Recently there has been much talk in the ADMIXTURE-fiddling blogs about the origin of Ancestral North Indian (ANI) vs Ancestral South Indian (ASI). While ANI increasingly appears to be a Fertile Crescent derived population, ASI remains somewhat of a mystery, although some minor Yellow River-derived population may have also had a role.
Assuming an exceptionally fast and thourough cultural-biological Human Revolution followed by (near) complete replacement model, one would expect ASI to necessarily have undergone sufficient adaptations to be able to survive the onslaught of better adapted Fertile Crescenters and Yellow Riverers. It was necessarily more than just being at the right time and place to learn and get seeds from a neighbouring agricultural people. A whole new way of thinking and cooperating was likely needed... Since there is no archaeological evidence of an independent invention of agriculture in South/SouthEast Asia, and complete replacement from both known Core Areas is against the genetic evidence here, it would seem that the model fails to explain the facts and thus must discarded or much modified.
There are however some indications of a 3rd, perhaps less complete from an archaeological point of view, Neolithic Revolution in Eurasia.
Firstly, one other area, in addition to the Fertile Crescent and Yellow River areas, is thought to have independently invented quite advanced agriculture.
Secondly, several crops still grown in South Asia and South East Asia were not brought over from China or then Middle East by agriculturalists, and it's likely they were domesticated locally. It's quite rare for an already "Neolithic" society to domesticate new plants. We still rely on ancient ones, and the first independent domestication of a food plant in Europe was apparently the strawberry and that happened only in the 18th century... (rye was adapted in Northern Europe but it probably already grew as a contaminant of better cereals back in the Near East).
South Asia's crops are also less productive crops that no farmer already possessing the likes of wheat, barley or rice would care about labouriously domesticating.
One, sugar cane is well known today, as it's grown as a commodity crop. Interestingly also grown in New Guinea (even though mostly different varieties).
Others are maybe forgotten, since they compared unfavourably with the new crops.
Razib recently unveiled a 3D model he adapted from Zack's Harappa Project that suggests a 3rd centre of recent population expansion in Eurasia, possibly aborted and partially "eaten up" by the other two. Maybe there was a lack of local suitable native plants and the resulting less competitive crops lead to a semi-forager lifestyle. This would perhaps explain the absence of archaeological evidence.
Based on these indications I thought it would be fun to run a supervised ADMIXTURE analysis on East+South Asia.
I used a Fertile Crescent pole, consisting of Adygei+Turks+Palestinians. A Yellow River pole based on Beijing Chinese and Japanese. And a hypothetical 3rd Revolution pole based on Papuans and Melanesians, for lack of better "unadmixed" populations (even though I'd expect Papuans to be more of a fringe group and not exactly the Core Area population).
Here are the results.
The results correlate to a surprisingly high degree with the estimates by Reich and al as the table at Dienekes shows.