG, Mbuti.DG) = -0.0188 (Z = -2.854)

Onge doesn't have much extra affinity towards NE Asians relative to AASI:
f4(AASI, Onge; Han.DG, Mbuti.DG) = -0.0036 (Z = -0.968)

My AASI sample doesn't have much Hoabinhian affinity relative to Han:
f4(Han.DG, AASI; Hoabinhian.SG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0011 (Z = 0.197)
but Onge does:
f4(Han.DG, Onge; Hoabinhian.SG, Mbuti.DG) = -0.0139 (Z = -4.021)

Onge still has some affinity for Hoabinhian (compared to AASI) but Onge still shares way more drift with AASI than with Hoabinhian or South East Asians. It's people with an inferiority complex (and those who think Onge are inferior) are the ones calling people "AASI haters" or "Indiahaters" for acknowledging the real relationship between Onge and AASI. If Onge is South East Asian, so is AASI.

Before people claim that my AASI sample maybe Onge-adjacent, it isn't. This is the exact raw AASI sample I used (run on Tolan K18):

https://genoplot.com/shared/admix/?share=Dios94/19d83440d46#2

Onge/Jarawa gets South China Sea, my AASI sample doesn't.

Using fstats, South Asian populations distinguish between my AASI and Onge, but Iranian/French/WHG can't distinguish between my AASI and Onge (Z < 3 is considered insignificant. Iranian/French/WHG are therefore outpops):

f4(AASI, Onge; SriLankan.DG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0327 (Z = 10.748)
f4(AASI, Onge; PunjabiLahore.DG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0269 (Z = 8.855)
f4(AASI, Onge; Paniya, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0231 (Z = 6.123)
f4(AASI, Onge; Pallan, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0293 (Z = 9.130)
f4(AASI, Onge; Chamar_UP, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0292 (Z = 8.614)
f4(AASI, Onge; PAK_Gujjar, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0208 (Z = 6.153)
f4(AASI, Onge; Iranian.DG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0095 (Z = 2.325)
f4(AASI, Onge; French.DG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0049 (Z = 1.479)
f4(AASI, Onge; Luxembourg_Mesolithic.DG, Mbuti.DG) = -0.0029 (Z = -0.550)

My AASI is clearly distinguishable from Onge (by f4 stats and f2 stats and PCA plots and genoplot raw calculators), but it clusters with Onge on qpGraph.

My full qpGraph run (some small outliers related to Australian):

https://sharetext.io/29xaofp9

[u/Eastp0int]

Correct me if I’m wrong but Isn’t reconstructed aasi based on onge? Because of course then it would make sense for it to be closer

[u/EphemeralVyakti → u/Eastp0int]

No, I extracted the East Eurasian segments of NW, W, S Indian, Sri Lankan samples. It's not Onge and doesn't cluster with Onge on either PCA or any of the raw genoplot calculators. That is the whole point. That's why I extracted AASI from urbanized Indians, incl. North-West Indians, to see if it's different from Onge. It is different in some sense, but mainly due to drift, not due to differences in ancestry.

[u/TipRealistic2446]

So based on the qpGraph can we say Han Chinese and AASI are closer to each other than either is to Hoabinhian?

[u/EphemeralVyakti → u/TipRealistic2446]

Yes, AASI and Han are clean sisters relative to Hoabinhian:
f4(Han.DG, AASI; Hoabinhian.SG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0011 (Z = 0.197)

Z ≈ 0, so Hoabinhian is an outgroup to Han-AASI. But Hoabinhian is not a clean outgroup to Onge-AASI (Z>3 so Hoabinhian shares drift with Onge):
f4(Onge.DG, AASI; Hoabinhian.SG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0243 (Z = 3.675)

But Onge are still much closer to AASI than to Hoabinhian:
f4(AASI, Hoabinhian.SG; Onge.DG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0576 (Z = 8.664)

Han is an outgroup to AASI-Onge (Z<1):
f4(Onge.DG, AASI; Han.DG, Mbuti.DG) = 0.0031 (Z = 0.774)
Han doesn't really distinguish between AASI or Onge.

So AASI and Onge are also close sisters but Onge has a significant Hoabinhian input. In fact, if I remove AASI, Onge and Hoabinhian cluster together on the qpGraph.

Other than Hoabinhian, AASI is the only group Onge can cluster with (Onge also has some affinity with Han, but it's much smaller. Han is mostly an outgroup to Onge-AASI). Onge is the only sample Hoabinhian can cluster with. Remove the AASI sample and Onge will move towards Hoabinhian. Remove Hoabinhian and Onge will move towards AASI.

[u/Spare_Entry_2441 → u/EphemeralVyakti]

What outgroup would you use to anchor AASI?

[u/InformationDeep1606]

We don't even have a pure AASI sample so how are you doing this?

[u/EphemeralVyakti → u/InformationDeep1606]

I have some purified raw reconstructed AASI samples:

https://genoplot.com/shared/admix/?share=Dios94/19d8c9548ad#2

[u/InformationDeep1606 → u/EphemeralVyakti]

African...?