Shi Huang's Out-of-Asia theory

[Malaparte]

Shi Huang is promoting an unorthodox theory of human origins. How credible is it?

The molecular models of modern human origins​

Shi HUANG

Show more
Received: Sep 25, 2023 Accepted: Sep 14, 2024 Published: Jan 6, 2025

https://doi.org/10.3724/2097-3063.20240030

https://cstr.cn/32092.14.2097-3063.20240030

Abstract

In the early 1960s, researchers started the field of molecular evolution based on the genetic distance phenomenon of protein sequences among species, and proposed a molecular evolutionary theory different from the natural selection theory, the molecular clock hypothesis and the neutral theory. This theory holds that the genetic distance of gene sequences can be used to infer the phylogenetic relationship between different species. The greater the genetic distance, the farther the phylogenetic relationship and the longer the evolutionary time. Researchers then deduced a molecular model of the origin of modern humans based on this theory, the recent out of Africa hypothesis. African populations have the highest genetic diversity among all racial groups, which was interpretated to mean that Africans have a more ancient most recent common ancestor than other populations. Modern humans are considered to have first appeared in Africa who then migrated to Eurasia and largely replaced the indigenous populations. Although the neutral theory is a very valuable null hypothesis, it cannot fully explain the phenomenon of genetic diversity, which therefore deems the out-of-Africa model, at best, uncertain. In 2008, a new theory of molecular evolution, known as the maximum genetic diversity theory, was published, offering a reinterpretation of the phenomenon of genetic distances. A large genetic distance does not necessarily mean a long evolutionary time, but can also reflect a large phenotypic difference. The increase in genetic distance over time is not infinite, as implied by the neutral theory, but has an upper limit, which is mainly determined by the phenotypic complexity of the species. Several lines of tests show that the genetic distances or genetic diversities are largely at the upper limit levels. Based on the maximum genetic diversity theory, new research has independently re-discovered the out of East Asia model of modern humans that was first proposed in 1983. It also provides autosomal DNA support for the multiregional hypothesis. Multiple lines of tests, including ancient DNA analyses, lend robust support to the out of East Asia model as the more accurate representation of modern human origins. As exploration of the fundamental theories of evolution deepens, humanity′s understanding of its own origins is destined to become clearer and more refined.

https://www.sciengine.com/prehistor...ESSIONID=6371f33c-664a-4b9f-9303-ab0cbc8dfb3e

https://nybreaking.com/scientist-challenges-out-of-africa-theory-with-new-origins-for-modern-humans/

 

[Malaparte]

3.3 Molecular Models for the Origin of Modern Humans​

At present, there are three main models for the origin of modern humans, namely, the theory of multi-regional evolution, the theory of recent emergence from Africa, and the theory of recent emergence from East Asia.

3.3.1 Multi-region Evolution Theory​

According to this theory, the evolution of modern populations was caused by the distribution of Homo erectus in the early and middle Pleistocene, and the differences in geographical environment led to the evolution of populations in different regions into modern humans[61,62]. The continuous evolution of East Asians is more remarkable than that of African populations, and some morphological characteristics of Homo erectus have been retained in today's East Asians, such as shovel-shaped incisors and low nasal bridge[63]. The theory of multi-regional evolution is supported by abundant fossils and Paleolithic cultural remains, but it has been lacking molecular evidence for a long time[64].

3.3.2 Recent Africa Theory​

The neutral theory's interpretation of the phenomenon that sub-Saharan Africans have the highest genetic diversity directly provides molecular evidence to support the African theory. Its basic logic is to set the root of the evolutionary tree in the population with the highest genetic diversity, or in the population with the closest sequence to the species outside the group[65]. Recently, the African theory uses the genotype of chimpanzees outside the group as the ancestral locus to determine whether the human locus has been mutated. The same as chimpanzees is the ancestral type, while the different is the derivative type. The bifurcation of the tree is determined by the derivative allele. All these require the infinite locus assumption of the neutral theory as the premise[66]. The San people of southern Africa happen to be the most genetically diverse and most recent in sequence to species outside the group, so the ancestors of these populations are considered to be the ancestors of all modern humans[67].

Strauss-Kahn et al. 'S mitochondrial study concluded that modern humans came from Africa, but they did not give the necessary warning to remind people of the uncertainty of the premise of the neutral theory[68]. Follow-up studies also established a Y chromosome evolutionary tree, which used similar principles to root the tree in Africa[66,69]. However, the phylogenetic tree of uniparental chromosomes derived from the African theory is not self-consistent, assuming that there are no reverse mutations and repeated mutations, but it contains a large number of such mutations[70,71]. The Y chromosome of all Chinese carries the M168T allele, but if there is a reverse mutation, it is impossible to distinguish the neonatal type from the ancestral type, so M168T may be caused by the physiological characteristics of Eurasians.M168G may be a specific mutation of some African populations after Asian modern humans entered Africa and hybridized with African ancients. Because of the chance of hybridization, most Africans do not have this mutation[69].

One of the distinctive features of the African hypothesis is that it is becoming more and more complex, because there are more and more assumptions that are matter-of-fact, and new discoveries that are contrary to the African model need to be forced to resolve. For example, the Y chromosome ancestor of all Eurasians is F, which comes from East Asia, which is an indisputable data, while the out-of-Africa theory should predict that F is in West Asia and the Middle East, which are the closest to Africa. In order to justify itself, the out-of-Africa school must introduce a matter-of-fact hypothesis: East Asians from Africa replace Middle Easterners and Europeans from Africa[70,72][72]. In addition, the school of African theory basically does not popularize the premise of neutral theory, which results in a strange phenomenon: although molecular biology scholars basically do not agree with the premise of neutral theory,However, they did not understand the causal relationship with the theory of extroversion, so they did not oppose the theory of extroversion and other inferences based on the assumption of neutral theory, such as the absence of genetic basis for race. For example, Birney, a well-known scholar and one of the leaders of the ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) project, does not agree with the neutral theory, but agrees with its inference[73][74].

3.3.3 East Asia in the Near Future​

In 1983, Cavalli Sforza's team used mitochondria to construct a model of modern humans originating from East Asia. They proposed a method to determine the oldest population. According to the characteristics of the oldest or central type of mitochondria, which should have a high frequency and exist in many different races, they concluded that modern humans originated from East Asia[1]. If they assume that the molecular clock is valid, they can draw the conclusion of African origin, but the author clearly believes that the molecular clock is not valid[75]. Cavalli Sforza later confirmed in a 1994 monograph that the data and logic of this East Asian origin model were not problematic[76]. However, the theory has been buried for a long time since it was put forward, and has not been mentioned or had any influence in Chinese literature. Cavalli Sforza later became a supporter of the theory of Africa[77].

The study of human origin from the perspective of genetic polymorphism must be based on a full understanding of what it means. The highest genetic diversity in the mulberry actually means that the upper equilibrium level is related to factors such as lower mental ability, stronger immunity, and higher tolerance for harmful mutations[41][78-81][70,82]. Most of the genome sequence (95%) has been subjected to natural selection and therefore cannot be used for evolutionary tree analysis[83].

A well-known feature of human genetic diversity is that the majority of human genetic variation (85%) is shared by different races[84]. This is interpreted by the neutral theory that the origin of modern people is relatively short, and there is a large number of interbreeding among different races. However, the new study shows that the shared variation of different races is mainly concentrated in fast-changing sequences, reflecting the saturated equilibrium of convergent evolution, independent mutation and genetic diversity of fast-changing sequences, and has little to do with hybrid hybridization, because hybridization does not lead to significant differences between fast-changing sequences and slow-changing sequences[70]. In addition, the genetic distance between Africans and different races on the rapid variable sequence shows an equidistance phenomenon (Fig. 2), that is, the genetic distance between Africans and Europeans is equal to the genetic distances between Africans and East Asians, and is also equal to the genetic distances between different individuals within Africans. However, the slow variable sequence is completely different, showing the normal expected results, and the genetic distance between different individuals within Africans is smaller than that between Africans and other ethnic groups[70]. This study shows that the genetic diversity of the population in the fast variable sequence is at the upper limit, and only the slow variable sequence can be used to obtain the real genetic lineage tree.

 

[Malaparte]

In recent years, some research teams have re-deduced the evolution of modern humans based on the upper limit theory of genetic diversity, re-discovered the East Asia theory, and found molecular evidence of autosomes for the multi-regional evolution theory (the first edition of the preprint paper was published in 2017)[70]. They selected slow variable loci for population statistical analysis, and the results of autosomal analysis showed that the origin of modern humans was closer to the conclusion of multi-regional evolution, but the difference was that both Y chromosome and mitochondria originated in the same region, that is, southern East Asia[28,70]. These East Asian modern humans later migrated to other regions and interbred with the local people, resulting in the replacement of the ancient type of uniparental chromosomes by the modern type, but the autosomes of East Asians were partially replaced by the local people, resulting in the localization of the phenotype. Hybridization has also contributed to the higher genetic diversity of these other populations than East Asians, with more alleles shared with great apes because of reverse mutations.

The root of the evolutionary tree of the uniparental chromosome of the East Asian theory is determined by the derivation of common sense, which holds that the original haplotype should be the most present in the present population, and that the present human haplotype which is closer to the ancient DNA is closer to the root[1,70]. According to the East Asian model, the ancestral types of uniparental chromosomes are mitochondrial haplotype R0 and Y chromosome haplotype F (Fig. 3)[70]. New research shows that F exists in a certain proportion (about 1.5%) of the Han male population in southwest China (Yunnan, Guizhou, Guangxi, Sichuan)[85].

3.3.4 Judging the rationality of the model from the first principle​

A conclusion derived from first principles or axioms should be the most reasonable conclusion. The theory of East Asia is more reasonable than the theory of Africa in the following aspects. First, the environment of East Asia is complex and diverse, and the challenges are moderate, which is more suitable for human progressive evolution[86]. Second, the East Asian environment is vast and relatively isolated, and frequent hybridization is not conducive to the evolution of advanced new traits, because such traits will be obliterated by hybridization. Third, the areas suitable for Homo erectus to evolve into modern humans should also be suitable for the progressive evolution of modern humans, and the areas where today's backward ethnic groups are located should also be less suitable for the earliest emergence of modern humans. There is a certain paradox in the African theory, which requires both the assumption that Eurasia is not as suitable for human progress as Africa (in the period of 2 million to 50,000 years ago) and the assumption that Eurasia is more suitable for human progress than Africa (in the period of nearly 50,000 years ago), leading to the fact that modern people in Eurasia are genetically farther away from great apes. Fourth, the population that first became modern humans should have low genetic diversity and remain so, barring accidents. Fifth, there are more pathogenic factors in tropical areas, which require strong immunity of the population, so it is not conducive to reducing the genetic diversity of the population. Sixth, order comes from compression, confusion, and disorder. Male and female combinations from different races have a higher incidence of infertility, indicating that confounding is subject to negative selection, and the direction of evolution is towards lower genetic diversity and purer populations[87]. Seventh, compared with other ancient groups, the genome of the group that first became modern humans should be the most distant from chimpanzees and has remained so. Eighth, the leading group of phenotypes such as mental ability should be the first group to cross the threshold of modern people and maintain it to this day, unless there is an accident.

The study of the region or race from which human beings originated is a major issue, and it is necessary to explore the various genetic and phenotypic differences between ethnic groups and ancient human fossils.However, the popular definition of racism in the West regards the belief in racial differences as racism, which is contrary to fact and science and interferes with the exploration of the origin of modern people, and must be revised[88].

3.3.5 Validation of Molecular Models for the Origin of Modern Humans​

Molecular models require some assumptions, which are usually uncertain, so they need to be independently verified to be truly valid. At present, there are two sets of public data that can be used for verification, one is ancient DNA data, and the other is Y chromosome complete sequencing data.

3.3.5.1 Ancient DNA Verification​

The establishment of the origin model of modern people basically comes from the analysis of DNA variation of modern people, which is a conjecture of past historical events, while ancient DNA really witnesses ancient events and has the most say in ancient evolutionary events. The school of African theory has not used ancient DNA to verify the African theory, but only used ancient DNA to merge with modern human DNA to construct a paternal evolutionary tree, but this method relies on the assumption of neutral theory that the African theory has always relied on, and convincing verification requires the independence of data and logic[89].

Ancient DNA shows that ancient samples should mutate only a part of all the sites of a haplotype, whether it is the basal haplotype, that is, the haplotype at the root or trunk of a tree, or the terminal haplotypes, that is, the haplotypes at the leaf position. This means that the differentiation of the terminal haplotype actually occurs before the basal haplotype has fully completed the mutation of all relevant sites, rather than after the neutral theory predicts. This also means that the process from partial mutation to complete mutation of the basal haplotype is almost synchronized with the complete formation of the terminal haplotype, and there must be convergent mutation, that is, the same mutation occurs at the same site in the population of different terminal haplotypes. This is similar to the growth of a living tree, where the growth of leaves or branches is synchronized with the growth of the trunk. Convergent mutation is not allowed to occur in the out-of-Africa model, but it can occur generally in the out-of-East Asia model. In addition, the mutations contained in the early basal haplotype in the African model are believed to have been gradually differentiated after the emergence of modern humans. But in the East Asian model, these mutations have already occurred in the genome of the first modern humans. Therefore, if the East Asian model is correct, all the sites of the early basal haplotype in these African models will always be mutated in the ancient samples. If the African model is correct, the ancient samples should be found to be partially mutated in these haplotypes. The results showed that the basal haplotypes of the out-of-Africa model were all mutated in the ancient samples, while almost all basal haplotypes of the out-of-East Asia model were found to be partially mutated, which meant that the basal haplotype of the out-of-East Asia model was real[90].

Common findings in the field of ancient DNA research are the prevalence of hybridization and mixing, as well as the weak genetic continuity between ancient people and local living people[91-93]. These studies based on the neutral theory can hardly verify the African theory or any model of single origin, because such verification needs to prove that the ancient people in the place of origin are genetically continuous with the local living people. If the genetic variation is neutral, the genotype frequency of the ancestral population should not be different from that of the descendants according to the Hardy-Weinberg law. However, if the variation is subject to natural selection, there will be a large difference in genotype frequency between ancestors and descendants due to different environments, and this gene frequency can change very rapidly over time[36]. At present, most of the literature assumes that functional variation is neutral variation, but if researchers use real neutral variation to analyze, they will find that there is genetic continuity between ancient people in East Asia and modern people in East Asia, but there is no similar situation in other regions, which basically supports the prediction of East Asia theory (Huangshi et al., paper in preparation). Other researchers have also found that the 45000-year-old ancients in Europe are not related to living Europeans, but have East Asian genes. Even though there is no direct evidence that these ancients in Europe came from East Asia, these findings do not contradict the theory of East Asia[94]. To say that East Asians came from the eastward migration of these ancient Westerners requires a far-fetched assumption: these ancient Europeans all migrated to East Asia and left no descendants in Europe.

 

[Malaparte]

3.3.5.2 Y Chromosome Complete Sequencing Verification​

Until recently, the human Y chromosome was only partially sequenced (53.8%), and the phylogenetic tree of the Y chromosome was constructed by using genetic variations located in non-recombinant regions (fig. 3). However, a breakthrough was the recent complete sequencing of 43 human Y chromosomes, which revealed a large number of variants from the pseudoautosomal region, providing a valuable resource for independent validation of the human origin model[95]. Some researchers have explored the sharing of these variations between different haplotypes. They have validated their method by identifying many uncontroversial haplotype relationships and revealed a clear pattern: haplotypes unique to East Asia are supported by new data, while haplotypes unique to Africa are not consistent with new data[96]. For example, A0b and A1a share the most variation with each other and show the closest relationship with each other, which is consistent with both belonging to the A00A1a haplotype of the East Asian hypothesis, but in the African hypothesis model, A1a is distant from A0b and close to other haplotypes such as B and C (Fig. 3).

3.3.5.3 Evidence Summary​

The independent evidence supporting the East Asian theory includes the following ten aspects. First, the chain of fossil evidence, for example, the Beijing Upper Cave Man more than 30,000 years ago is the pre-Holocene fossil with the most modern characteristics[97,98][99]. Second, the local continuous evidence chain of East Asian stone culture[64]. Third, Cavalli – Sforza's mitochondrial conclusion[1]. Fourth, under the guidance of the upper limit theory of genetic diversity, the molecular research conclusions of autosomal and uniparental chromosomes of DNA at present[70]. Fifth, the East Asian hypothesis is verified by using the data of ancient DNA single-parent chromosomes[71,90]. Sixth, verify the East Asian hypothesis by using the complete sequencing data of Y chromosome[96]. Seventh, the conclusion that the early Bulgarian ancients in Europe were mainly East Asian genes[94]. Eighth, the conclusion that the Y chromosome of Europe and West Asia comes from East Asia[72]. Ninth, the conclusion that the X chromosome in Europe and West Asia may come from East Asia[100]. Tenth, in the past 3 million years, the environment of East Asia has become more complex and diverse, which is more suitable for human progress and evolution[86].

In contrast, there are only two types of data that seem to be consistent with the African theory. First, there are some early modern human fossils in Africa. Although there are Jebel Irhoud fossils in North Africa 300,000 years ago, there are no modern human fossils in sub-Saharan Africa earlier than 250,000 years ago[101]. North Africa has been dominated by Eurasian immigration from ancient times to the present, and the ancient DNA that has been found reveals that this is at least 15000 years ago, so the fossils of Jebel Iro can not be evidence of Africa (South)[102]. In fact, almost all the fossils of ancient Africans before the Holocene are not completely modern, and the chain of fossil evidence for the continuous evolution of ancient humans in Africa into modern humans is not strong enough to support the theory of multi-regional evolution[99,103]. Second, the interpretation of genetic diversity of living populations under the guidance of neutral theory.

4 Conclusion​

There are two different molecular models for the origin of modern humans, namely, the African theory and the East Asian theory, both of which were first proposed in 1983. The African theory was rediscovered in 1987, and the East Asian theory was rediscovered in 2017. The former is derived from the neutral theory, while the latter is based on the upper limit theory of genetic diversity. The neutral theory as an explanatory hypothesis of nature has been abandoned by most scholars, which means that the African theory is a drastic measure. As a new evolutionary theory that has the strength to replace the neutral theory and can better explain nature, the upper limit theory of genetic diversity has been directly verified by many analytical experiments. At the same time, the theory of East Asia has also been supported by a number of independent tests.

The future research will further verify the upper limit theory of genetic diversity and the East Asian theory from the following aspects. First, large-scale functional genomics studies may show that almost all bases are functional. Second, more populations or species are studied to further show that genetic diversity is at an upper level. Third, the phenomenon of genetic equidistance can be further established by studying more species and more genes. Fourth, by confirming the phylogenetic tree based on the upper limit theory of genetic diversity, such as the East Asian theory, the theory itself has been verified. Fifth, a better understanding of cognitive ability would further establish the harmfulness of random disorder to order or cognition. Sixth, a better understanding is needed at the molecular level of how the collective effects of a large number of genetic variants affect traits.

In short, the correct understanding of the basic theory of evolution and the mystery of the origin of modern people will inevitably be gradually improved, and will greatly promote human beings to accurately grasp the present and future of their own destiny community.

 

[ZZZZ1111]

It is possible that the paternal ancestors of Homo sapiens and Neanderthals lived in the east Eurasian and then migrated back and forth.
its notable that orang utans lives in SEA,while chimps in africa