posted
Did the Dravidian speakers originate in Africa?*
Dear Sir,
Chaubey et al. ''Peopling of South Asia'', argue that most Indians are autochthonous and originated shortly after the African migration to India 5060,000 ybp, given the diversity of M haplogroups in India. Molecular, archaeological, linguistic and osteological studies of Dravidian-speaking people, however, suggest a more-recent origin for people speaking these languages. According to Sergent, (1) the Dravidian populations are not autochthonous to India. Using osteological data, researchers have made it clear that the Dravidian speakers of South India and the Indus valley were primarily related to the ancient Capsian population, which originated in Africa. (29) Lahovary (5) and Sastri(6) maintains that this population was unified over an extensive zone from Africa, to South India.
Some researchers maintain that the Capsian civilization originated in East Africa. (5,10) Researchers have proven that the Dravidians are related to the C-group of Nubia, given the fact that both groups used (1) a common black-and-red ware (BRW), (6) (2) a common burial complex incorporating megaliths and circular rock enclosures (5,6) and (3) a common type of rock-cut sepulcher. (5) The BRW industry diffused from Nubia, across West Asia into Rajastan, and thence to East Central and South India. (11) Singh made it clear that he believes that the BRW radiated from Nubia through Mesopotamia and Iran southward into India.(12)
Many linguists claim that the Dravidian languages are genetically related to the Niger-Congo group especially languages spoken today in the Niger Valley and Senegambia region. (5,1321) The Niger-Congo speakers originated in Nubia. Winters has reconstructed the Paleo-African- Dravidian terms for the hoe, millet, cattle, sheep and goats. (5,1824) R. Balakrishnan claims that Onomastics indicate an African ''root'' for the Dravidian-speaking tribes. (25) He presents data that the names for rivers and hills in Koraput, for example, are identical to the names for rivers and hills in Africa. (25) The diversity of M HGs in India has led many researchers besides Chaubeyet al. to suggest that theMclades have an insitu origin. (26,27)
These researchers speculate that, although L3 originated in Africa, the M1HG is only found in Ethiopia and Egypt and may be the result of a back migration to Africa from India.(26,27) The M lineages are not found only in East Africa. Rosa et al. found a low frequency of the M1 HG among West Africans who speak the Niger-Congo languages, such as the Balanta-Djola. (28) Gonzalez et al. found N, M and M1 HGs among Niger-Congo speakers living in Cameroon, Senegambia and Guinea Bissau. (29) Gonder et al. has also found N, M and M1 in Tanzania. (30) The molecular data make it clear that haplogroups M and M1 are spread across Africa from East to West, not just Ethiopia. (2830,32)
Anna Oliviera et al. argue that M1 must have originated in West Asia, because none of the Asian M haplogroups harbor any distinguishing East African root mutations. (30) They claim that the presence of any East African M1 root mutations in Asian-specific clades suggest a recent arrival of M1; and that the absence of M1 root mutations among Eurasian sister clades indicate a back migration into East Africa of HG M1. (30) Oliviera et al. claim that East African M1 root mutations are absent in Eurasian M sister clades is not supported by the evidence. (36) For example, Gondar et al. make it clear that the Tanzanian M1 haplogroup cluster with people from Oceania. In addition, Roychoudhury et al. noted nucleolides shared by East African M1, and Indian M haplogroups include HG M4 at 16311; HG M5 at 16,129; and HG M34 at 16,249.
It is also not true that HGM1 is absent in India. Kivisild et al. noted that 26 of the subjects in his study belonged to the M1 haplogroup. (31) In this study, it was discovered that subcluster M1 was found mainly in Kerala and Karnataka. (31) Kivisild et al. found 5 major haplogroup M subclusters in India: M1, M2, M3, M4, and M5.(31) Kivisild et al. make it clear that each Indian M lineage has its own unique star features. (31) A cursory examination of Kivisild et al.'s Fig. 3, makes it clear that they found different transitions at nps for Indian haplogroups. (31) Indian M subclusters have mutations common to the East African M1 HG. (33,35) In Fig. 3, Kivisild et al. identify transitions for Indian M1 at 16,311,16,129 and 16,189. (31) Other Indian nodes that agree with East African M1, according to Fig. 3, include: HG M5a 16,311, HG M5 16,189, and HG M2a 16,189. (31) An African genesis for India's M haplogroups would explain the variant nucleolides East African M1 shares with Indian haplogroups: HG M4 at 16311, 16129 with HG M5 and 16249 with HG M34/. (31,33) This is interesting given Quintain-Murci et al.'s claim that the East African HG M1 HVS-I motif is characterized by four transitions at nt 16,129,16,189, 16249 and 16,311.(32)
Researchers have made it clear that M1 and the M macrohaplogroup originated from an African background characterized by the ancestral state 10873C. (32,34,35) The presence of shared root mutations between East African M1, and Oceanic and Indian M haplogroups, (30,33,35) may indicate a recent arrival of Eurasian M clades from Africa. A Proto-Dravidian migration event from Africa would explain the East African HVS-I signature motifs in the Indian M haplogroup samples.(30,33,35) The geographical range of Indian M haplogroups is explained by the coalescent theory, i.e. the small Proto-Dravidian population that settled the Indus Valley expanded and spread over the subcontinent from Pakistan in the North to South India.
The Dravidian speakers are probably not autochthonous to India as claimed by Chaubeyet al. It is clear that the Dravidians and Africans speak genetically related languages, (5,1321) and share anthropological (29) and archaeological (5,6,11,12) features that unite both groups. The presence of M1 in India,(31) and the absence of Indian-specific clades in Africa, indicates that IndianMsubclusters probably developed in India, after the migration of proto- Dravidian speakers from the Indus Valley down into South India.
This path for Dravidian migration may be marked by the spread of (1) shared toponyms, (21,25) (2) genetically related languages,(5,1321) (3) skeletal remains,( 29) and (4) red-and-black pottery.(5,6,11,12)
References
1. Sergent B. 1992. Gene`se de L'Inde. Paris: Payot.
2. Gates RR. 1961. Early Mediterranean traits in the leptorhine elements in the Kurumbas and other tribes of S. India. Mankind 1(4).
3. Guha GB. The Chalcolithic Races of India.
4. Guha GB. 193637. The racial affinities of the people of India. Rendus du Congress Intl d'Anthrop et Etnogr, Bruxelles.
5. Lahovary N. 1963. Dravidian Origins and the West, Madras: Longman.
6. Sastri N. 1954. History of South India. Cumberledge, Madras.
7. Shaffer R. 1954. Ethnography of ancient India. Harrasowitz, Wiesbaden.
8. Wheeler M. 1959. Early India and Pakistan. Thames and Hudson, London.
9. Winters CA. 1985. The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians, Tamil Civilization 3:19.
10. Cole S. 1954. The Prehistory of East Africa. London: Pelican.
11. Gururaja Rao BK. 1972. The Megalithic Culture in South India. Mysore.
12. Singh HN. 1982. History and archaeology of Black-and Red ware. Delhi.
13. Aravanan KP. 1976. ''Physical and cultural similarities between Dravidians and Africans''. Journal of Tamil Studies 10:2327.
14. Aravanan KP. 1979. Dravidians and Africans, Madras.
15. Aravanan KP. 1980. Notable negroid elements in Dravidian India. J Tamil Studies 2045.
16. Upadhyaya P, Upadhyaya SP. 1979. Les liens entre Kerala et l'Afrique tels qu'ils resosortent des survivances culturelles et inguistiques, Bulletin de L'IFAN, no. 1:100132.
17. Upadhyaya P, Upadhyaya SP. 1977. Affinites ethno-linguistiques entre Dravidiens et les Negro-Africain, Bull.de L'IFAN, No.1:127157.
18. Winters CA. 1981a. ''The Unity of African and Indian Agriculture' '. J African Civilization 3:103110.
19. Winters CA. 1980. ''The genetic unity of Dravidian and African languages and culture'', Proc First Interntl Symp on Asian Studies (PIISAS) 1979, Hong Kong: Asian Research Service.
20. Winters CA. 1981b. ''Are Dravidians of African Origin'', P. Second ISAS, 1980, (Hong Kong: Asian Research Service):789 807.
21. Winters CA. 1986. ''The Dravidian Origin of the Mountain and Water Toponyms in central Asia''. J Central Asia 9, 2:144148.
22. Winters CA. 1999a. ProtoDravidian terms for cattle. Interntl J Dravidian Linguistics 28:9198.
23. Winters CA. 1999b. Proto-Dravidian terms for sheep and goats. PILC J Dravidian Studies 9:183187.
24. Winters CA. 2000. Proto-Dravidian agricultural terms. Interntl J Dravidian Linguistics 30:2328.
25. Balakrishnan R. 2005. African roots of the Dravidian-speaking Tribes: A case in Onomastics, Interntl J Dravidian Linguistics 34:153202.
26. Metspalu M, Kivisild T, Metspalu E, Parik J, Hudjashov G, et al. 2004. Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans. BMC Genetics 2004, 5:26. http://www.biomedce ntral. com/1471-2156/ 5/26
27. Thangaraj K, Chaubey G, Kumar V, Vanniarajan SA, Ithanseem I, et al. 2006. In situ origin of deep rooting lineages of mitochondrial Macrohaplogroup 'M' in India. BMC Genomics 7:151. http://www.pubmedce ntral. nih.gov/articlerend er.fcgi?artid Ό 1534032
28. Rosa A, Brehm A, Kivisild T, Metspalu E, Villems R. 2004. MtDNA Profile of West Africa Guineans: Towards a Better Understanding of the Senegambia Region. Annals of Human Genetics 68:4 http://www.blackwel l- synergy.com/ links/doi/ 10.1046/j. 1529-8817. 2004.00100. x/enhancedabs/
29. Gonza΄ lez AM, Cabrera VM, Larruga JM, Tounkara A, Noumsi G, et al. 2006. Mitochondrial DNA Variation in Mauritania and Mali and their Genetic Relationship to Other Western Africa Populations. Annals of Human Genetics 70, 5. http://www.blackwel l- ynergy.com/doi/ abs/ 10.1111/j.1469- 1809.2006. 00259.x?cookieSe t Ό1&journalCode Όahg.
30. Gonder MK, Mortensen HM, Reed FA, de Sousa A, Tishkoff SA. 2006. Whole mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages. Mol Biol Evol Dec 28.
31. Kivisild T, Kaldman K, Metspalu M, Parik J, Papiha S. 1999. In Genomic Diversity, (Ed.) R. Papiha Deka (pp. 135152). S.S. Kluwer/Plenum Publishers http://evolutsioon. ut.ee/publicatio ns/Kivisild 1999b.pdf.
32. Quintana-Murci L, Semino O, Bandelt H-J, Passarino G, McElreavey K, Santachiara- Benerecetti AS. 1999. Genetic evidence of an early exit of Homo sapiens sapiens from Africa through eastern Africa. Nat Genet 23:437441 [PubMed Abstract] [Publisher Full Text]
33. Roychoudhury S, Roy S, Basu A, Banerjee R, Vishwanathan H, et al. 2001. Genomic structures and population histories of linguistically
distinct tribal groups of India. Hum Genet 109:339350 First citation in article j PubMed j CrossRef
34. Rajkumar R, Banerjee J, Gunturi HB. Trivedi R, Kashyap VK. 2005 Phylogeny and antiquity of M haplogroup inferred from complete mtDNA sequence of Indian specific lineages. BMC Evol Biol, 5:26.
35. Sun C, Kong Q-P, Palanichamy MG, Agrawal S, Bandelt HJ, et al. 2005. The Dazzling array or Basal Branches in the mtDNA macrogroup M from India as inferred from complete Genomes. Molecular Biology and Evolution 10:1093.
36. Olivieri A, Achilli A, Pala M, Battaglia V, Fornarino S, et al. 2006. The mtDNA legacy of the Levantine early Upper Palaeolithic in Africa.
Science 314:17671770.
DOI 10.1002/bies. 20565 Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience. wiley.com). BioEssays 29:497498, _ 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. BioEssays 29.5 497-498
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Congratulations.
Marc Washington Member # 10979
posted
I second that.
Marc W.
SEEKING Member # 10105
posted
Shouldn't there be more congratulations posted or others have decided to hold back on the congratulations because of wanting to further scrutinize the information presented?
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Agreed.
We bust up any and everybody's peer reviewed articles here. Dr. Winters deserves all the honors he can get for being, ttbomk, the 1st independant Afrikan minded historian/linguist to be published in a scientific journal.
Does that mean I agree with him? No. Do I agree with any scholar in toto? No.
yazid904 Member # 7708
posted
Congrats to Dr Winters!
I would say that the Dravidian language developed en route and at point of dispersal when that group arrived in India. I say that due to the changes from the motherland to India that allowed the flowering of language and their variances due to environment! I am reminded of a Russian study where the scientists wanted to breed foxes for their fur and they found that said foxes were difficult to raise due to their 'wild' nature. One scientist had the idea of distinguishing those who exhibited the fight response from those who exhibited the flight response. The flight responders not only changed temperament with breeding (more docile) but also the variation in colour and external chartacteristics showed up in the new offspring! Difference in food and other preference showed up and the tamer one followed the owners like dogs!
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Congratulations.
Thank You.
Arwa Member # 11172
posted
Clyde Winters, congratulations !!!
What journal is that ?
Edit:
Never mind
BTW, BioEssays is not one of those journals we "worship".
Try Science or nature,
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^You're right, I was so caught up in the material I failed to realize that Winters actually published it in peer reviewed.
For that, I do congratulate!
Israel Member # 11221
posted
Thank you Dr. Winters for your commitment to the creative reinterpretation of history.......congratulations.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Clyde Winters, congratulations !!!
What journal is that ?
Edit:
Never mind
BTW, BioEssays is not one of those journals we "worship".
Try Science or nature,
Presently, I have a couple of letters being considered by Science.
.
Arwa Member # 11172
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Presently, I have a couple of letters being considered by Science.
.
I'm looking forword to, Clyde. And with your permission, I want to publish it on my blog.
Thank you
Your sister!
Masonic Rebel Member # 9549
posted
I'm Not Surprise about this, Clyde Winters Has Class plus he's Afrocentric.
Congratulations:
Mystery Solver Member # 9033
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Did the Dravidian speakers originate in Africa?*
Dear Sir,
Chaubey et al. ''Peopling of South Asia'', argue that most Indians are autochthonous and originated shortly after the African migration to India 5060,000 ybp, given the diversity of M haplogroups in India. Molecular, archaeological, linguistic and osteological studies of Dravidian-speaking people, however, suggest a more-recent origin for people speaking these languages. According to Sergent, (1) the Dravidian populations are not autochthonous to India. Using osteological data, researchers have made it clear that the Dravidian speakers of South India and the Indus valley were primarily related to the ancient Capsian population, which originated in Africa. (29) Lahovary (5) and Sastri(6) maintains that this population was unified over an extensive zone from Africa, to South India.
Some researchers maintain that the Capsian civilization originated in East Africa. (5,10) Researchers have proven that the Dravidians are related to the C-group of Nubia, given the fact that both groups used (1) a common black-and-red ware (BRW), (6) (2) a common burial complex incorporating megaliths and circular rock enclosures (5,6) and (3) a common type of rock-cut sepulcher. (5) The BRW industry diffused from Nubia, across West Asia into Rajastan, and thence to East Central and South India. (11) Singh made it clear that he believes that the BRW radiated from Nubia through Mesopotamia and Iran southward into India.(12)
Many linguists claim that the Dravidian languages are genetically related to the Niger-Congo group especially languages spoken today in the Niger Valley and Senegambia region. (5,1321) The Niger-Congo speakers originated in Nubia. Winters has reconstructed the Paleo-African- Dravidian terms for the hoe, millet, cattle, sheep and goats. (5,1824) R. Balakrishnan claims that Onomastics indicate an African ''root'' for the Dravidian-speaking tribes. (25) He presents data that the names for rivers and hills in Koraput, for example, are identical to the names for rivers and hills in Africa. (25) The diversity of M HGs in India has led many researchers besides Chaubeyet al. to suggest that theMclades have an insitu origin. (26,27)
These researchers speculate that, although L3 originated in Africa, the M1HG is only found in Ethiopia and Egypt and may be the result of a back migration to Africa from India.(26,27) The M lineages are not found only in East Africa. Rosa et al. found a low frequency of the M1 HG among West Africans who speak the Niger-Congo languages, such as the Balanta-Djola. (28) Gonzalez et al. found N, M and M1 HGs among Niger-Congo speakers living in Cameroon, Senegambia and Guinea Bissau. (29) Gonder et al. has also found N, M and M1 in Tanzania. (30) The molecular data make it clear that haplogroups M and M1 are spread across Africa from East to West, not just Ethiopia. (2830,32)
Anna Oliviera et al. argue that M1 must have originated in West Asia, because none of the Asian M haplogroups harbor any distinguishing East African root mutations. (30) They claim that the presence of any East African M1 root mutations in Asian-specific clades suggest a recent arrival of M1; and that the absence of M1 root mutations among Eurasian sister clades indicate a back migration into East Africa of HG M1. (30) Oliviera et al. claim that East African M1 root mutations are absent in Eurasian M sister clades is not supported by the evidence. (36) For example, Gondar et al. make it clear that the Tanzanian M1 haplogroup cluster with people from Oceania. In addition, Roychoudhury et al. noted nucleolides shared by East African M1, and Indian M haplogroups include HG M4 at 16311; HG M5 at 16,129; and HG M34 at 16,249.
It is also not true that HGM1 is absent in India. Kivisild et al. noted that 26 of the subjects in his study belonged to the M1 haplogroup. (31) In this study, it was discovered that subcluster M1 was found mainly in Kerala and Karnataka. (31) Kivisild et al. found 5 major haplogroup M subclusters in India: M1, M2, M3, M4, and M5.(31) Kivisild et al. make it clear that each Indian M lineage has its own unique star features. (31) A cursory examination of Kivisild et al.'s Fig. 3, makes it clear that they found different transitions at nps for Indian haplogroups. (31) Indian M subclusters have mutations common to the East African M1 HG. (33,35) In Fig. 3, Kivisild et al. identify transitions for Indian M1 at 16,311,16,129 and 16,189. (31) Other Indian nodes that agree with East African M1, according to Fig. 3, include: HG M5a 16,311, HG M5 16,189, and HG M2a 16,189. (31) An African genesis for India's M haplogroups would explain the variant nucleolides East African M1 shares with Indian haplogroups: HG M4 at 16311, 16129 with HG M5 and 16249 with HG M34/. (31,33) This is interesting given Quintain-Murci et al.'s claim that the East African HG M1 HVS-I motif is characterized by four transitions at nt 16,129,16,189, 16249 and 16,311.(32)
Researchers have made it clear that M1 and the M macrohaplogroup originated from an African background characterized by the ancestral state 10873C. (32,34,35) The presence of shared root mutations between East African M1, and Oceanic and Indian M haplogroups, (30,33,35) may indicate a recent arrival of Eurasian M clades from Africa. A Proto-Dravidian migration event from Africa would explain the East African HVS-I signature motifs in the Indian M haplogroup samples.(30,33,35) The geographical range of Indian M haplogroups is explained by the coalescent theory, i.e. the small Proto-Dravidian population that settled the Indus Valley expanded and spread over the subcontinent from Pakistan in the North to South India.
The Dravidian speakers are probably not autochthonous to India as claimed by Chaubeyet al. It is clear that the Dravidians and Africans speak genetically related languages, (5,1321) and share anthropological (29) and archaeological (5,6,11,12) features that unite both groups. The presence of M1 in India,(31) and the absence of Indian-specific clades in Africa, indicates that IndianMsubclusters probably developed in India, after the migration of proto- Dravidian speakers from the Indus Valley down into South India.
This path for Dravidian migration may be marked by the spread of (1) shared toponyms, (21,25) (2) genetically related languages,(5,1321) (3) skeletal remains,( 29) and (4) red-and-black pottery.(5,6,11,12)...
This whole piece is actually a regurgitation both completely discredited and a hodgepodge of "half-truth" pieces from studies brought to Clyde's attention by various discussants, including myself, in previous discussions; examples of such discussions include the following:
Essays On African Dravidian Relations, where for example this highlighted piece of info: Researchers have made it clear that M1 and the M macrohaplogroup originated from an African background characterized by the ancestral state 10873C., was brought to his attention by none other than myself, from the Semino et al. piece he never could accurately interpret no matter how times the gist of the study has been explained to him.
Clyde's this piece, with emphasis on the highlighted: The presence of shared root mutations between East African M1, and Oceanic and Indian M haplogroups, (30,33,35) may indicate a recent arrival of Eurasian M clades from Africa., has also been discredited in that same link above, by Semino et al. and Chang Sun et al.
This decrediting was duplicated in the following discussions:
This Clyde piece: "It is also not true that HGM1 is absent in India. Kivisild et al. noted that 26 of the subjects in his study belonged to the M1 haplogroup. ", was demonstrated here on Egyptsearch to have been discredited by none other than the very author that Clyde professes to have learnt the said information from, Kivisild!...in a much more UP-TO-DATE PUBLICATION.
This Clyde piece: Researchers have made it clear that M1 and the M macrohaplogroup originated from an African background characterized by the ancestral state 10873C. (32,34,35) The presence of shared root mutations between East African M1, and Oceanic and Indian M haplogroups, (30,33,35) may indicate a recent arrival of Eurasian M clades from Africa.
Goes back to the very first discussion I linked to in this post. Aside from 10400C->T transition, and the 10873C as noted in that discussion, what other "root mutations" are shared between East African M1 and Asian M macrohaplogroup?...for we know from Maca-Meyer et al., Semino et al., Raj Kummar et al., Metspalu et al. and Chang Sun et al., the same thing that the following brings to our attention:
Indeed, the reconstructed ancestral motifs of all Indian M haplogroups turned out to be devoid of those variations that characterized M1, i.e., 6446, 6680, 12403, and 14110 (Maca-Meyer et al. 2001; Herrnstadt et al. 2002). - Chang Sun et al
This Clyde piece: Indian M subclusters have mutations common to the East African M1 HG. (33,35) In Fig. 3, Kivisild et al. identify transitions for Indian M1 at 16,311,16,129 and 16,189. (31) Other Indian nodes that agree with East African M1, according to Fig. 3, include: HG M5a 16,311, HG M5 16,189, and HG M2a 16,189. (31) An African genesis for India's M haplogroups would explain the variant nucleolides East African M1 shares with Indian haplogroups: HG M4 at 16311, 16129 with HG M5 and 16249 with HG M34/. (31,33) This is interesting given Quintain-Murci et al.'s claim that the East African HG M1 HVS-I motif is characterized by four transitions at nt 16,129,16,189, 16249 and 16,311.(32)
^Nothing really interesting here, once it is understood that these mutations are parallel mutations found "randomly" across the M macrohaplogroup.
This Clyde piece: The Dravidian speakers are probably not autochthonous to India as claimed by Chaubeyet al. It is clear that the Dravidians and Africans speak genetically related languages, (5,1321) and share anthropological (29) and archaeological (5,6,11,12) features that unite both groups. The presence of M1 in India,(31) and the absence of Indian-specific clades in Africa, indicates that IndianMsubclusters probably developed in India, after the migration of proto- Dravidian speakers from the Indus Valley down into South India.
The ludicrous idea of M1 being present in India has already been noted. The idea that "Indian M subclusters probably developed in India, **after** the migration of proto- Dravidian speakers from the Indus Valley down into South India", according to Clyde above, easily contradicted by the fact that the Asian M lineages come from migrations of Paleolithic background as deemed from the much older TMRCA and expansion time frames for the Asian M lineage in comparison to the relatively younger expansion dates for the East African M1.
This Clyde piece says: Anna Oliviera et al. argue that M1 must have originated in West Asia, because none of the Asian M haplogroups harbor any **distinguishing** East African **root mutations. (30)
...and right thereafter says this:
They claim that the presence of any **East African M1 root mutations** in Asian-specific clades suggest a **recent arrival** of M1;
^Contradicts the former claim by the authors, at least according to how it is framed in Clyde's dissemination.
...furthermore,
and that the absence of M1 root mutations among Eurasian sister clades indicate a back migration into East Africa of HG M1.
...is obviously without any substantive merit, as neither M1 [Iran basically forms the eastern-most limit, and even there, these are only downstream lineages of M1 from those found in East Africa], nor the M1 predecessor is found in south Asia [including the Indian sub-continent].
Proceeding with Clyde's claim, we are confronted with...
(30) Oliviera et al. claim that East African M1 root mutations are absent in Eurasian M sister clades is not supported by the evidence. (36) For example, Gondar et al. make it clear that the Tanzanian M1 haplogroup cluster with people from Oceania.
"Finally, our limited genetic data from Tanzanians belonging to haplogroups M1, N1 and J suggest two alternatives that are not mutually exclusive. Populations in Tanzania may have been important in the migration of modern humans from Africa to other regions, as noted in previous studies of other populations in eastern Africa (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999). For example, mtDNAs of Tanzanians belonging to haplogroup M1 cluster with peoples from Oceania, while Tanzanian mtDNAs belonging to haplogroup N1 and J, cluster with peoples of Middle Eastern and Eurasian origin. However, the presence of haplogroups N1 and J in Tanzania suggest back migration from the Middle East or Eurasia into eastern Africa, which has been inferred from previous studies of other populations in eastern Africa (Kivisild et al. 2004). These results are intriguing and suggest that the role of Tanzanians in the migration(s) of modern humans within and out of Africa should be analyzed in greater detail after more extensive data collection, particularly from analysis of Y-, X-, and autosomalchromosome markers...
"mtDNAs belonging to haplogroups M and N form two monophyletic clades (Figure 2a). These two M and N haplogroup clades included a few Tanzanians (belonging to haplogroups M1, M, N1 and J), suggesting possible recent gene flow back into Africa and/or that ancestors of the Tanzanian populations may have been a source of migration of modern humans from Africa to other regions (Figure 2b)." - Gonder et al.
It had been noted in the said discussion by myself, that Gonder et al. are making their assessments [about recent gene flow and/or the idea that the Tanzanian groups may be remnants of basal African groups who went onto populate Asia in the Paleolithic to form the basis of populations therein; the latter is lent some support by the Senegalese "basal-M like" L3 haplotype] based on the "inclusion" of other non-M1 M lineages found in Tanzanian samples, into consideration with N lineages [including the N derived J lineage], as opposed to the presence of the East African "M1", which is not found in the Indian sub-continent. The inclusion of M1 into the M superhaplogroup, as I noted earlier, is based on the basal 10400C->T transition and the 10873C according to Semino et al., but for various other geneticists - as noted by Semino et al., Metspalu et al. and Chang Sun et al. for example - it was largely done so initially and prematurely by observation [and a shakey premise at that] of "random" re-occurrence of certain hyper-variable region transitions across the M superhaplogroup amongst certain identified M sub-lineages, although the M1 HVS-I arrangement itself isn't duplicated in any other M lineage. So, it is in that backdrop, as just mentioned now, M1 is clustered with the M macrohaplogroup. There is no evidence whatsoever, as noted by Chang Sun et al., Metspalu et al. for instance, that M1 originates from Asia, and Semino et al.'s aforementioned study for its part, largely makes a reasonable case against M1 as a product of back-migration. Understanding of underlying genetic premises is in order, before one attempts to draw conclusions, and especially questionable ones at that, from population genetics publications.
"Substantive" merit should be given priority, imo, before any superficial idea of attaining "publicity", and corresponding fanfare.
- Peace.
Quetzalcoatl Member # 12742
posted
I hate to be the skunk at the picnic. Although BioEssays is a peer-reviewed journal. the letters, which is what Clyde wrote, are not peer-reviewed. Here is an e-mail from the journal:
"In answer to your question - No - correspondence does not undergo peer review, it is read and accepted or rejected by the Editor only.
If you would like to send me your piece I will pass it to the Editor.
Best wishes Stephanie Hamer Editorial Administrator"
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
That being the case then Supes, who has so succinctly composed the counterview, should likewise submit a fit for print reply.
If handled correctly, this could well be our ingress to addressing population genetics reports we critique, presenting our observations to the scholarly world.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: That being the case then Supes, who has so succinctly composed the counterview, should likewise submit a fit for print reply.
If handled correctly, this could well be our ingress to addressing population genetics reports we critique, presenting our observations to the scholarly world.
Supercar's statements have nothing to do with my piece. He is arguing that M1 did not originate in India.
My argument is that the M haplogroups carried by many Indians originated in Africa and were taken to India by the Dravidian speakers. I supported this proposition with multidisciplinary evidence . The evidence required for genetics population movements.
To counter this paper Supercar should present evidence disputing the osteological, toponymic, archaeological and linguistic evidence that the Dravidians are not related to Africans. If you have this evidence please present it now.
.
.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ And it has been stated many times ad-nasium that the particular type M* is NOT found in East Africa, and that the same M found in India is also found in other parts of Asia and that any similarities to M1 in Africa is only due to common *Paleolithic* origins NOT Neolithic origins. Where is the evidence of African migrations? Where is it in Arabia-- the area between India and Africa? There is also no evidence of Dravidian languages in Africa also. Which means, everything you said is still wrought in vain.
Mystery Solver Member # 9033
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri:
That being the case then Supes, who has so succinctly composed the counterview, should likewise submit a fit for print reply.
If handled correctly, this could well be our ingress to addressing population genetics reports we critique, presenting our observations to the scholarly world.
Supercar's statements have nothing to do with my piece.
Anyone is minimally capacitated in reading my feedback to your intro notes, it is granted that my statement's have everything to do with your piece, as laid out point by point. On failure to see the latter, one has to begin questioning their attention span or ability to process information.
quote:Clyde Winters:
He is arguing that M1 did not originate in India.
My points go quite beyond that; the debunk the idea that M1 is even present in the Indian sub-continent, naturally including amongst Dravidians. It also dispells the fallacy that M1 derives from the Asian M haplogroup as a product of back-migration. This renders your entire piece with very little substantive merit, if any at all, as the piece hinges on the presence of M1 in the Indian sub-continent or in south Asia and its relationship with the M haplotypes therein.
quote:Clyde Winters:
My argument is that the M haplogroups carried by many Indians originated in Africa and were taken to India by the Dravidian speakers. I supported this proposition with multidisciplinary evidence . The evidence required for genetics population movements.
When the African groups which form the basal lineage for the South Asians carrying the M haplogroup left the continent, it was within the Paleolithic time frame; needless to say, at this point, there was no such thing as "Dravidians", and since "Dravidians" ultimately derive from this basal population, as did other Eurasians, the idea of "recent African" provenance of "Dravidians" is laughable at best.
quote:Clyde Winters
To counter this paper Supercar should present evidence disputing the osteological, toponymic, archaeological and linguistic evidence that the Dravidians are not related to Africans. If you have this evidence please present it now.
Point by point deconstruction of your piece with counter-points by myself is self-explanatory reality that your piece lacks substantive merit. You can address those counterpoints at anytime, or you can simply ignore them and resort to regurgitateing discredited hodge podge.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^LOL What's funny is that we have presented all the evidence that refutes *all* aspects of his claims multiple times on this board, yet he denies them all.
As Rasol pointed out on another thread, he denies the evidence and keeps contradicting himself. It makes me wonder whether he is really able to publish work in peer-review. Peers in that area are much harsher critics than in this forum.
yazid904 Member # 7708
posted
Dr Winters never stated that this was recent!
The most recent group called Sidi, who are the descendants of said Africans who served for the Mughals and are mostly integrated into the greater community. Later groups who came after are concentrated in NW India (Gujerati province) along with isolated communities around the countryside. AT time, their phenotype is no different from the tribals of the northern border areas.
posted
Just a note to say they were also known as Habashi and weilded power during the Mughal era!
rasol Member # 4592
posted
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: Dr Winters never stated that this was recent!
False. He specifically claims that Africans left the sahara in the neolithic to old kingdom Kemetic historical era, and founded Dravidia.
I doubt he believes this though.
He may actually believe that Indian "gymnasophists" originated the meroitic text and migrated from India to Sudan during the historic era.
He defintitely believes he has dicphered meroitic texts on this basis.
And 'this' is why he needs his India connection.
His support materials have much more to do with India-centrism than Afri-centrism, both of which, as with Eurocentrism, are equally mythological.
quote:The most recent group called Sidi, who are the descendants of said Africans who served for the Mughals and are mostly integrated into the greater community.
Later groups who came after are concentrated in NW India (Gujerati province) along with isolated communities around the countryside. AT time, their phenotype is no different from the tribals of the north border areas.
False. He specifically claims that Africans left the sahara in the neolithic to old kingdom Kemetic historical era, and founded Dravidia.
I doubt he believes this though, even though some of his naive students may.
Same with the bogus Mande/Japan claims.
He may actually believe that Indian "gymnansophists" originated the meroitic text and migrated from India to Sudan during the historic era.
He clearly believes he has decphered meroitic texts on this basis.
To understand Dr. Winters thesis - you must understand that this is his -central premise- his claimed contribution to the scholarly discourse.
And 'this' is why he needs his India connection.
His support materials have much more to do with India-centrism than Afri-centrism, both of which, as with Eurocentrism, are equally mythological.
quote:The most recent group called Sidi, who are the descendants of said Africans who served for the Mughals and are mostly integrated into the greater community.
Many of the Sidi are decendant from East Africans from 14th century and later. This has absolutely nothing to do with the origins of Dravidia. It's a classic non-sequitur and example of argument by mis-direction.
quote:Later groups who came after are concentrated in NW India (Gujerati province) along with isolated communities around the countryside.
Not in dispute. You really didn't address, much less support any of Dr. Winters far fetched claims. Glance at the thread topic, and ask yourself in what way you validated it?
If the topic were did Navahoe speakers originate in Africa, would you support it by referencing African Americans? Of course not.
Gyaneshwer Chaubey, Mait Metspalu, Richard Villems, Toomas Kivisild. 2007. Reply to Winters BioEssays 29(5): 499
Published Online: 20 Apr 2007 DOI: 10.1002/bies.20574
Reply to Winters Dear Sir, The origins of Dravidian speaking populations of South Asia have been a matter of scientific debate over many decades. In our recent review on the genetic affinities of Indian tribal and caste populations,(1) we concluded that both Indo- European- and Dravidian-speaking populations of India share largely the same pool of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) lineages that has evolved in situ in South Asia since the Out-of-Africa migration of anatomically modern humans (AMH) some 5070 KYA. Dr. Clyde Winters in his correspondence(2) to our paper disagrees with this view and argues instead that there are linguistic, archaeological as well as genetic evidences for a relatively recent African origin of Dravidian populations. For a recent discussion on the origin of Dravidian languages, the reader is referred to a monograph by B. Krishnamurti.(3) MtDNA-based genetic arguments provided by Dr. Winters in favor of gene flow from Africa to Dravidian-speaking Indians are, however, entirely erroneous. The author has been, unfortunately, confused by overlooking changes in mtDNA haplogroup (hg) nomenclature. Namely hg, M1 in Kivisild et al.(4) has been later changed to hg M3, in order to avoid parallel nomenclatures.(5) Furthermore, a recent dedicated paper on phylogeography of mtDNA hg M1(6) as well as an extensive comparative mapping of autosomal genetic markers among many Indian populations relative to global populations elsewhere, including Africans,(7) do not provide any clues for a putative recent gene flow, from Africa, to Dravidian-speaking populations in South Asia. References 1. Chaubey G, Metspalu M, Kivisild T, Villems, R. 2007. Peopling of South Asia: investigating the caste-tribe continuum in India. Bioessays 29:91100. 2. Winters C. 2007. BioEssays 29:497498. 3. Krishnamurti B. 2003. The Dravidian Languages 1-574: Cambridge University Press 4. Kivisild T, Kaldma K, Metspalu M, Parik J, Papiha S, Villems R. 1999. The place of the Indian mtDNA variants in the global network of maternal lineages and the peopling of the Old World. In Deka R, Papiha SS. eds Genomic Diversity Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers New York p 135 152. 5. Quintana-Murci L, Semino O, Bandelt H-J., Passarino G, McElreavey K, Santachiara-Benerecetti AS. 1999. Genetic evidence of an early exit of Homo sapiens sapiens from Africa through eastern Africa. Nat Genet 23: 437441. 6. Olivieri A, Achilli A, Pala M, Battaglia V, Fornarino S. et al. 2006. The mtDNA legacy of the Levantine early Upper Palaeolithic in Africa. Science 314:17671770. 7. Rosenberg NA, Mahajan S, Gonzalez-Quevedo C, Blum MGB, Nino- Rosales L. et al. 2007. Low Levels of Genetic Divergence across Geographically and Linguistically Diverse Populations from India. PloS Genet 2:e215. Gyaneshwer Chaubey* Mait Metspalu Richard Villems Department of Evolutionary Biology Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology University of Tartu and Estonian Biocentre Tartu, Estonia Toomas Kivisild Leverhulme Centre of Human Evolutionary Studies The Henry Wellcome Building University of Cambridge Fitzwilliam Street Cambridge. UK CB21QH DOI 10.1002/bies.20574 Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
Gyaneshwer Chaubey, Mait Metspalu, Richard Villems, Toomas Kivisild. 2007. Reply to Winters BioEssays 29(5): 499
Published Online: 20 Apr 2007 DOI: 10.1002/bies.20574
Reply to Winters
Dear Sir,
The origins of Dravidian speaking populations of South Asia have been a matter of scientific debate over many decades. In our recent review on the genetic affinities of Indian tribal and caste populations,(1) we concluded that both Indo- European- and Dravidian-speaking populations of India share largely the same pool of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) lineages that has evolved in situ in South Asia since the Out-of-Africa migration of anatomically modern humans (AMH) some 5070 KYA.
Dr. Clyde Winters in his correspondence(2) to our paper disagrees with this view and argues instead that there are linguistic, archaeological as well as genetic evidences for a relatively recent African origin of Dravidian populations.
For a recent discussion on the origin of Dravidian languages, the reader is referred to a monograph by B. Krishnamurti.(3)
MtDNA-based genetic arguments provided by Dr. Winters in favor of gene flow from Africa to Dravidian-speaking Indians are, however, entirely erroneous. The author has been, unfortunately, confused by overlooking **changes in mtDNA haplogroup (hg) nomenclature**.
Namely hg, ***M1 in Kivisild et al.(4) has been later changed to hg M3, in order to avoid parallel nomenclatures.(5)***
Furthermore, a recent dedicated paper on phylogeography of mtDNA hg M1(6) as well as an extensive comparative mapping of autosomal genetic markers among many Indian populations relative to global populations elsewhere, including Africans,(7) ***do not provide any clues for a putative recent gene flow, from Africa, to Dravidian-speaking populations in South Asia.***
....
Thank you sir for posting this. It is undoubtedly a terrible blow to Mr. Winters' regular propagation on this matter, and by the very authors he continues to use notwithstanding, to push forth his proclamations. Of course, nothing herein has been said by the said geneticists which either myself or other posters have not already relayed to Winters ad nauseam. However, it would be a mistake to assume that this would pull the reins of Mr. Winters' horses, to continue pushing forth discredited ideology.
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
^ This was not a blow to my research. I read the letter even before my article was published. As a result, I revised my original letter and discussed some of the points made by Chaubey et al, especially the Olieveri et al article. Chaubey et al, did not dispute any other evidence I presented and as a result they can not really falsify my proposition.
Moreover, I recently published the piece disputing the Rosenberg et al, article in PLoS Genetics, where I showed that the Indo-European and Dravidian speakers in India have the same MRCA, and thusly the results of the paper do not really tell us anything about "ethnic" diversity in India.
This is not propaganda. My article was published because it includes evidence from multiple disciplines. The only evidence Chaubey has is genetic evidence, it can not alone defeat multiple sources of evidence. You can bet that if my letter was not throughly research it would not have been published.
Moreover, as I said earlier these are just two of the articles on this theme I have published in referreed journals. You can expect to see more in the future. Your jealousy will not stop me.
.
Nice Vidadavida *sigh* Member # 13372
posted
Why are you trying to take away Africa's legacy by making it Indian Clyde?!?!
Clyde...you are hurting us
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
quote:Originally posted by Nice Vidadavida *sigh*: Why are you trying to take away Africa's legacy by making it Indian Clyde?!?!
Clyde...you are hurting us
You're a European. How can you be hurt by knowing the truth.
.
Quetzalcoatl Member # 12742
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: You can bet that if my letter was not throughly research it would not have been published
.
Not so. Although the journal is a "peer reviewed journal" , this letter was NOT peer reviewed and cannot be claimed to have been "throughly researched." As I posted earlier the editorial office confirmed that items in "correspondence" where this was printed are posted without a "peer review" and this is the reason why the authors of the original article were asked to reply to Clyde's letter. From above
quote:
. Although BioEssays is a peer-reviewed journal. the letter, which is what Clyde wrote, are not peer-reviewed. Here is an e-mail from the journal:
"In answer to your question - No - correspondence does not undergo peer review, it is read and accepted or rejected by the Editor only.
If you would like to send me your piece I will pass it to the Editor.
Best wishes Stephanie Hamer Editorial Administrator"
Mystery Solver Member # 9033
posted
Mark my words:
However, it would be a mistake to assume that this would pull the reins of Mr. Winters' horses, to continue pushing forth discredited ideology.
...and sure enough:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
^ This was not a blow to my research.
Of course it was, because as I said:
It is undoubtedly a terrible blow to Mr. Winters' regular propagation on this matter, and by the very authors he continues to use notwithstanding, to push forth his proclamations.
quote:Clyde Winters:
I read the letter even before my article was published. As a result, I revised my original letter and discussed some of the points made by Chaubey et al, especially the Olieveri et al article. Chaubey et al, did not dispute any other evidence I presented and as a result they can not really falsify my proposition.
Your letter doesn't say anything that hasn't already been discredited both here, and by the aforementioned authors. Some authors apparently pay no attention to you, if they are aware if you published anything, while others like the geneticists who refused to see their work being defaced or used for questionable purposes, had already spoken out, and quite candidly.
quote:Clyde Winters:
Moreover, I recently published the piece disputing the Rosenberg et al, article in PLoS Genetics, where I showed that the Indo-European and Dravidian speakers in India have the same MRCA, and thusly the results of the paper do not really tell us anything about "ethnic" diversity in India.
What DNA tests have you personally conducted?...to be in a position to be disputing actual geneticists.What are the specifics of your dispute, if they aren't regurgitated discredited pieces from here and there? Please share it.
quote:Clyde Winters:
This is not propaganda.
You are right; it is outright fantasy.
quote:Clyde Winters:
My article was published because it includes evidence from multiple disciplines.
Quetzalcoatl's response to this was appropriate enough.
quote:Clyde Winters:
The only evidence Chaubey has is genetic evidence, it can not alone defeat multiple sources of evidence. You can bet that if my letter was not throughly research it would not have been published.
Genetics, archeology and linguistic evidence are all against you, my friend. Genetics alone is a big deal, because it would be evidence of direct biological connection.
quote:Clyde Winters:
Your jealousy will not stop me.
Spoken "eloquently" like a true juvenile. Have a nice day.
rasol Member # 4592
posted
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: I showed that the Indo-European and Dravidian speakers in India have the same MRCA, and thusly the results of the paper do not really tell us anything about "ethnic" diversity in India.
Well.....
It seems to us that knowledge accumulated thus far allows us not only to draw the first reasonably well-supported conclusions concerning what one may call the basic time-and-space oriented landmarks of the Indian maternal and paternal lineages, but also to avoid the pitfalls so easily created by an obvious desire 'to tell an exciting tale'.
The table [shown below] brings together our current understanding of the arrival of maternal lineages to India as far as it can be deduced from the approximately 1300 extant mtDNAs analyzed.
The results are informative, but not necessarily useful for affirming prior belief.
Bettyboo Member # 12987
posted
Dravidian languages do not come from Africa. They are purely Asiatic. There are no genetic similiarities neither. If anything, those nations from Africa and those from Asia should be the least matched by DNA because those two groups are the oldest. Africa being the first oldest nations and Asia the second of the oldest nations.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted Irregardless, *all* disciplines of linguistics, archaeology, anthroplogy, philology, ethnology, as well as genetics have debunked this nonsense of an African (Mande) connection with Dravidian long before such a connection was even proposed!
posted ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
And it has been stated many times ad-nasium that the particular type M* is NOT found in East Africa, and that the same M found in India is also found in other parts of Asia and that any similarities to M1 in Africa is only due to common *Paleolithic* origins NOT Neolithic origins. Where is the evidence of African migrations? Where is it in Arabia-- the area between India and Africa? There is also no evidence of Dravidian languages in Africa also. Which means, everything you said is still wrought in vain.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)