Upon encountering that tweet by Iosif Lazaridis of Harvard Med I figured I'd drop him the following email:
Where he promptly replied with:
It ultimately seems as though there are groups in West Asia like Negev Bedouin Bs (who will show more of "Near Eastern" ancestry like what shows up in David over at Eurogenes' K=8 ADMIXTURE analysis than Early European Farmers) seemingly richer in Basal Eurasian ancestry than Early European Farmers.
The issue though is quite simply that many or most of these groups tend to have African ancestry (tends to be East African-related) and that ultimately makes whether or not they are more Basal Eurasian an iffy matter complicated by their African admixture even if it is accounted for as best as possible.
My personal opinion is that populations richer in "Near Eastern/ENF" will prove to be more Basal Eurasian than Early European Farmers but something's surely needed in order to be sure here; more ancient DNA data from West Asia.
1. The West Asian / Near Eastern populations less rich in Basal Eurasian that Lazaridis noticed are probably ones like Anatolians, Caucasians and Iranians whom are all rich in MA-1 ("Ancient North Eurasian") related ancestry and will even show some notable Western European Hunter-Gatherer-related ancestry like the case is with various Anatolian Turks. These groups will actually show less of "Near Eastern/ENF" than Early European Farmers so it would make sense. I can't be sure about them being the particular groups that seem to be less Basal Eurasian than Early European Farmers but it's just an educated guess...