quote:nope, "primarily" down the tubes
Originally posted by Tukuler:
U6 is universally recognized as local North African.
quote:True. But no one has ever shown any data/evidence of any back migration into Africa, yet other scholars will use this paper to make such a claim.
Originally posted by xyyman:
Sham…yes/maybe
We need not get caught up with headliners, as what Lioness just posted. That section Lioness posted is there to create controversy. As I said the author provided no proof or data showing U6 or U entered from the Levant. They only speculated that U/U6 MAY have entered from the Levant. That is ONLY their assumption. That is NOT what the paper is about. From that assumption they THEN went on to provided data/proof on the diversity and frequency of U6 and the subclades within and outside of Africa. The paper is really about U6 in Africa.
The paper has some important disclosure; don’t get caught up in the hype. The devil is in the details.
quote:You can do this as a consumer of information. But as a researcher you never accept lies--you point them out and defeat them. My job is to get others to recognize the fallacy, and hope you can get someone to tell the truth.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So we agree. There is a lot of hypotheticals in the paper. The author only assumed That U entered from the Levant but it reads like that is a FACT. Deception. I am used to that by now. You should to. Focus only on the FACTUAL information. There are some gems in there.
quote:So true. The only problem is you have to pay as much as $1500+ to have your paper published in most publications today.
Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Dr Winters. These researchers are getting away with criminal activity. What they are doing is very simple. The raid a sometimes free GenBank database, pull the genomes, process it and publish a paper. If you have the resources to process this is very easy to do and a nice hustle
Someone needs to do one for hg-U5. Comparision of U5 across, Europe, Africa and the Near East.
quote:What proof do you have that it didn't arrive from the Levant? I have always heard U6 classified as Eurasian in orgin.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So we agree. There is a lot of hypotheticals in the paper. The author only assumed That U entered from the Levant but it reads like that is a FACT. Deception. I am used to that by now. You should to. Focus only on the FACTUAL information. There are some gems in there.
quote:.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:nope, "primarily" down the tubes
Originally posted by Tukuler:
U6 is universally recognized as local North African.
quote:
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:What proof do you have that it didn't arrive from the Levant? I have always heard U6 classified as Eurasian in orgin.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So we agree. There is a lot of hypotheticals in the paper. The author only assumed That U entered from the Levant but it reads like that is a FACT. Deception. I am used to that by now. You should to. Focus only on the FACTUAL information. There are some gems in there.
quote:Politically any person citizen of an African country is African. The same thing could be said about African people in Europe (which are Europeans).
Originally posted by Tukuler:
35k yrs in Africa
No evidence of Asian residence
Yet still considered Asian?
quote:^^So you are saying the "arrival" could have been
Originally posted by xyyman:
Did you read the paper? The opening discussion is "hypothetically" how/when it arrived. Then the author provide data on it dispersal FROM NW Africa.
In other words - no data/evidence was provided on it's arrival to Africa.
What is fascinating is the unique tropical West African U6a sub-clade. And some U6 was found only in AFRAMS
quote:Easily. It's parent haplogroup U and haplogroup R are Eurasian in origin. They are in Africa due to the back migration of Eurasian populations a very long time ago.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
xyz's chart shows U6 is African, but you claim it is not African.
How do you explain this discrepancy Amun-Ra?
quote:as shown here, Achilli
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Easily. It's parent haplogroup U and haplogroup R are Eurasian in origin. They are in Africa due to the back migration of Eurasian populations a very long time ago.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
xyz's chart shows U6 is African, but you claim it is not African.
How do you explain this discrepancy Amun-Ra?
quote:Do you know what "HVS I motif" means and how it relates to the data that you are looking at?
Originally posted by xyyman:
For those who like visuals. He is something interesting I came across. Dated but yet interesting.
This is the first I have seen where some researchers agree with me.
U5b is African
U6 is also African'
U3 is African
H1 is African
V is African.
LOL!
It would be great to see an similar but up to date study LOL.
Those Euros will need drugs to take them off the ledge. HA! Ha!\\\
quote:Not true at all and completely illogical.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The fact remains. The proposed date for the back migration of U6 into Africa from the Levant, is before the Levant was settled by anatomically modern humans.
.
quote:The most probable origin of the proto-U6 lineage was the Near East. Around 30,000 years ago it spread to North Africa where it represents a signature of regional continuity. Subgroup U6a reflects the first African expansion from the Maghrib returning to the east in Paleolithic times. Derivative clade U6a1 signals a posterior movement from East Africa back to the Maghrib and the Near East. This migration coincides with the probable Afroasiatic linguistic expansion. U6b and U6c clades, restricted to West Africa, had more localized expansions. U6b probably reached the Iberian Peninsula during the Capsian diffusion in North Africa. Two autochthonous derivatives of these clades (U6b1 and U6c1) indicate the arrival of North African settlers to the Canarian Archipelago in prehistoric times, most probably due to the Saharan desiccation. The absence of these Canarian lineages nowadays in Africa suggests important demographic movements in the western area of this Continent.
Originally posted by xyyman:
The root of U6 is found amongst Western African Berbers and now Tropical West Africans. Where from the Levant is it from?
Enlighten me. Where in Eurasia is U6 origins.
quote:
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:What proof do you have that it didn't arrive from the Levant? I have always heard U6 classified as Eurasian in orgin.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So we agree. There is a lot of hypotheticals in the paper. The author only assumed That U entered from the Levant but it reads like that is a FACT. Deception. I am used to that by now. You should to. Focus only on the FACTUAL information. There are some gems in there.
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:Do you know what "HVS I motif" means and how it relates to the data that you are looking at?
Originally posted by xyyman:
For those who like visuals. He is something interesting I came across. Dated but yet interesting.
This is the first I have seen where some researchers agree with me.
U5b is African
U6 is also African'
U3 is African
H1 is African
V is African.
LOL!
It would be great to see an similar but up to date study LOL.
Those Euros will need drugs to take them off the ledge. HA! Ha!\\\
quote:
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:The most probable origin of the proto-U6 lineage was the Near East. Around 30,000 years ago it spread to North Africa where it represents a signature of regional continuity. Subgroup U6a reflects the first African expansion from the Maghrib returning to the east in Paleolithic times. Derivative clade U6a1 signals a posterior movement from East Africa back to the Maghrib and the Near East. This migration coincides with the probable Afroasiatic linguistic expansion. U6b and U6c clades, restricted to West Africa, had more localized expansions. U6b probably reached the Iberian Peninsula during the Capsian diffusion in North Africa. Two autochthonous derivatives of these clades (U6b1 and U6c1) indicate the arrival of North African settlers to the Canarian Archipelago in prehistoric times, most probably due to the Saharan desiccation. The absence of these Canarian lineages nowadays in Africa suggests important demographic movements in the western area of this Continent.
Originally posted by xyyman:
The root of U6 is found amongst Western African Berbers and now Tropical West Africans. Where from the Levant is it from?
Enlighten me. Where in Eurasia is U6 origins.
quote:
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:What proof do you have that it didn't arrive from the Levant? I have always heard U6 classified as Eurasian in orgin.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So we agree. There is a lot of hypotheticals in the paper. The author only assumed That U entered from the Levant but it reads like that is a FACT. Deception. I am used to that by now. You should to. Focus only on the FACTUAL information. There are some gems in there.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC270091/
quote:The first Aurignacians in the Levant date back to 36-34kya from Ksar Akil, these people had been in Iberia as early as 44kya.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Not true at all and completely illogical.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The fact remains. The proposed date for the back migration of U6 into Africa from the Levant, is before the Levant was settled by anatomically modern humans.
.
quote:Yep, it's awesome when you look at this.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:as shown here, Achilli
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Easily. It's parent haplogroup U and haplogroup R are Eurasian in origin. They are in Africa due to the back migration of Eurasian populations a very long time ago.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
xyz's chart shows U6 is African, but you claim it is not African.
How do you explain this discrepancy Amun-Ra?
source of xyyman's chart (he a;ways leaves that out) (table 1 at below link)
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/2/13
Major genomic mitochondrial lineages delineate early human expansions
Nicole Maca-Meyer, Ana M González, José M Larruga, Carlos Flores and Vicente M Cabrera* 2001
Conclusions
The first detectable expansion occurred around 59,000–69,000 years ago from Africa, independently colonizing western Asia and India and, following this southern route, swiftly reaching east Asia. Within Africa, this expansion did not replace but mixed with older lineages detectable today only in Africa. Around 39,000–52,000 years ago, the western Asian branch spread radially, bringing Caucasians to North Africa and Europe, also reaching India, and expanding to north and east Asia. More recent migrations have entangled but not completely erased these primitive footprints of modern human expansions.
Finally, cluster U seems to have suffered a radial spread (Fig. 2), giving subsequent diversification in different geographic areas. Three sub-haplogroups, U2, U5 and U6 had their major expansions in India, Europe and North Africa respectively. U2 split in two branches, one, characterized by mutations 16129C and 15907, is geographically scattered from Western Europe to Mongolia [2,26] but has not been detected in North Africa. The other reached India where it gave origin to several sub-clusters with global frequencies around 10% being, after its predecessor haplogroup M (53%), the second most abundant haplogroup in India [9]. U7 with a minor implantation in Europe but third in frequency in India [9] and also not detected in North Africa might have had a similar expansion as U2. The main radiation of haplogroup U5 occurred in Europe. It has been stated that this lineage entered Europe during the Upper Paleolithic [2], most probably from the Middle East-Caucasus area. The great divergence found here for the two U5 representatives is in agreement with the old age proposed for this haplogroup. Finally, U6 traces the first detectable Paleolithic return to Africa of ancient Caucasoid lineages. It has been mostly found in Northwest Africa, with a global estimated age of 47,000 years [28] reflecting an old human continuity in that rather isolated area. The fact that in Europe it has only been detected in the Iberian Peninsula [29] rules out a possible European route, unless a total lineage extinction in all the path is invoked. On the other hand, its presence in Northeast Africa [30], albeit in low frequencies, reinforces its way through North Africa. A third possibility could be that this lineage never went out of Africa but its coalescence with clades which all had prominent expansions in Eurasia weakens this option. U3 has also been found with a comparatively higher frequency in Northwest Africa [29] and might have followed the same route as U6, however, as its star-like expansion in the Caucasus has been dated around 30,000 yr BP [30], it most probably reached Africa in a posterior expansion. This out of Africa and back again hypothesis has also been suggested for Y-chromosome lineages [31]. Subsequent Neolithic and historic expansions have doubtlessly reshaped the human genetic pool in wide geographic areas but mainly as limited gene flow, not admixture, between populations. Consequently, the continental origin of the major haplogroups can still be detected and the earliest human routes inferred through them.
After coming out of Africa, modern humans first spread to Asia following two main routes. The southern one is represented by haplogroup M and related clades that are overwhelmingly present in India and eastern Asia. The northern one gave a posterior radiation that, through Central Asia, again reached North and East Asia carrying, among others, the prominent lineages A and B. Later expansions, can be detected by the presence of subclades of haplogroup U in India and Europe. There were also returns to Africa, most probably from the same two routes. The return from India could be detected by the presence of derivatives of M in Northeast Africa, and the arrival of Caucasoids by the existence of a subclade of haplogroup U that, today, is mainly confined to Northwest Africa.
quote:Sarah Tiskhoff (2007)
African
origin (haplogroups M and N) were the progenitors of all non-African haplogroups,...
quote:http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/3/757/F1.large.jpg
Relative frequencies of haplogroups L0, L1, L5, L2, L3, M, and N in different regions of Africa from mtDNA d-loop and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies.
quote:--Paola Spinozzi, Alessandro Zironi .
Although Haplogroup M differentiated
soon after the out of Africa exit and it is
widely distributed in Asia (east Asia and
India) and Oceania, there is an
interesting exception for one of its more
than 40 sub-clades: M1.. Indeed this
lineage is mainly limited to the African
continent with peaks in the Horn of
Africa."
quote:-- Petraglia, M and Rose, J
“..the M1 presence in the Arabian
peninsula signals a predominant East
African influence since the Neolithic
onwards.“
quote:No foot in mouth, you just dont know what you are talking about. There is actual SCIENCE to be learned in all of this. If you dont know the science you dont really know what they are talking about and you make armature mistakes : pulling Y-dna from Autosome. The difference between Y-DNA STR and AuDNA STR...etc.
Originally posted by xyyman:
Help me out...careful now! last time you put your foot in your mouth.
Help me out with "motif"
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:Do you know what "HVS I motif" means and how it relates to the data that you are looking at?
Originally posted by xyyman:
For those who like visuals. He is something interesting I came across. Dated but yet interesting.
This is the first I have seen where some researchers agree with me.
U5b is African
U6 is also African'
U3 is African
H1 is African
V is African.
LOL!
It would be great to see an similar but up to date study LOL.
Those Euros will need drugs to take them off the ledge. HA! Ha!\\\
quote:--Sarah Tishkoff, Ph.D
For many of the individuals for which we have obtained DNA, we also collected phenotype data for traits likely to play a role in adaptation, some of which demonstrate a complex pattern of inheritance and are likely influenced by multiple loci and environmental factors. In addition to case/control analyses of variation at candidate genes, we are using whole-genome association studies to identify novel genes that are associated with these traits. Together with collaborators, we are also developing methods for mapping complex traits (including disease) in highly structured African populations.
quote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/30/AR2009043002485.html
Although the study's main focus was on Africa, Tishkoff and her colleagues studied DNA markers from around the planet, identifying 14 "ancestral clusters" for all of humanity. Nine of those clusters are in Africa. "You're seeing more diversity in one continent than across the globe," Tishkoff said.
quote:I wonder how everything is always a back migration.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Easily. It's parent haplogroup U and haplogroup R are Eurasian in origin. They are in Africa due to the back migration of Eurasian populations a very long time ago.
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
xyz's chart shows U6 is African, but you claim it is not African.
How do you explain this discrepancy Amun-Ra?
quote:the same way they migrated out of Africa they later migrated back into Africa
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
. How were all these early hunter gatherers able to navigate back?
quote:And how is that?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:the same way they migrated out of Africa they later migrated back into Africa
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
. How were all these early hunter gatherers able to navigate back?
quote:
I wonder how everything is always a back migration.
However, no one ever explains the assemblage, industries and back navigation of these supposed back migrations. How were all these early hunter gatherers able to navigate back?
Maybe you can provide some sources explaining this remarkable event:
quote:If you agree that African migrated out of Africa yet don't have any "navigation" requirement to believe that then why when some of them migrated back into Africa does that require some sort of navigation explanation?
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:And how is that?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:the same way they migrated out of Africa they later migrated back into Africa
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
. How were all these early hunter gatherers able to navigate back?
I asked for specif details. Not your argument as an opinion.
And this is the circumvention I'm speaking of, never an explanation. But for a simple skimp.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:If you agree that African migrated out of Africa yet don't have any "navigation" requirement to believe that then why when some of them migrated back into Africa does that require some sort of navigation explanation?
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:And how is that?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:the same way they migrated out of Africa they later migrated back into Africa
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
. How were all these early hunter gatherers able to navigate back?
I asked for specif details. Not your argument as an opinion.
And this is the circumvention I'm speaking of, never an explanation. But for a simple skimp.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
quote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/30/AR2009043002485.html
Although the study's main focus was on Africa, Tishkoff and her colleagues studied DNA markers from around the planet, identifying 14 "ancestral clusters" for all of humanity. Nine of those clusters are in Africa. "You're seeing more diversity in one continent than across the globe," Tishkoff said.
quote:Here is more, from this specific study, propelled by lioness.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:The first Aurignacians in the Levant date back to 36-34kya from Ksar Akil, these people had been in Iberia as early as 44kya.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Not true at all and completely illogical.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The fact remains. The proposed date for the back migration of U6 into Africa from the Levant, is before the Levant was settled by anatomically modern humans.
.
The oldest Aurignacian remains come from Iberia/Spain. These sites vary in age from 41kya for the l'Arbreda Cave, and 43kya for Abric Romani, located in Catalonia, Spain.
The dates for the Aurignacian in Europe make it clear this culture spread from west to east. You can also recognize that Aurignacian appears not to have reached the Levant, until 11ky after it was established in Spain.
These dates for sites where amh were found in Western Europe make it impossible for claims of U6, M1 and etc., originating prior to 32kya in the Levant and entering Africa via a back migration as early as 40kya.
Eurocentric view of Spread of U6
.
For more information on the Aurignacian culture see:
Demidenko Y.E., Otte M. & Noiret P. (dir.) - Siuren i rock-shelter. From Late Middle Paleolithic and Early Upper Paleolithic to Epi-Paleolithic in Crimea. Liège, ERAUL 129, 2012, p. 343-357.
http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/2268/135222/1/Chapter%2018%20Europe%20Aurignacian.pdf
.
quote:(P. 13-14)
In absolute agreement with this vision, we propose that, in parallel, U6 reached the Levant with the intrusive Levantine Aurignacian around 35 kya, coinciding with the coalescence age for this haplogroup.
U6 spreads into Africa
This first African expansion of U6a in the Maghreb was suggested in a previous analysis [6]. This radiation inside Africa occurred in Morocco around 26 kya (Table 2) and, ruling out the earlier Aterian, we suggested the Iberomaurusian as the most probable archaeological and anthropological correlate of this spread in the Maghreb [6]. Others have pointed to the Dabban industry in North Africa and its supposed source in the Levant, the Ahmarian, as the archaeological footprints of U6 coming back to Africa [7,9]. However, we disagree for several reasons: firstly, they most probably evolved in situ from previous cultures, not being intrusive in their respective areas [42-44]; second, their chronologies are out of phase with U6 and third, Dabban is a local industry in Cyrenaica not showing the whole coastal expansion of U6. In addition, recent archaeological evidence, based on securely dated layers, also points to the Maghreb as the place with the oldest implantation of the Iberomaurusian culture [45], which is coincidental with the U6 radiation from this region proposed in this and previous studies [6]. In the same publication, based on partial sequences [6], we also suggested a migration from the Maghreb eastwards to explain the Ethiopian radiation but, in the light of complete sequence information, it seems that it was an independent spread [9]. In the present study, the U6a2 branch shows an important radiation centered in Ethiopia (Table 2) at around 20 kya (see Additional file 2). However, this period corresponds with a maximal period of aridity in North Africa and a return to East Africa across the Sahara seems unlikely. The most probable scenario is that small human groups scattered at a low density throughout the territory, retreated in bad times to more hospitable areas such as the Moroccan Atlas Mountains and the Ethiopian Highlands. Given the still limited U6 information from Northeast African and Levant populations, we are unable to hypothesize the route followed by the U6 settlers of Ethiopia and to correlate them to an appropriate archaeological layer. In this respect, the absence of U6 representatives in autochthonous populations from Egypt [46-8] and its scarcity in cosmopolitan samples [49,50] is puzzling. However, our model has an important outcome. It is that the proposed movement out of Africa through the Levantine corridor around 40 kya did not occur or has no maternal continuity to the present day. This is because: first, in that period the Eurasian haplogroups M and N had already evolved and spread at continental level in Eurasia, and, second, there is no evidence of any L-derived clade outside Africa with a similar coalescence age to that proposed movement. Under this perspective, the late Pleistocene human skull from Hofmeyr, South Africa, considered as a sub-Saharan African predecessor of the Upper Paleolithic Eurasians [51], should be better considered as the southernmost vestige of the Homo sapiens return to Africa. The knowledge of its mtDNA and Y-chromosome affiliations would be an invaluable test for our hypothesis. The rest of the human movements inside Africa, such as the Saharan occupation in the humid period by Eastern and Northern immigrations, or the retreat to sub-Saharan African southwards and to the Maghreb northwards in the desiccation period [52], or even the colonization of the Canary Islands, all faithfully reflect the scenarios deduced from the archaeological and anthropological information.
quote:It's funny and remarkable at the same time, because in previous studies such as the one you propose, the based their conclusions on the Dabban culture. Which later was to be discovered incorrect.
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:The most probable origin of the proto-U6 lineage was the Near East. Around 30,000 years ago it spread to North Africa where it represents a signature of regional continuity. Subgroup U6a reflects the first African expansion from the Maghrib returning to the east in Paleolithic times. Derivative clade U6a1 signals a posterior movement from East Africa back to the Maghrib and the Near East. This migration coincides with the probable Afroasiatic linguistic expansion. U6b and U6c clades, restricted to West Africa, had more localized expansions. U6b probably reached the Iberian Peninsula during the Capsian diffusion in North Africa. Two autochthonous derivatives of these clades (U6b1 and U6c1) indicate the arrival of North African settlers to the Canarian Archipelago in prehistoric times, most probably due to the Saharan desiccation. The absence of these Canarian lineages nowadays in Africa suggests important demographic movements in the western area of this Continent.
Originally posted by xyyman:
The root of U6 is found amongst Western African Berbers and now Tropical West Africans. Where from the Levant is it from?
Enlighten me. Where in Eurasia is U6 origins.
quote:
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:What proof do you have that it didn't arrive from the Levant? I have always heard U6 classified as Eurasian in orgin.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So we agree. There is a lot of hypotheticals in the paper. The author only assumed That U entered from the Levant but it reads like that is a FACT. Deception. I am used to that by now. You should to. Focus only on the FACTUAL information. There are some gems in there.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC270091/
quote:--Erwan Pennarun, Toomas Kivisild, Ene Metspalu, Mait Metspalu, Tuuli Reisberg, Doron M Behar, Sacha C Jones and Richard Villems
Assuming that M1 and U6 were introduced to Africa by a dispersal event from Asia, it would
be difficult to accept their involvement in the first demographic spread of anatomically
modern humans around 40–45 KYA, as suggested by Olivieri et al. (2006), [29] who
associated these two clades with the spread of Dabban industry in Africa. It has indeed been
previously suggested that the colonisation of North Africa from the Levant took place during
the early Upper Paleolithic, as marked by the “Dabban” industry in North Africa [42].
However, comparison of early Upper Palaeolithic artefacts from Haua Fteah and Ksar Akil
does not support the notion that the early Dabban of Cyrenaica is an evidence of a population
migration from the Levant into North Africa [43]. Marks [44] also noted differences between
the two areas in terms of the methods of blade production, further arguing against a
demographic connection between the regions. Likewise, the new coalescent date estimates
for M1 obtained in this study are not compatible with the model implying the spread of M1 in
Africa during the Early Upper Palaeolithic, 40–45 KYA...
Our analyses do not support the model according to which mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6
represent an early dispersal event of anatomically modern humans at around 40–45 KYA in
association with the spread of Dabban industry in North Africa as proposed earlier [28,29]. A
West Asian origin for these haplogroups still remains a viable hypothesis as sister clades of U
(and ancestral to it, macro-hg N (including R)) and M are spread overwhelmingly outside
Africa, notably in Eurasia, even though the phylogeographic data on extant populations do
not present a clear support for it.
[/i]
quote:The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:It's funny and remarkable at the same time, because in previous studies such as the one you propose, the based their conclusions on the Dabban culture. Which later was to be discovered incorrect.
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:The most probable origin of the proto-U6 lineage was the Near East. Around 30,000 years ago it spread to North Africa where it represents a signature of regional continuity. Subgroup U6a reflects the first African expansion from the Maghrib returning to the east in Paleolithic times. Derivative clade U6a1 signals a posterior movement from East Africa back to the Maghrib and the Near East. This migration coincides with the probable Afroasiatic linguistic expansion. U6b and U6c clades, restricted to West Africa, had more localized expansions. U6b probably reached the Iberian Peninsula during the Capsian diffusion in North Africa. Two autochthonous derivatives of these clades (U6b1 and U6c1) indicate the arrival of North African settlers to the Canarian Archipelago in prehistoric times, most probably due to the Saharan desiccation. The absence of these Canarian lineages nowadays in Africa suggests important demographic movements in the western area of this Continent.
Originally posted by xyyman:
The root of U6 is found amongst Western African Berbers and now Tropical West Africans. Where from the Levant is it from?
Enlighten me. Where in Eurasia is U6 origins.
quote:
Originally posted by melchior7:
quote:What proof do you have that it didn't arrive from the Levant? I have always heard U6 classified as Eurasian in orgin.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So we agree. There is a lot of hypotheticals in the paper. The author only assumed That U entered from the Levant but it reads like that is a FACT. Deception. I am used to that by now. You should to. Focus only on the FACTUAL information. There are some gems in there.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC270091/
That of course meant back to the drawing table.
Looking for another possible connection. After so many already have been disputed.
quote:--Erwan Pennarun, Toomas Kivisild, Ene Metspalu, Mait Metspalu, Tuuli Reisberg, Doron M Behar, Sacha C Jones and Richard Villems
Assuming that M1 and U6 were introduced to Africa by a dispersal event from Asia, it would
be difficult to accept their involvement in the first demographic spread of anatomically
modern humans around 40–45 KYA, as suggested by Olivieri et al. (2006), [29] who
associated these two clades with the spread of Dabban industry in Africa. It has indeed been
previously suggested that the colonisation of North Africa from the Levant took place during
the early Upper Paleolithic, as marked by the “Dabban” industry in North Africa [42].
However, comparison of early Upper Palaeolithic artefacts from Haua Fteah and Ksar Akil
does not support the notion that the early Dabban of Cyrenaica is an evidence of a population
migration from the Levant into North Africa [43]. Marks [44] also noted differences between
the two areas in terms of the methods of blade production, further arguing against a
demographic connection between the regions. Likewise, the new coalescent date estimates
for M1 obtained in this study are not compatible with the model implying the spread of M1 in
Africa during the Early Upper Palaeolithic, 40–45 KYA...
Our analyses do not support the model according to which mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6
represent an early dispersal event of anatomically modern humans at around 40–45 KYA in
association with the spread of Dabban industry in North Africa as proposed earlier [28,29]. A
West Asian origin for these haplogroups still remains a viable hypothesis as sister clades of U
(and ancestral to it, macro-hg N (including R)) and M are spread overwhelmingly outside
Africa, notably in Eurasia, even though the phylogeographic data on extant populations do
not present a clear support for it.
[/i]
Divorcing the Late Upper Palaeolithic demographic histories of mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6 in Africa
quote:^At one point they also claimed that Hofmeyr was responsible for the "back-migration.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:Science 12 January 2007:
The lack of Late Pleistocene human fossils from sub-Saharan Africa has limited paleontological testing of competing models of recent human evolution. We have dated a skull from Hofmeyr, South Africa, to 36.2 ± 3.3 thousand years ago through a combination of optically stimulated luminescence and uranium-series dating methods. The skull is morphologically modern overall but displays some archaic features. Its strongest morphometric affinities are with Upper Paleolithic (UP) Eurasians rather than recent, geographically proximate people. The Hofmeyr cranium is consistent with the hypothesis that UP Eurasians descended from a population that emigrated from sub-Saharan Africa in the Late Pleistocene.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Pheeew!![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Quote: "rCRS is not a Marker." It is a standard indicative of hg-H ie H2*? IIRC God!
Listen I need to post some new stuff on ESR. Get back to me. Unless I am banned there. LOL!
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:CRS is not a marker, dummy. ~40% of the samples
Originally posted by Xyyman:
In addition – PS-1 and CH-1 carried the
same mtDNA marker as two of the handler
were CRS in HVS-I.
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb]
RCRS is the "Cambridge Reference Sequence" they used a long time ago when looking at every mtdna sequence.....YES they looked at all DNA going forward or backward in the MTDNA tree starting with this European sequence. The key is this: The Cambridge Reference mtDNA lineage is H2a2a.
Notice you dont see H2a2a anywhere on that chart.
quote:For a while they had the Aterian theory as well. They said the Aterian was between 40Kya and 20Kya old.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:--Francesco d’Erricoa et al. (2009)
Recent investigations into the origins of symbolism indicate that personal ornaments in the form of perforated marine shell beads were used in the Near East, North Africa, and SubSaharan Africa at least 35 ka earlier than any personal ornaments in Europe.
[...]
The first argues that modern cognition is unique to our species and the consequence of a genetic mutation that took place 50 ka in Africa among anatomically modern humans (AMH) (1).
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:--Gerd-Christian Weniger 1; Jörg Linstädter 2; Josef Eiwanger 3 and Abdessalam Mikdad 4 (2012)
The cultural sequence of the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene of Morocco displays three main techno-complexes: a Middle Palaeolithic, including a special facies called Aterian; an Upper Palaeolithic, separated into an early phase of uncertain configuration; a later phase, termed Iberomaurusian; and an Epipalaeolithic (Linstädter et al. 2012).
quote:--Cremaschi, Mauro, et al. "Some Insights on the Aterian in the Libyan Sahara: Chronology,
The area differs from other sties areas such as the Nile Valley or the Near East because the Middle/Late Paleolithic transition in the Sahara is not marked by changes in core technology. The overall dates for the Libya sites containing the Aterian tool technique range from 47,000- 24,500 BP. Some of the dating techniques were Thermoluminescence (TL) which proved successful in dating several types of sediments including "desert loss" sand dunes.
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:--J.-J. Hublin, C. Verna, S. Bailey, T. Smith, A. Olejniczak, F. Z. Sbihi-Alaoui, and M. Zouak (2012)
Abstract The Aterian fossil hominins represent one of the most abundant series of human remains associated with Middle Stone Age/Middle Paleolithic assemblages in Africa.
[...]
A complete mandible of Homo erectus was discovered at the Thomas I quarry in Casablanca by a French-Moroccan team co-led by Jean-Paul Raynal, CNRS senior researcher at the PACEA(1) aboratory (CNRS/Université Bordeaux 1/ Ministry of Culture and Communication). This mandible is the oldest human fossil uncovered from scientific excavations in Morocco. The discovery will help better define northern Africa's possible role in first populating southern Europe.
A Homo erectus half-jaw had already been found at the Thomas I quarry in 1969, but it was a chance discovery and therefore with no archeological context.
This is not the case for the fossil discovered May 15, 2008, whose characteristics are very similar to those of the half-jaw found in 1969. The morphology of these remains is different from the three mandibles found at the Tighenif site in Algeria that were used, in 1963, to define the North African variety of Homo erectus, known as Homo mauritanicus, dated to 700,000 B.C.
The mandible from the Thomas I quarry was found in a layer below one where the team has previously found four human teeth (three premolars and one incisor) from Homo erectus, one of which was dated to 500,000 B.C. The human remains were grouped with carved stone tools characteristic of the Acheulian(2) civilization and numerous animal remains (baboons, gazelles, equines, bears, rhinoceroses, and elephants), as well as large numbers of small mammals, which point to a slightly older time frame. Several dating methods are being used to refine the chronology.
The Thomas I quarry in Casablanca confirms its role as one of the most important prehistoric sites for understanding the early population of northwest Africa. The excavations that CNRS and the Institut National des Sciences de l’Archéologie et du Patrimoine du Maroc have led there since 1988 are part of a French-Moroccan collaboration. They have been jointly financed by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs(3), the Department of Human Evolution at the Max Plank Institute in Leipzig (Germany), INSAP(4)(Morocco) and the Aquitaine region.
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:--Late Pleistocene Human Occupation of Northwest Africa: A Crosscheck of Chronology and Climate Change in Morocco
Regular Middle Paleolithic inventories as well as Middle Paleolithic inventories of Aterian type have a long chronology in Morocco going back to MIS 6 and are interstratified in some sites. Their potential for detecting chrono-cultural patterns is low. The transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic, here termed Early Upper Paleolithic—at between 30 to 20 ka—remains a most enigmatic era. Scarce data from this period requires careful and fundamental reconsidering of human presence. By integrating environmental data in the reconstruction of population dynamics, clear correlations become obvious. High resolution data are lacking before 20 ka, and at some sites this period is characterized by the occurrence of sterile layers between Middle Paleolithic deposits, possibly indicative of a very low presence of humans in Morocco. After Heinrich Event 1, there is an enormous increase of data due to the prominent Late Iberomaurusian deposits that contrast strongly with the foregoing accumulations in terms of sedimentological features, fauna, and artifact composition. The Younger Dryas again shows a remarkable decline of data marking the end of the Paleolithic. Environmental improvements in the Holocene are associated with an extensive Epipaleolithic occupation. Therefore, the late glacial cultural sequence of Morocco is a good test case for analyzing the interrelationship of culture and climate change.
quote:--On the industrial attributions of the Aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb, Harold L. Dibble et al.
North Africa is quickly emerging as one of the more important regions yielding information on the origins of modern Homo sapiens. Associated with significant fossil hominin remains are two stone tool industries, the Aterian and Mousterian, which have been differentiated, respectively, primarily on the basis of the presence and absence of tanged, or stemmed, stone tools. Largely because of historical reasons, these two industries have been attributed to the western Eurasian Middle Paleolithic rather than the African Middle Stone Age. In this paper, drawing on our recent excavation of Contrebandiers Cave and other published data, we show that, aside from the presence or absence of tanged pieces, there are no other distinctions between these two industries in terms of either lithic attributes or chronology. Together, these results demonstrate that these two ‘industries’ are instead variants of the same entity. Moreover, several additional characteristics of these assemblages, such as distinctive stone implements and the manufacture and use of bone tools and possible shell ornaments, suggest a closer affinity to other Late Pleistocene African Middle Stone Age industries rather than to the Middle Paleolithic of western Eurasia.
quote:And finally, last but not least, the pre-Aurgnacian culture is within Africa. There is also Proto-Aurignacian, but it's younger.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:Unfortunately you have not responded to my question, as of yet.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:the same way they migrated out of Africa they later migrated back into Africa
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
. How were all these early hunter gatherers able to navigate back?
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Nice explanation...to the lurkers...for your boy Sweetness. But preaching to the choir.
But you haven't addressed the point I made. The authors are suggesting these mutations first occurred in the geographic location indicated. Am I wrong?
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Pheeew!
Quote: "rCRS is not a Marker." It is a standard indicative of hg-H ie H2*? IIRC God!
Listen I need to post some new stuff on ESR. Get back to me. Unless I am banned there. LOL!quote:CRS is not a marker, dummy. ~40% of the samples
Originally posted by Swenet:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Xyyman:
In addition – PS-1 and CH-1 carried the
same mtDNA marker as two of the handler
were CRS in HVS-I.
quote:Again you dont know what you are talking about because you dont understand the science. And you lack common sense. rCRS is the sample from a European. When we look at that sample TODAY it is haplogroup H2a2a. Haplogroup H2a2a was not resolved at that point. Many of the sequences listed in your paper were not resolved to the point they are today. That is why the are kept vague.
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb]
RCRS is the "Cambridge Reference Sequence" they used a long time ago when looking at every mtdna sequence.....YES they looked at all DNA going forward or backward in the MTDNA tree starting with this European sequence. The key is this: The Cambridge Reference mtDNA lineage is H2a2a.
Notice you dont see H2a2a anywhere on that chart.
quote:The total identification of the Aterian culture as an African culture is why Bernard Secher et al. , wants to remove this culture from identfying the origin of U6. If you accept the Aterian culture as an African culture you can not claim a back migration for the origin of U6 in Eurasia.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:--Late Pleistocene Human Occupation of Northwest Africa: A Crosscheck of Chronology and Climate Change in Morocco
Regular Middle Paleolithic inventories as well as Middle Paleolithic inventories of Aterian type have a long chronology in Morocco going back to MIS 6 and are interstratified in some sites. Their potential for detecting chrono-cultural patterns is low. The transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic, here termed Early Upper Paleolithic—at between 30 to 20 ka—remains a most enigmatic era. Scarce data from this period requires careful and fundamental reconsidering of human presence. By integrating environmental data in the reconstruction of population dynamics, clear correlations become obvious. High resolution data are lacking before 20 ka, and at some sites this period is characterized by the occurrence of sterile layers between Middle Paleolithic deposits, possibly indicative of a very low presence of humans in Morocco. After Heinrich Event 1, there is an enormous increase of data due to the prominent Late Iberomaurusian deposits that contrast strongly with the foregoing accumulations in terms of sedimentological features, fauna, and artifact composition. The Younger Dryas again shows a remarkable decline of data marking the end of the Paleolithic. Environmental improvements in the Holocene are associated with an extensive Epipaleolithic occupation. Therefore, the late glacial cultural sequence of Morocco is a good test case for analyzing the interrelationship of culture and climate change.
Jörg Linstädter, Prehistoric Archaeology, Cologne University, GERMANY Josef Eiwanger, KAAK, German Archaeological Institute, GERMANY Abdessalam Mikdad, INSAP, MOROCCO
Gerd-Christian Weniger, Neanderthal Museum, GERMANY
quote:--On the industrial attributions of the Aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb, Harold L. Dibble et al.
North Africa is quickly emerging as one of the more important regions yielding information on the origins of modern Homo sapiens. Associated with significant fossil hominin remains are two stone tool industries, the Aterian and Mousterian, which have been differentiated, respectively, primarily on the basis of the presence and absence of tanged, or stemmed, stone tools. Largely because of historical reasons, these two industries have been attributed to the western Eurasian Middle Paleolithic rather than the African Middle Stone Age. In this paper, drawing on our recent excavation of Contrebandiers Cave and other published data, we show that, aside from the presence or absence of tanged pieces, there are no other distinctions between these two industries in terms of either lithic attributes or chronology. Together, these results demonstrate that these two ‘industries’ are instead variants of the same entity. Moreover, several additional characteristics of these assemblages, such as distinctive stone implements and the manufacture and use of bone tools and possible shell ornaments, suggest a closer affinity to other Late Pleistocene African Middle Stone Age industries rather than to the Middle Paleolithic of western Eurasia.
Journal of Human Evolution, 2013 Elsevier.
quote:If a clade is found in African that does not prove it originates in Africa, xyyman, that is basic
Originally posted by xyyman:
Carrying on. On the issue of back-migration. It is a fallacy. To AMRTU point. . ALL the major clades and sub-clades of M and N is found in Africa. All of them. Including R0. Hg-M, N and R0 has origins in Africa Kevilsild et al.
So Z-man , yes, it it all Africans migrating WITHIN Africa with subsequent genetic drift.
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Nice explanation...to the lurkers...for your boy Sweetness. But preaching to the choir.
But you haven't addressed the point I made. The authors are suggesting these mutations first occurred in the geographic location indicated. Am I wrong?
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Pheeew!
Quote: "rCRS is not a Marker." It is a standard indicative of hg-H ie H2*? IIRC God!
Listen I need to post some new stuff on ESR. Get back to me. Unless I am banned there. LOL!quote:CRS is not a marker, dummy. ~40% of the samples
Originally posted by Swenet:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Xyyman:
In addition – PS-1 and CH-1 carried the
same mtDNA marker as two of the handler
were CRS in HVS-I.quote:Again you dont know what you are talking about because you dont understand the science. And you lack common sense. rCRS is the sample from a European. When we look at that sample TODAY it is haplogroup H2a2a. Haplogroup H2a2a was not resolved at that point. Many of the sequences listed in your paper were not resolved to the point they are today. That is why the are kept vague.
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb]
RCRS is the "Cambridge Reference Sequence" they used a long time ago when looking at every mtdna sequence.....YES they looked at all DNA going forward or backward in the MTDNA tree starting with this European sequence. The key is this: The Cambridge Reference mtDNA lineage is H2a2a.
Notice you dont see H2a2a anywhere on that chart.
The authors in question list the "ORIGIN" of those lineages in the particular region but they are not talking about the ENTIRE HAPLOGROUP. Obviously if you see the same haplogroup listed twice or 3 times yet they all have different origins they are NOT saying that U2 has an origin in JORDAN AND IBERIA.
What they are saying is the HVSI sequence of each mtdna has different origins one in Jordan and the other in Iberia. The work YOU have to do is see how these HVSI sequences are translated into mtdna trees TODAY.
I will give you an African example you can understand and use the terminology of the old paper you posted:
HVSI Motif - 209,519 - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Ethiopia
HVSI Motif - 209,519,162, 259 - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Egypt
HVSI Motif - 209,519,284, 519 - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Chad
HVSI Motif - 209,519,292, - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Zambia
Obviously L3f does not have an origin in all 4 places. It has an origin in Ethiopia. When looking at the HVSI motif, Ethiopia L3f*, The Chad lineage is L3f3, the Egyptian one is L3f2b, and Zambian lineage is L3f1b4a.
L3f3, L3f2b and L3f1b4a are the details you get today when looking at extensive HVSI and HVSII data. Basically your study is lacking in subclades. You dont understand that HVSI can indicate subclades.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
xyyman please humble yourself and ask beyoku some questions. She knows a lot more about genetics than you or I and can teach you some things
thanks, lioness
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb] Pheeew!
Quote: "rCRS is not a Marker." It is a standard indicative of hg-H ie H2*? IIRC God!
Listen I need to post some new stuff on ESR. Get back to me. Unless I am banned there. LOL!quote:CRS is not a marker, dummy. ~40% of the samples
Originally posted by Swenet:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Xyyman:
In addition – PS-1 and CH-1 carried the
same mtDNA marker as two of the handler
were CRS in HVS-I. [/
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
xyyman this red underlining is retarded
U5a is listed in Sweden
while U5b is listed as Berber
so what does this tell us about the origin of U5 ?
You don't have any idea
Of the two, the Swiss and the Berbers you like Berbers better so you underline it and then pretend you are proving something
quote:Oh you thought the post was getting at Swenet cause he pointed out the % of rCRS?
Originally posted by xyyman:
Maybe or maybe NOT. I have my doubts of Beyoku but he seem more knowledgeable than many. He screwed big time on that K discussion which makes me think with him it is razzle dazzle.(no depth)
With the motif discussion he still haven't addressed the point I made and underlined in red. He talks about several other different things except what I asked about and higlighted in red. That tells me he agrees with me but is reluctant to agree because of his insecurity.
I am saying based upon that dated study...the authors are implying origin. He hasn't answered that a yet.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
xyyman please humble yourself and ask beyoku some questions. She knows a lot more about genetics than you or I and can teach you some things
thanks, lioness
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:Wrong about WHAT exactly?
Originally posted by xyyman:
Maybe or maybe NOT. I have my doubts of Beyoku but. He hasn't answered that a yet.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
I don't know because the study is from 2001. We are now in 2014.
I dont give 2 shits about mtdna H. This is the nature of changing science.
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb] Maybe or maybe NOT. I have my doubts of Beyoku ....
Quote by Beyoku:
I dont give 2 shits about mtdna H. This is the nature of changing science.
.
quote:that seems foolish
Originally posted by xyyman:
Lioness knows my MO. I only ask a question I know the answer to....
quote:The Closet Africans of Sardinia
Originally posted by xyyman:
First you don't see the relevance of Sardinia. Now you don't see the relevance of MTDNA hg-H.
quote:I see, and all other proposals fail as well. As was show previously, on page one. They are now trying to connect it to the Cro Magnon.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:The total identification of the Aterian culture as an African culture is why Bernard Secher et al. , wants to remove this culture from identfying the origin of U6. If you accept the Aterian culture as an African culture you can not claim a back migration for the origin of U6 in Eurasia.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The main problem with all of their theories about the origin and back migration of L(M) into Africa is they base this on the existence of haplogroup M among the Dravidians of India.
This theory can not be supported because the Dravidians belong to the C-Group of Nubia. This means that there were no Dravidians in India before 2500BC.
Some researchers try to imply that the Aurgnacian culture entered Eurasia from the East. They use a Neanderthal site to make their case. But the dates for Aurignacian in Europe begins in Iberia at 44kya.
They don't want to accept the Iberia origin of Aurignacian, because then they would have to admit that haplogroups, H.M.N and etc., entered Europe from Africa, instead of resulting from the OoA migration into South and East Asia.
The entrance of the Aurignacian culture from Africa, into Iberia makes all the proposed back migrations into Africa mute.
quote:--Late Pleistocene Human Occupation of Northwest Africa: A Crosscheck of Chronology and Climate Change in Morocco
Regular Middle Paleolithic inventories as well as Middle Paleolithic inventories of Aterian type have a long chronology in Morocco going back to MIS 6 and are interstratified in some sites. Their potential for detecting chrono-cultural patterns is low. The transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic, here termed Early Upper Paleolithic—at between 30 to 20 ka—remains a most enigmatic era. Scarce data from this period requires careful and fundamental reconsidering of human presence. By integrating environmental data in the reconstruction of population dynamics, clear correlations become obvious. High resolution data are lacking before 20 ka, and at some sites this period is characterized by the occurrence of sterile layers between Middle Paleolithic deposits, possibly indicative of a very low presence of humans in Morocco. After Heinrich Event 1, there is an enormous increase of data due to the prominent Late Iberomaurusian deposits that contrast strongly with the foregoing accumulations in terms of sedimentological features, fauna, and artifact composition. The Younger Dryas again shows a remarkable decline of data marking the end of the Paleolithic. Environmental improvements in the Holocene are associated with an extensive Epipaleolithic occupation. Therefore, the late glacial cultural sequence of Morocco is a good test case for analyzing the interrelationship of culture and climate change.
Jörg Linstädter, Prehistoric Archaeology, Cologne University, GERMANY Josef Eiwanger, KAAK, German Archaeological Institute, GERMANY Abdessalam Mikdad, INSAP, MOROCCO
Gerd-Christian Weniger, Neanderthal Museum, GERMANY
quote:--On the industrial attributions of the Aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb, Harold L. Dibble et al.
North Africa is quickly emerging as one of the more important regions yielding information on the origins of modern Homo sapiens. Associated with significant fossil hominin remains are two stone tool industries, the Aterian and Mousterian, which have been differentiated, respectively, primarily on the basis of the presence and absence of tanged, or stemmed, stone tools. Largely because of historical reasons, these two industries have been attributed to the western Eurasian Middle Paleolithic rather than the African Middle Stone Age. In this paper, drawing on our recent excavation of Contrebandiers Cave and other published data, we show that, aside from the presence or absence of tanged pieces, there are no other distinctions between these two industries in terms of either lithic attributes or chronology. Together, these results demonstrate that these two ‘industries’ are instead variants of the same entity. Moreover, several additional characteristics of these assemblages, such as distinctive stone implements and the manufacture and use of bone tools and possible shell ornaments, suggest a closer affinity to other Late Pleistocene African Middle Stone Age industries rather than to the Middle Paleolithic of western Eurasia.
Journal of Human Evolution, 2013 Elsevier.
.
quote:--A. Bouzouggar, et al.
we suggest that there may have been a relationship, albeit a complex one, between climatic events and cave activity on the part of Iberomaurusian populations.
quote:--Wolfgang Haak
PC correlates and component loadings (Figure 2) showed a pattern similar to average hg frequencies (Table 2) in both large meta-population sets, with the LBK dataset grouping with Europeans because of a lack of mitochondrial African hgs (L and M1) and preHV, and elevated frequencies of hg V.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
The Aterian is a distinctive stone tool industry of North Africa, dated between 90000 and 40000 years ago,
The age of U6 has widely varied estimates. Some of this are under 40K so that means that U6 does not necessarily have to coincide with Aterian culture
_______________________________
This first African expansion of U6a in the Maghreb was suggested in a previous analysis [6]. This radiation inside Africa occurred in Morocco around 26 kya (Table 2) and, ruling out the earlier Aterian, we suggested the Iberomaurusian as the most probable archaeological and anthropological correlate of this spread in the Maghreb [6]. Others have pointed to the Dabban industry in North Africa and its supposed source in the Levant, the Ahmarian, as the archaeological footprints of U6 coming back to Africa [7,9]. However, we disagree for several reasons: firstly, they most probably evolved in situ from previous cultures, not being intrusive in their respective areas [42-44]; second, their chronologies are out of phase with U6 and third, Dabban is a local industry in Cyrenaica not showing the whole coastal expansion of U6. In addition, recent archaeological evidence, based on securely dated layers, also points to the Maghreb as the place with the oldest implantation of the Iberomaurusian culture [45], which is coincidental with the U6 radiation from this region proposed in this and previous studies [6].
The history of the North African mitochondrial DNA haplogroup U6 gene flow into the African, Eurasian and American continents. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2014.
quote:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/12/234
"No southwest Asian specific clades for M1 or U6 were discovered. U6 and M1 frequencies in North Africa, the Middle East and Europe DO NOT FOLLOW similar patterns, and their sub-clade divisions do not appear to be compatible with their shared history reaching back to the Early Upper Palaeolithic."
code:Geography Founder Analysis
Migration Time (ka) % of L3 Lineages (SE)
East Africa 58.8 74.0 (0.5)
1.8 20.1 (2.6)
0.1 5.9 (2.5)
Central Africa 42.4 75.0 (2.7)
9.2 24.1 (2.8)
0.1 0.9 (0.2)
North Africa 35.0 7.4 (2.7)
6.6 67.0 (4.0)
0.6 25.7 (3.1)
South Africa 3.2 86.7 (4.3)
0.1 13.3 (4.3)
South Africa (southern)1.8 83.4 (3.7)
0.1 16.6 (3.7)
quote:--Frigi et al.
Our results also point to a less ancient western sub-Saharan gene flow to Tunisia, including haplogroups L2a and L3b. This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 BP. These findings parallel the more recent findings of both archaeology and linguistics on the prehistory of Africa. The present work suggests that sub-Saharan contributions to North Africa have experienced several complex population processes after the occupation of the region by anatomically modern humans. Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa.
[...]
Indeed, taking into account the Tunisian sequences belonging to haplogroup L2a from Sejnane, Zriba, Kesra, Matmata, Sned, and Chenini-Douiret, we obtain a divergence age of about 28,000 ± 8,900 years, which is the same age calculated for this haplogroup including all the described sequences. However, we noticed two pairs of related haplotypes in the Kesra population, where we detected a local evolution of the L2a cluster, suggesting that this haplogroup could have been introduced earlier in Kesra.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
The Aterian is a distinctive stone tool industry of North Africa, dated between 90000 and 40000 years ago,
The age of U6 has widely varied estimates. Some of this are under 40K so that means that U6 does not necessarily have to coincide with Aterian culture
_______________________________
This first African expansion of U6a in the Maghreb was suggested in a previous analysis [6]. This radiation inside Africa occurred in Morocco around 26 kya (Table 2) and, ruling out the earlier Aterian, we suggested the Iberomaurusian as the most probable archaeological and anthropological correlate of this spread in the Maghreb [6]. Others have pointed to the Dabban industry in North Africa and its supposed source in the Levant, the Ahmarian, as the archaeological footprints of U6 coming back to Africa [7,9]. However, we disagree for several reasons: firstly, they most probably evolved in situ from previous cultures, not being intrusive in their respective areas [42-44]; second, their chronologies are out of phase with U6 and third, Dabban is a local industry in Cyrenaica not showing the whole coastal expansion of U6. In addition, recent archaeological evidence, based on securely dated layers, also points to the Maghreb as the place with the oldest implantation of the Iberomaurusian culture [45], which is coincidental with the U6 radiation from this region proposed in this and previous studies [6].
The history of the North African mitochondrial DNA haplogroup U6 gene flow into the African, Eurasian and American continents. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2014.
quote:--Bengston, John D.(ed.), In Hot Pursuit of
"It is of interest that the M35 and M2 lineages are
united by a mutation - the PN2 transition. This PN2
defined clade originated in East Africa, where various
populations have a notable frequency of its underived
state. This would suggest that an ancient population
in East Africa, or more correctly its males, form the
basis of the ancestors of all African upper Paleolithic
populations - and their subsequent descendants in the
present day."
quote:--On the industrial attributions of the Aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb, Harold L. Dibble et al.
North Africa is quickly emerging as one of the more important regions yielding information on the origins of modern Homo sapiens. Associated with significant fossil hominin remains are two stone tool industries, the Aterian and Mousterian, which have been differentiated, respectively, primarily on the basis of the presence and absence of tanged, or stemmed, stone tools. Largely because of historical reasons, these two industries have been attributed to the western Eurasian Middle Paleolithic rather than the African Middle Stone Age. In this paper, drawing on our recent excavation of Contrebandiers Cave and other published data, we show that, aside from the presence or absence of tanged pieces, there are no other distinctions between these two industries in terms of either lithic attributes or chronology. Together, these results demonstrate that these two ‘industries’ are instead variants of the same entity.
Moreover, several additional characteristics of these assemblages, such as distinctive stone implements and the manufacture and use of bone tools and possible shell ornaments, suggest a closer affinity to other Late Pleistocene African Middle Stone Age industries rather than to the Middle Paleolithic of western Eurasia.
quote:--Late Pleistocene Human Occupation of Northwest Africa: A Crosscheck of Chronology and Climate Change in Morocco
Regular Middle Paleolithic inventories as well as Middle Paleolithic inventories of Aterian type have a long chronology in Morocco going back to MIS 6 and are interstratified in some sites. Their potential for detecting chrono-cultural patterns is low. The transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic, here termed Early Upper Paleolithic—at between 30 to 20 ka—remains a most enigmatic era. Scarce data from this period requires careful and fundamental reconsidering of human presence. By integrating environmental data in the reconstruction of population dynamics, clear correlations become obvious. High resolution data are lacking before 20 ka, and at some sites this period is characterized by the occurrence of sterile layers between Middle Paleolithic deposits, possibly indicative of a very low presence of humans in Morocco. After Heinrich Event 1, there is an enormous increase of data due to the prominent Late Iberomaurusian deposits that contrast strongly with the foregoing accumulations in terms of sedimentological features, fauna, and artifact composition. The Younger Dryas again shows a remarkable decline of data marking the end of the Paleolithic. Environmental improvements in the Holocene are associated with an extensive Epipaleolithic occupation. Therefore, the late glacial cultural sequence of Morocco is a good test case for analyzing the interrelationship of culture and climate change.
quote:An even older industry to the Pre-Auriganician, is the Mousterian industry, also within Africa of course. In fact chronologically its overlapping.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The total identification of the Aterian culture as an African culture is why Bernard Secher et al. , wants to remove this culture from identfying the origin of U6. If you accept the Aterian culture as an African culture you can not claim a back migration for the origin of U6 in Eurasia.
quote:Interesting testament,"
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:The Closet Africans of Sardinia
Originally posted by xyyman:
First you don't see the relevance of Sardinia. Now you don't see the relevance of MTDNA hg-H.
"quote:--Frigi et al
The dates for subhaplogroups H1 and H3 (13,000 and 10,000 years, respectively) in Iberian and North African populations allow for this possibility. Kefi et al.’s (2005) data on ancient DNA could be viewed as being in agreement with such a presence in North Africa in ancient times (about 15,000–6,000 years ago) and with the fact that the North African populations are considered by most scholars as having their closest relations with European and Asian populations (Cherni et al. 2008; Ennafaa et al. 2009; Kefi et al. 2005; Rando et al. 1998). However, considering the general understanding nowadays that human settlement of the rest of the world emerged from eastern northern Africa less than 50,000 years ago, a better explanation of these haplogroups might be that their frequencies reflect the original modern human population of these parts of Africa as much as or more than intrusions from outside the continent. The ways that gene frequencies may increase or decrease based on adaptive selection, gene flow, and/or social processes is under study and would benefit from the results of studies on autosomal and Y-chromosome markers.
quote:--María Cerezo (2013)
However, the remaining 35% of L mtDNAs form European-specific subclades, revealing that there was gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa toward Europe as early as 11,000 yr ago.
quote:--LaluezaFox
"However, the biggest surprise was to discover that this individual possessed African versions in the genes that determine the light pigmentation of the current Europeans, which indicates that he had dark skin, although we can not know the exact shade."
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:The Closet Africans of Sardinia
Originally posted by xyyman:
First you don't see the relevance of Sardinia. Now you don't see the relevance of MTDNA hg-H.
quote:Yes there is a connection. http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_3.htm
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:An even older industry to the Pre-Auriganician, is the Mousterian industry, also within Africa of course. In fact chronologically its overlapping.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The total identification of the Aterian culture as an African culture is why Bernard Secher et al. , wants to remove this culture from identfying the origin of U6. If you accept the Aterian culture as an African culture you can not claim a back migration for the origin of U6 in Eurasia.
I notice that the Aterian chronologically clusters both of the mentioned industries. Do you know if there is any relation of connection?
quote:Europeans have created a big lie to explain why they are pale skinned. This lie involves the idea that the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal populations were originally white. The only problem was that the more research archaeologist conducted the more evidence emerged that thesepeople were not white.
The cultures of prehistoric humans are known mostly through the excavation of stone tools and other relatively imperishable artifacts. The early tool making traditions are often referred to as being paleolithic (literally "Old Stone" Age). The Oldowan and Acheulian tool traditions of the first humans were the simplest technologies. As a result, they are lumped together into the Lower Paleolithic stage of cultural development. Homo heidelbergensis continued to make tools mostly in the Acheulian tradition. However, by 100,000 years ago or somewhat earlier, Neandertal and some other late archaic humans achieved a major leap forward in tool making with the development of the Mousterian tool tradition (named for the site of le Moustier in France). This new technology was revolutionary enough to warrant being considered a distinct Paleolithic phase--the Middle Paleolithic. Mousterian-like tool industries were employed at that time also by early modern Homo sapiens in some areas of Africa and Southwest Asia.
quote:why bother quoting me on U6 and thne posting a lot of stuff on Hg L ?
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
Look at the estimated lineage of Hg L in Northwest Africa.
quote:why is this stuff about H1 in a thread about U6 ????
Originally posted by xyyman:
===
Interesting testament,".......................................................^
quote:
quote:It makes no sense?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:why bother quoting me on U6 and thne posting a lot of stuff on Hg L ?
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
Look at the estimated lineage of Hg L in Northwest Africa.
This makes no sense. I wont read it and no one else will
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:Bump!
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
First you don't see the relevance of Sardinia. Now you don't see the relevance of MTDNA hg-H.quote:--Frigi et al
The dates for subhaplogroups H1 and H3 (13,000 and 10,000 years, respectively) in Iberian and North African populations allow for this possibility. Kefi et al.’s (2005) data on ancient DNA could be viewed as being in agreement with such a presence in North Africa in ancient times (about 15,000–6,000 years ago) and with the fact that the North African populations are considered by most scholars as having their closest relations with European and Asian populations (Cherni et al. 2008; Ennafaa et al. 2009; Kefi et al. 2005; Rando et al. 1998). However, considering the general understanding nowadays that human settlement of the rest of the world emerged from eastern northern Africa less than 50,000 years ago, a better explanation of these haplogroups might be that their frequencies reflect the original modern human population of these parts of Africa as much as or more than intrusions from outside the continent. The ways that gene frequencies may increase or decrease based on adaptive selection, gene flow, and/or social processes is under study and would benefit from the results of studies on autosomal and Y-chromosome markers.
quote:--María Cerezo (2013)
However, the remaining 35% of L mtDNAs form European-specific subclades, revealing that there was gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa toward Europe as early as 11,000 yr ago.
Reconstructing ancient mitochondrial DNA links between Africa and Europe
quote:--LaluezaFox
"However, the biggest surprise was to discover that this individual possessed African versions in the genes that determine the light pigmentation of the current Europeans, which indicates that he had dark skin, although we can not know the exact shade."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140126134643.htm
quote:--Paul Brotherton, Wolfgang Haak, et al.
Haplogroup H dominates present-day Western European mitochondrial DNA variability (>40%), yet was less common (~19%) among Early Neolithic farmers (~5450 BC) and virtually absent in Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. Here we investigate this major component of the maternal population history of modern Europeans and sequence 39 complete haplogroup H mitochondrial genomes from ancient human remains. We then compare this ‘real-time’ genetic data with cultural changes taking place between the Early Neolithic (~5450 BC) and Bronze Age (~2200 BC) in Central Europe. Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC). Dated haplogroup H genomes allow us to reconstruct the recent evolutionary history of haplogroup H and reveal a mutation rate 45% higher than current estimates for human mitochondria.
quote:xyyman, help me out here, were does U2 originate Jordan or 2000 miles away in Jordan?
Originally posted by xyyman:
Source of H1 Mauritania
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
[QB]Again you dont know what you are talking about because you dont understand the science. And you lack common sense. rCRS is the sample from a European. When we look at that sample TODAY it is haplogroup H2a2a. Haplogroup H2a2a was not resolved at that point. Many of the sequences listed in your paper were not resolved to the point they are today. That is why the are kept vague.
The authors in question list the "ORIGIN" of those lineages in the particular region but they are not talking about the ENTIRE HAPLOGROUP. Obviously if you see the same haplogroup listed twice or 3 times yet they all have different origins they are NOT saying that U2 has an origin in JORDAN AND IBERIA.
What they are saying is the HVSI sequence of each mtdna has different origins one in Jordan and the other in Iberia. The work YOU have to do is see how these HVSI sequences are translated into mtdna trees TODAY.
I will give you an African example you can understand and use the terminology of the old paper you posted:
HVSI Motif - 209,519 - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Ethiopia
HVSI Motif - 209,519,162, 259 - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Egypt
HVSI Motif - 209,519,284, 519 - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Chad
HVSI Motif - 209,519,292, - Haplogroup L3f - Origin Zambia
Obviously L3f does not have an origin in all 4 places. It has an origin in Ethiopia. When looking at the HVSI motif, Ethiopia L3f*, The Chad lineage is L3f3, the Egyptian one is L3f2b, and Zambian lineage is L3f1b4a.
L3f3, L3f2b and L3f1b4a are the details you get today when looking at extensive HVSI and HVSII data. Basically your study is lacking in subclades. You dont understand that HVSI can indicate subclades.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
xyyman can you explain what an HVS motif is? ,
thanks
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] are you asking a question you have the answer to?
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
For the record:
The MtDNA genome is about 16596 bp long has several regions of interest
Which includes
HVS-1, HVS-II and HVS-III and other misc regions eg xRNA
HVS-I (16024-16569) which is of primary interest determining female lineage ie MtDNA Haplogroups
Motifs are essentially positoins(think addresses or locations) in the region of interest.. eg 16000 +223(16223). A ” T” at that position is indicative of hg-W. But other hg carry “T” at the position. So you need a holistic view. So Beyoku was part right. Work needs to be done if the author is sloppy.
Anyways based upon the information provided in the table the origin was correctly identified AT THAT TIME
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Did I do a better job that Beyoku...the junior geneticist?
He put is foot in his mouth ...again.
BTW some geneticist interchangably use motif=haplotype. Why you ask? Beyoku do you know the answer?
quote:Agreed here, that's the exact same thought I had about this.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Yes there is a connection. http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_3.htm
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:An even older industry to the Pre-Auriganician, is the Mousterian industry, also within Africa of course. In fact chronologically its overlapping.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The total identification of the Aterian culture as an African culture is why Bernard Secher et al. , wants to remove this culture from identfying the origin of U6. If you accept the Aterian culture as an African culture you can not claim a back migration for the origin of U6 in Eurasia.
I notice that the Aterian chronologically clusters both of the mentioned industries. Do you know if there is any relation of connection?
Bernard Secher et al. , base their hypothesis on the origin of U6 on or the alleged back migration of M1 into Africa.
quote:Europeans have created a big lie to explain why they are pale skinned. This lie involves the idea that the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal populations were originally white. The only problem was that the more research archaeologist conducted the more evidence emerged that thesepeople were not white.
The cultures of prehistoric humans are known mostly through the excavation of stone tools and other relatively imperishable artifacts. The early tool making traditions are often referred to as being paleolithic (literally "Old Stone" Age). The Oldowan and Acheulian tool traditions of the first humans were the simplest technologies. As a result, they are lumped together into the Lower Paleolithic stage of cultural development. Homo heidelbergensis continued to make tools mostly in the Acheulian tradition. However, by 100,000 years ago or somewhat earlier, Neandertal and some other late archaic humans achieved a major leap forward in tool making with the development of the Mousterian tool tradition (named for the site of le Moustier in France). This new technology was revolutionary enough to warrant being considered a distinct Paleolithic phase--the Middle Paleolithic. Mousterian-like tool industries were employed at that time also by early modern Homo sapiens in some areas of Africa and Southwest Asia.
As a result, Cro-Magnon was proven to be Black The research today has found that these. Early hunter-gatherers and farmers in Europe were brown skinned and some even had blue eyes. Next, the research proved that Neanderthals were also Black. Although they know this they continued to publish pictures of cave men looking white, some with red hair.
To perpetuate this myth the Plank Institute began to produce research claiming the Neanderthals did not share genes with Africans. In fact, the Plank Institute claimed every other population was connected to Neanderthal but the Africans. Next thing we discover is that the Altai Neanderthal are closely related to the San and Yoruba. Yet, the status quo continues to claim in the popular press this distinction.
This was always a myth because the Mousterian tool culture originated in Africa and was taken to Europe. The Neanderthal also used the Levallois tools that also originated in Africa. Yet Europeans attempted to, and succeed in divorsing Neantherthals from Africa so they could perpetuate the myth of the “unique” origin of Europeans. See:
http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_3.htm
We know that Neanderthal migrated back into Africa and participated in the Aterian culture. Later we see the Cro-Magnon/San people migrating into Eurpe where they founded the Aurignacian culture.
The Aterian culture is related to the Sangoan culture. I have discussed how L3(M,N) was probably spread to North and West Africa by the Sangoan population. The earliest evidence of human activity in West Africa is typified by the Sangoan industry (Phillipson,2005). The amh associated with the Sangoan culture may have deposited Hg LOd and haplotype AF-24 in Senegal thousands of years before the exit of amh from Africa. This is because it was not until 65kya that the TMRCA of non-African L3(M,N) exited Africa (Kivisild et al, 2006).
Anatomically modern humans arrived in Senegal during the Sangoan period. Sangoan artifacts spread from East Africa to West Africa between 100-80kya. In Senegal Sangoan material has been found near Cap Manuel (Giresse, 2008), Gambia River in Senegal (Davies,1967; Wai-Ogussu,1973); and Cap Vert (Phillipson,2005).
Look at the map. You will notice that the Mousterian culture and pre-Aurignacian culture originated in Africa. It was only natural for U6 to have originated in an environment where L3 (M,N) was already present.
Neanderthal dominated the Levant when the imagined back migration of M1 occurred 50kya ,we must reject the contention of Gonzalez et al. (2007) and Olivieri et al. (2007) and Sores et al (2012) that M1 originated in Asia because 1) the possible Senegalese origin of the M1c subclade; 2) the absence of the AF-24 haplotype of haplogroup LOd in Asia; and 3) the African origin of the Dravidian speakers of India (2007,2008)who carry the most diverse M haplogroups.
Moreover, the existence of the L3a(M) motif in the Senegambia characterized by the DdeI site np 10394 and AluI site np 10397 in haplotype AF24 (DQ112852) make a ‘back migration of M1 to Africa highly unlikely, because of the ancientness of this haplotype. The first amh to reach Senegal belonged to the Sangoan culture which spread from East Africa to West Africa probably between 100-80kya.
The presence of the AF-24 is a haplotype of haplogroup LOd makes it clear that this haplotype is not only an ancient human genome. It is also evidence that AF-24 probably did not originate in Asia, since AF-24 was found among the Senegalese and Khoisan.
This reflects an early migration from East Africa to West Africa. The presence of basal nucleotides characteristic of macrohaplogroup L3(M) in West Africa and the reality that M1 does not descend from an Asian M macrohaplogroup because of the absence of AF24 in Asia (Sun et al, 2005) and its presence among the Khoisan and Senegalese suggest that expansion of M1 was probably from Africa to Eurasia. The existence of haplotype AF-24 and basal L3(M) lineage in East and West Africa suggest the probable existence of the Proto-M1 lineage in Africa, not Eurasia before haplogroup L3(M,N) carriers exited Africa.
Given the early spread of L3(M,N) into North Africa, it would have been more natural for U6, and H to have originated in North Africa, than the Levant which was not even settled by amh at the time these haplogroups allegedly originated.
quote:It's fascinating, how they are fascinated by the Neanderthal. And this fascinates me. What fascinates me even more is the map shown at, 30:50 min.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
To perpetuate this myth the Plank Institute began to produce research claiming the Neanderthals did not share genes with Africans. In fact, the Plank Institute claimed every other population was connected to Neanderthal but the Africans. Next thing we discover is that the Altai Neanderthal are closely related to the San and Yoruba. Yet, the status quo continues to claim in the popular press this distinction.
[...]
Europeans have created a big lie to explain why they are pale skinned. This lie involves the idea that the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal populations were originally white. The only problem was that the more research archaeologist conducted the more evidence emerged that thesepeople were not white.
As a result, Cro-Magnon was proven to be Black The research today has found that these. Early hunter-gatherers and farmers in Europe were brown skinned and some even had blue eyes. Next, the research proved that Neanderthals were also Black. Although they know this they continued to publish pictures of cave men looking white, some with red hair.
This was always a myth because the Mousterian tool culture originated in Africa and was taken to Europe. The Neanderthal also used the Levallois tools that also originated in Africa. Yet Europeans attempted to, and succeed in divorsing Neantherthals from Africa so they could perpetuate the myth of the “unique” origin of Europeans. See:
http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_3.htm
We know that Neanderthal migrated back into Africa and participated in the Aterian culture. Later we see the Cro-Magnon/San people migrating into Eurpe where they founded the Aurignacian culture.
The Aterian culture is related to the Sangoan culture. I have discussed how L3(M,N) was probably spread to North and West Africa by the Sangoan population. The earliest evidence of human activity in West Africa is typified by the Sangoan industry (Phillipson,2005). The amh associated with the Sangoan culture may have deposited Hg LOd and haplotype AF-24 in Senegal thousands of years before the exit of amh from Africa. This is because it was not until 65kya that the TMRCA of non-African L3(M,N) exited Africa (Kivisild et al, 2006).
Anatomically modern humans arrived in Senegal during the Sangoan period. Sangoan artifacts spread from East Africa to West Africa between 100-80kya. In Senegal Sangoan material has been found near Cap Manuel (Giresse, 2008), Gambia River in Senegal (Davies,1967; Wai-Ogussu,1973); and Cap Vert (Phillipson,2005).
Look at the map. You will notice that the Mousterian culture and pre-Aurignacian culture originated in Africa. It was only natural for U6 to have originated in an environment where L3 (M,N) was already present.
Neanderthal dominated the Levant when the imagined back migration of M1 occurred 50kya ,we must reject the contention of Gonzalez et al. (2007) and Olivieri et al. (2007) and Sores et al (2012) that M1 originated in Asia because 1) the possible Senegalese origin of the M1c subclade; 2) the absence of the AF-24 haplotype of haplogroup LOd in Asia; and 3) the African origin of the Dravidian speakers of India (2007,2008)who carry the most diverse M haplogroups.
Moreover, the existence of the L3a(M) motif in the Senegambia characterized by the DdeI site np 10394 and AluI site np 10397 in haplotype AF24 (DQ112852) make a ‘back migration of M1 to Africa highly unlikely, because of the ancientness of this haplotype. The first amh to reach Senegal belonged to the Sangoan culture which spread from East Africa to West Africa probably between 100-80kya.
The presence of the AF-24 is a haplotype of haplogroup LOd makes it clear that this haplotype is not only an ancient human genome. It is also evidence that AF-24 probably did not originate in Asia, since AF-24 was found among the Senegalese and Khoisan.
This reflects an early migration from East Africa to West Africa. The presence of basal nucleotides characteristic of macrohaplogroup L3(M) in West Africa and the reality that M1 does not descend from an Asian M macrohaplogroup because of the absence of AF24 in Asia (Sun et al, 2005) and its presence among the Khoisan and Senegalese suggest that expansion of M1 was probably from Africa to Eurasia. The existence of haplotype AF-24 and basal L3(M) lineage in East and West Africa suggest the probable existence of the Proto-M1 lineage in Africa, not Eurasia before haplogroup L3(M,N) carriers exited Africa.
Given the early spread of L3(M,N) into North Africa, it would have been more natural for U6, and H to have originated in North Africa, than the Levant which was not even settled by amh at the time these haplogroups allegedly originated.
quote:
First migration of modern humans out of Africa: The fossil evidence
Katerina Harvati
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
The current modern human origins debate centers on the possibility and degree of admixture between indigenous archaic humans and modern human populations migrating out of Africa into Europe and Asia in the Late Pleistocene (approx. the last 120 thousand years). In the last few decades genetic evidence from living human populations around the world has indicated that our species originated in sub-Saharan Africa fairly recently (100-200 thousand years ago), and dispersed out of Africa to colonize the rest of the Old World as recently as 65 to 25 thousand years ago. Most genetic data (from living people as well as from ancient DNA) show no contribution from archaic populations, such as Neanderthals, in our gene pool, suggesting that very little admixture occurred between migrating modern humans and the archaic populations that they met as they dispersed into Eurasia. Nonetheless, not all genetic studies are consistent with this scenario, with a few findings suggesting non-African contributions to the gene pool of living humans.
This presentation reviews the fossil record of early modern humans from across the Old World. The fossil evidence for an African origin of modern humans is presented and the proposed morphological evidence for hybridization between Neanderthals and early modern humans is assessed.
Further References:
Grine F. E., Bailey R.M., Harvati K., Nathan R.P, Morris, A.G., Henderson G.M., Ribot I. and Pike A.W.G. 2007. Late Pleistocene Human Skull from Hofmeyr, South Africa and Modern Human Origins. Science 315:226-229.
Gunz P. and Harvati K. 2007. The Neanderthal “chignon”: Variation, integration and homology. Journal of Human Evolution, 52:262-274.
Harvati K., Frost S.R. and McNulty K.P. 2004. Neanderthal taxonomy reconsidered: Implications of 3D primate models of intra- and inter-specific differences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 101:1147-1152.
Stringer, C.B. 2002. Modern human origins: progress and prospects. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 357,563-579.
Trinkaus, E.T. 2005. Early modern humans. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 34,207–30.
quote:They are fascinated by Neanderthals because the multiregional theory for the origin of man can not be sustained any longer. as a result, researchers have to accept the monolithic origin of man and the OoA. Europeans hope to use the Nenaderthals as a method to explain why they are "pale" and a unique people superior to the other races of man.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
It's fascinating, how they are fascinated by the Neanderthal. And this fascinates me.
quote:The question on light skin has already been discovered and explained. But yeah, there are some out there who claim that Neanderthals were light skinned, so therefor modern Europeans are light skinned.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:They are fascinated by Neanderthals because the multiregional theory for the origin of man can not be sustained any longer. as a result, researchers have to accept the monolithic origin of man and the OoA. Europeans hope to use the Nenaderthals as a method to explain why they are "pale" and a unique people superior to the other races of man.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
It's fascinating, how they are fascinated by the Neanderthal. And this fascinates me.
This myth of a Proto-European light skinned Neanderthal will also evaporate as more research is done. The recent paper on the Altai Neanderthal which indicated a close relationship with the Yoruba and San, will put to rest the lie that everyone carries Neanderthal genes except Africans.
It is sad Europeans lie about history just so they can pretend they are superior to the rest of mankind.
.
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
Yeah so where do you get HVSI 223 c to t transition is haplogroup W?
You may think hap H is important but that's you prerogative. Personally the genetics of contemporary maghrebi populations as well as contemporary South west Asians are just not that interesting to me. I could care less that they may be parental ancestors to some European groups.
You may find this interesting. The other ABF board was unable to do anything with it. I am actually surprised.
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
@ XYY - You were speaking on Ancient DNA.
Posted is non Run of the mill Ancient DNA from Egypt. This public but not so widespread. THe other forum did not know what to do with these numbers.
quote:I recommend a Galaxy Note or something like it. I
Originally posted by xyyman:
These smart devices are finicky.
quote:On it? On what? I've been looking into implications
Originally posted by xyyman:
Anyways. I see the book image now. Looks
like Sage and Sweetness are on it.
quote:From :
However, significant differences were found between these populations. Based on an increased frequency of HpaI 3592 (+) haplotypes in the contemporary Dakhlehian population, the authors suggested that, since Roman times, gene flow from the Sub-Saharan region has affected gene frequencies of individuals from the oasis.
quote:From the study in the original post.
However, as U6 persists in modern day African populations we can assume a maternal continuity since around 35 kya, the age of this haplogroup. This continuity has received some support from ancient DNA studies on Iberomaurusian remains, with an age around 12 kya, exhumed from the archaeological site of Taforalt in Morocco [17]. In this analysis, haplotypes tentatively assignable to haplogroups H, JT, U6 and V were identified, pointing to a local evolution of this population and a genetic continuity in North Africa. On the other hand, only one haplotype harbored the 16223 mutation, which if assigned to an L haplogroup would represent a sub-Saharan African influence of about 4%. This would equate to a frequency five times lower than that found in current Moroccan populations (20%) and would support the proposal that the penetration of sub-Saharan mtDNA lineages to North Africa mainly occurred since the beginning of the
Holocene onwards.
quote:Beyoku, I'm trying to get things in perspective here.
Originally posted by beyoku:
Also brought this up in the other thread. They didnt know the significance:
quote:From :
However, significant differences were found between these populations. Based on an increased frequency of HpaI 3592 (+) haplotypes in the contemporary Dakhlehian population, the authors suggested that, since Roman times, gene flow from the Sub-Saharan region has affected gene frequencies of individuals from the oasis.
http://www.anthropology.uw.edu.pl/02/bne-02-02.pdf
Interestingly we can see what the current study has to say about 16223:
quote:From the study in the original post.
However, as U6 persists in modern day African populations we can assume a maternal continuity since around 35 kya, the age of this haplogroup. This continuity has received some support from ancient DNA studies on Iberomaurusian remains, with an age around 12 kya, exhumed from the archaeological site of Taforalt in Morocco [17]. In this analysis, haplotypes tentatively assignable to haplogroups H, JT, U6 and V were identified, pointing to a local evolution of this population and a genetic continuity in North Africa. On the other hand, only one haplotype harbored the 16223 mutation, which if assigned to an L haplogroup would represent a sub-Saharan African influence of about 4%. This would equate to a frequency five times lower than that found in current Moroccan populations (20%) and would support the proposal that the penetration of sub-Saharan mtDNA lineages to North Africa mainly occurred since the beginning of the
Holocene onwards.
quote:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7611282
mtDNA sequence variation was examined in 140 Africans, including Pygmies from Zaire and Central African Republic (C.A.R.) and Mandenkalu, Wolof, and Pular from Senegal. More than 76% of the African mtDNAs (100% of the Pygmies and 67.3% of the Senegalese) formed one major mtDNA cluster (haplogroup L) defined by an African-specific HpaI site gain at nucleotide pair (np) 3592. Additional mutations subdivided haplogroup L into two subhaplogroups, each encompassing both Pygmy and Senegalese mtDNAs. A novel 12-bp homoplasmic insertion in the intergenic region between tRNA(Tyr) and cytochrome oxidase I (COI) genes was also observed in 17.6% of the Pygmies from C.A.R. This insertion is one of the largest observed in human mtDNAs. Another 25% of the Pygmy mtDNAs harbored a 9-bp deletion between the cytochrome oxidase II (COII) and tRNA(Lys) genes, a length polymorphism previously reported in non-African populations. In addition to haplogroup L, other haplogroups were observed in the Senegalese. These haplogroups were more similar to those observed in Europeans and Asians than to haplogroup L mtDNAs, suggesting that the African mtDNAs without the HpaI np 3592 site could be the ancestral types from which European and Asian mtDNAs were derived. Comparison of the intrapopulation sequence divergence in African and non-African populations confirms that African populations exhibit the largest extent of mtDNA variation, a result that further supports the hypothesis that Africans represent the most ancient human group and that all modern humans have a common and recent African origin. The age of the total African variation was estimated to be 101,000-133,000 years before present (YBP), while the age of haplogroup L was estimated at 98,000-130,000 YBP. These values substantially exceed the ages of all Asian- and European-specific mtDNA haplogroups.
PMID: 7611282 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] PMCID: PMC1801234 Free PMC Article
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
.quote:-- Jeffrey Rose
Evidence for a hunter-gatherer range-expansion is indicated by the site of Station One in the northern Sudan, a surface scatter of chipped stone debris systematically collected almost 40 years ago, though not studied until present. Based on technological and typological correlates in East Africa, the predominant use of quartz pebbles for raw material, and the production of small bifacial tools, the site can be classified as Middle Stone Age. While often appearing in East African assemblages, quartz was rarely used in Nubia, where ferrocrete sandstone and Nile pebble were predominantly used by all other Middle Palaeolithic/Middle Stone Age populations. Additionally, façonnage reduction is characteristic of lithic technology in East Africa in the late Middle Stone Age, while Middle Palaeolithic industries in the Nile Valley display only core reduction. It is proposed this assemblage represents a range-expansion of Middle Stone Age hunter-gatherers from East Africa during an Upper Pleistocene pluvial.
[...]
Studies of mitochondrial DNA suggest that all modern humans are derived from a common ancestral group that was living in sub-Saharan Africa between 200,000 and 100,000 years ago (Cann et al. 1987; Vigi- lant et al. 1991; Horai et al. 1995; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Ingman et al. 2000). This ‘Out of Africa’ model posits multiple dispersals via the Arabian (Tchernov 1992; Ronen & Weinstein-Evron 2000; Rose 2000; Stringer 2000; Rose 2004) and/or Levantine corridors (Bar-Yosef 1987; 1994; 2000; Van Peer 1998) between 110,000 and 50,000 BP, which places these events in the latter half of the Middle Palaeolithic (henceforth MP)/Middle Stone Age (henceforth MSA).
It is reasonable to assume if any population expanded from East Africa to Northeast Africa, and subsequently into the Levant, they would have brought with them the lithic technology from whence they came. There are scattered assemblages from the Sudan that are characteristic of the Sangoan (e.g. Arkell 1949; Guichard & Guichard 1965), indicating some degree of technological continuity between
Central and Northeast Africa during the late Early Stone Age (henceforth ESA).
To date, however, there has been no convincing archaeological evidence to suggest inter-regional af- finities during the MSA between East Africa and Northeast Africa. On the contrary, MP industries of Sudan (e.g. Marks 1968a,b) are technologically and typologically distinct from those found in Kenya and Ethiopia (e.g. Breuil et al. 1951; Merrick 1975). Furthermore, comparative analyses of Egyptian and Levantine MP assemblages suggest that no compel- ling technological connections existed between these two regions at this time (Marks 1990; Van Peer 1998). So, while there is a plethora of genetic evidence sup- porting the ‘Out of Africa’ model, archaeological data along one of the primary corridors of human migration have been absent until now. Station One, an MSA site from northern Sudan, represents the only example of a techno-typological connection be- tween the source area of anatomically modern hu- mans and Northeast Africa.
[...]
quote:--Mae Goder-Goldberger
There is clear evidence of lithic technological variability in Middle Paleolithic (MP) assemblages along the Nile valley and in adjacent desert areas. One of the identified variants is the Khormusan, the type-site of which, Site 1017, is located north of the Nile's Second Cataract. The industry has two distinctive characteristics that set it apart from other MP industries within its vicinity. One is the use of a wide variety of raw materials; the second is an apparent correlation between raw material and technology used, suggesting a cultural aspect to raw material management. Stratigraphically, site 1017 is situated within the Dibeira-Jer formation which represents an aggradation stage of the Nile and contains sediments originating from the Ethiopian Highlands. While it has previously been suggested that the site dates to sometime before 42.5 ka, the Dibeira-Jer formation can plausibly be correlated with Nile alluvial sediments in northern Sudan recently dated to 83 ± 24 ka (MIS 5a). This stage coincides with the 81 ka age of sapropel S3, indicating higher Nile flow and stronger monsoon rainfall at these times.
Other sites which reflect similar raw material variability and technological traditions are the BNS and KHS sites in the Omo Kibish Formation (Ethiopia) dated to ∼100 ka and ∼190 ka respectively. Based on a lithic comparative study conducted, it is suggested that site 1017 can be seen as representing behavioral patterns which are indicative of East African Middle Stone Age (MSA) technology, adding support to the hypothesis that the Nile Valley was an important dispersal route used by modern humans prior to the long cooling and dry trend beginning with the onset of MIS 4. Techo-typological comparison of the assemblages from the Khormusan sites with other Middle Paleolithic sites from Nubia and East Africa is used to assess the possibility of tracing the dispersal of technological traits across the landscape and through time.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
In Africa, Europe and the Levant, 16223T is bound
to be indicative of African haplogroups. The latter
areas are almost completely fixed in L, N and M1
haplogroups. 16223T disappears from N phylogeny
after N and satellite hgs. It never quite leaves M
phylogeny, but in terms of probabilities, that's
generally irrelevant for 16223T positive haplotypes
in Africa, Europe and the Levant for reasons already
mentioned.
quote:--Inferring the most likely geographical origin
"From the African L3 paragroup radiates the Eurasian
macrohaplogroups M and N. From N derives the
Europeans haplogroups H, I, J, N1b, T, U, V, W,
and X (more than 95% of the European lineages;
Richards et al. 2000). All these derived N
lineages lack transition 16223."
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
You're completely off. In my analysis all haplotypes
showed potential hits with L types, with the exception
of 101 and 27. They classed as T2b. There is no
way you could have narrowed down that many
haplotypes to a single haplogroup, gramps. Also,
looking back at my notes from months ago:
quote:--Inferring the most likely geographical origin of mtDNA sequence profiles (2004)
"From the African L3 paragroup radiates the Eurasian macrohaplogroups M and N. From N derives the Europeans haplogroups H, I, J, N1b, T, U, V, W, and X (more than 95% of the European lineages; Richards et al. 2000). All these derived N lineages lack transition 16223."
quote:I see your reasoning, but look at N phylogeny and
Originally posted by xyyman:
According to Phylottree hg-W is determined by :
195 204 207 1243 3505 5460 8251 8994 11947 15884C 16292
16292 is the only section within the HVI-S ?. (D-Loop). Therefore to answer your question. C16223T within hg-W is an anomaly ie “by decent” ie reverse mutation.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
I see your reasoning, but look at N phylogeny and
then look at the evidence on the net showing that
some N lineages do in fact have 16223T. These
lineages all have in common that they're satellite
hgs, or direct descendants, of mtDNA N. With
immediate descent from N being the common
denominator between all these lineages (i.e. I,
X, W, etc), it looks like they've all inherited
16223T, with the exception of N > R, where it
seems to have left the N tree.
Notice that I didn't take that 2004 citation at
face value. I don't believe it's actually true
that 16223T left in all 5 (or whatever N's amount
of subclades is) satellite lineages at once. I just
posted it because they emphasized 16223T's highly
diagnostic nature for the presence of L types. BTW,
it should be noted that the 50% types in Iberia
included at least one haplotype (talking from
memory here) which only only differed at 16223
relative to CRS. The academics know this makes it
highly diagnostic for mtDNA L, at least in West
Asia, Europe and Africa and so they placed it
in L3.
quote:^Yeah, that's RSRS if I'm not mistaken. About time
Originally posted by beyoku:
They are trying to change the default reference sequence to an L0 haplogroup. There is an article per called something like ' a cornucopian reassessment of... Mtdna... Human' blah blah blah.
quote:Right, X, but potentially also some M and L lineages,
Originally posted by xyyman:
Point taken.
Statistical significance is correct. 7% in Europeans vs 91 % in Africa!! Tells a story. Hg-X may account for the majority of the 16233T in Europe. X1 has African origin source cited on ESR. It has been cited as Paleolithic vs X2 being post-LGM.
Hg-W?? Need to do research.
quote:Do you prefer the happenstance CRS and rCRS over Behar's actual rooted RSRS?
Originally posted by beyoku:
They are trying to change the default reference sequence to an L0 haplogroup. There is an article per called something like ' a cornucopian reassessment of... Mtdna... Human' blah blah blah.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Did not see image with previous device. These smart devices are finicky.
Anyways. I see the book image now. Looks like Sage and Sweetness are on it.
I used mtHAP and got N for the first...
----
Markers found (shown as differences to rCRS):
HVR2:
CR:
HVR1: 16223T ***16331C***
Best mtDNA Haplogroup Matches:
1) N
Defining Markers for haplogroup N:
HVR2: 73G 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 2706G 4769G 7028T 8860G 11719A 12705T 14766T 15326G
HVR1: 16223T
quote:[/qb]
Originally posted by beyoku:
@ XYY - You were speaking on Ancient DNA.
Posted is non Run of the mill Ancient DNA from Egypt. This public but not so widespread. THe other forum did not know what to do with these numbers.
quote:Most probable. I doubt they point to
Originally posted by xyyman:
16233T along with 16311C implies SSA in Kellis 2. That is the story.
quote:The breakdown of this 7% 16223T figure in Europe
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Right, X, but potentially also some M and L lineages,
Originally posted by xyyman:
Hg-X may account for the majority of the 16233T in Europe. X1 has African origin source cited on ESR. It has been cited as Paleolithic vs X2 being post-LGM.
as well as oriental N lineages which aren't native
to Europe. If this 7% 16223T figure in Europeans
includes those lineages, you get a skewed impression
of native European levels of 16223T, as you'd be
dealing with partly Asian/African 16223T diversity.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Let's not go backwards, shall we?
303/307 SE Africans are 16223T positive, whereas
129/1710 Europeans are 16223T positive. Almost all
indigenous SSA lineages vs 0.075 Europeans, assuming
these figures are representative on both sides.
^From that paper I referenced earlier. [/QB]
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
They are trying to change the default reference sequence to an L0 haplogroup. There is an article per called something like ' a cornucopian reassessment of... Mtdna... Human' blah blah blah.
quote:This is the big problem that confronts us. If we look at the mutations of most genes you usually find one of the Pan-African genes: 16223,16311, 16189 etc.
Originally posted by xyyman:
?? Lost? Follow the conversation. You are the expert(sic).
The debate is if 16233T is enough to project SSA(as it applies to Kellis 2) and not about changing the Reference Standard.
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
They are trying to change the default reference sequence to an L0 haplogroup. There is an article per called something like ' a cornucopian reassessment of... Mtdna... Human' blah blah blah.
quote:- From The Oxford Encyclopedia of African Thought, Volume 1 (2010)
As a consequence the many invasions of ancient Egypt, the population has changed over the years. There were Hyksos (Heka Khasut) from Asia, who melted into the Delta Region around 1500 B.C.E., and then a series of invasions by the Assyrians, Persians and Greeks. With the arrival of large groups of Arabians in the seventh century C.E., the racial character of Egypt began to change.
The resultant mixtures of Africans, Arabs, Greeks and Persians were to be jointed with Turks, Russians, Albanians, British, and French to create a different population that there had been during the ancient times.
One cannot say that today's Egypt is the same as the Egypt of antiquity anymore than one can say that today's North America is the same as it was 5000 years ago.
quote:- From A Brief History of Egypt by Jr. Goldschmidt Arthur (2007)
With the passage of time, each wave of new immigrants has assimilated into the local mix of peoples , making modern Egypt a combination of Libyans, Nubians, Syrians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, Arabs, Turks, Circassians, Greeks, Italians, and Armenians, along with the descendants of the people of ancient Egypt.
quote:from Ethnicity (Riggs, 2012)
Immigrations during the late periods:
- In the Late Period , internationalism, migration, and trade are especially well documented, and immigration from Thrace and the Greek cities of Anatolia was facilitated by the establishment of Naukratis (attributed to the reign of Psammetichus I) and the use of Greek mercenaries, first against Nubia (Psammetichus II) and later against Persian rule.
- The descendants of Greek immigrants took Egyptian names and operated within Egyptian cultural practices[...]
Period of mass immigration:
- Alexander the Great’s conquest of Egypt, in 332 BCE, precipitated a period of mass immigration .
- Peaking in the third century BCE, immigration from the Mediterranean, the Black Sea coast, Asia Minor, and the Near East may have numbered into the hundreds of thousands and included foreign slaves and prisoners of war as well as economic migrants and military veterans.
- In Greek and Demotic sources, almost 150 different ethnic labels attest to the scale and geographic range of immigration and ethnic-group settlement (La’da 2003: 158 - 159)
- Greek was “the language of upward social mobility” (p. 105); the Egyptian language, as well as other cultural forms, changed both in relation to it and depending on the circumstances and interests of individuals and of social groups.
quote:from A Companion to Ancient History Edited by Andrew Erskine (2009)
The Late Period is often singled out as the time when mass immigration into Egypt altered the character of the country
quote:from A History of Egypt: From Earliest Times to the Present by Jason Thompson (2009)
The Muslim conquerors did not attempt a mass conversion of Christianity to Islam, if only because that would have reduced the taxes non-Muslims were compelled to pay, but a number of other factors were at work. Arab men could marry Christian women and their children would become Muslim. Large-scale Arab immigration into Egypt began during the eighth century.
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So, the data show no positive proof of the presence of Europeans(Romans) interred at Kellis 2. End…….. of Story
But there is definite SSA presence..
quote:.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
16233T along with 16311C implies SSA in Kellis 2. That is the story.
Most probable. I doubt they point to
M4 [India]
M65 [Arabia (Abu Amero)]
W5a1a1 [German]
I1 [Italy, Denmark]
considering the historical situation.
BTW "Roman" Dakleh no doubt was not
colonized by Italian Romans. A Roman
citizen could be of any nationality.
This far south of the Med My money's
on both the mothers and the fathers
being native Africans but really I
don't know. This late in time, 300 CE,
others could've migrated there though
I can't imagine what would draw them
there.
I take it you've looked at non-genetic
info on Roman ruled Xian era Dakleh?
Don't know if this is helpful or not.
http://artsonline.monash.edu.au/archaeology/excavations-in-dakhleh-oasis-egypt/
ROMAN LADY ASLEEP ON A COUCH (Kargha or Kellis)
Of the 158 juveniles excavated from the Kellis 2 cemetery, Burial 519 is the only one showing signs of repeated non accidental trauma, suggesting child abuse wasn't something that occurred throughout the community. The uniqueness of the case supports the general belief that children were a valued part of ancient Egyptian society.
By contrast, though Romans loved their kids immensely, they believed children were born soft and weak, so it was the parents' duty to mold them into adults. They often engaged in such practices as corporal punishment, immobilizing newborn infants on wooden planks to ensure proper growth and routinely bathing the young in cold water as to not soften them with the feel of warm water.
"We know that the ancient Egyptians really revered children," Wheeler said. "But we don't know how much Roman ideas filtered into Egyptian society," she added, suggesting that the unique child abuse case may have been the result of Roman influence.
. That said. Let me re-read the underscore.quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Can't wish away the statistical
reality of 16223T's association with mtDNA L by
posting uninspired counter-example exceptions
which are mostly native to Far East Asia, Siberia,
the Americas, South Asia and Australian Aboriginals.
quote:what is the extent of non-Egyptian Africans coming into Egypt after the Muslims?
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
[qb] Those undercover racists always come with the same trickery, so it becomes easy to counter them.
CHANGE IN THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF MODERN EGYPT:
We all know in terms of ethnic composition, modern Egypt, is much different from Ancient Egypt.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Google is a very useful tool for some folks--not
to make use of the opportunity it offers to research
something beforehand, but to create the false
impression that they're well-read enough to speak
on matters which they're just now familiarizing
themselves with as they go along. They then go to
active threads to adamantly swear that they know
their stuff, not realizing that they're broadcasting
to those in the know that they couldn't be more
wet behind the ears--like the hapless data protection
manager who clumsily spills classified information
via intercom, not realizing that everyone elsewhere
in the building is listening in.
Then, when they finally realize how out of touch
and irrelevant their posts have been, they start
to parasite off of others' research notes and
ideas and silently distance themselves from their
earlier sloppy patchwork case against 16223T being
statistically suggestive of L when it reaches >40%
in African aDNA. Of course, during their silent
concessions, they act like their newly acquired
views by way of leeching are completely in line
with the ones they've plundered from google during
their google guru moment.
My views: same since my first post in this thread.
Their views: updated with new concessions every
time others make a post, but somehow they were
still right all along, and the people they leeched
from are wrong.
When relying on Google to supply you with what you
already should have known before you antagonized
rock-solid facts, goes wrong. SMH. Some people
think they're too slick to do research beforehand
or even to read the sources others post in threads.
Everyone who has commented on that Parr screenshot
so far was willing to do some basic research to
confirm or invalidate Parr's tacit association of
>40% 223T with L types, but I guess some self-
appointed gurus think they're above that and think
they just can dismiss things out of hand because
it's their opportunity to sound knowledgeable by
denying that which they don't know a shred about.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Can't wish away the statistical
reality of 16223T's association with mtDNA L by
posting uninspired counter-example exceptions
which are mostly native to Far East Asia, Siberia,
the Americas, South Asia and Australian Aboriginals.
quote:Or since the dynastic era altogether you could have asked. That's a good question. I don't know the exact extent of course, but it's also something that changed the ethnic composition of modern Egypt to some degree (as many other regions in Africa and the world like Mesopotamia, Punt, West Africa, etc). What is true for Egypt is true for many places around the world. Of course modern Egyptians should be proud of their extensive admixture (Greeks, Romans, Persians, Turks, African, Jewish, British, Arab,etc, all great people) but here we're concerned about the ethnic composition of Ancient Egyptians not modern people.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:what is the extent of non-Egyptian Africans coming into Egypt after the Muslims?
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
[qb] Those undercover racists always come with the same trickery, so it becomes easy to counter them.
CHANGE IN THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF MODERN EGYPT:
We all know in terms of ethnic composition, modern Egypt, is much different from Ancient Egypt.
quote:From Keita and Boyce in 'Egypt in Africa'.
The information from the living Egyptian population may not be as useful because historical records indicate substantial immigration into Egypt over the last several millennia, and it seems to have been far greater from the Near East and Europe than from areas far south of Egypt.
quote:Your iterations are getting funny again. Again, as was asked hunderends of times already, over the many years.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Amun Ra some people have a different motive than you think they have. They don't want North Africans to be significantly non-African because they feel if that is established it could be used to suggest the Egyptians were similarly admixted.
Egypt is coastal and is just as North as the rest of Northern Africa. Furthermore the first entry point of the non-Africans into Africa is into Egypt.
So the idea is if you minimize the foreigness of Northern Africa (including Egypt) as a whole, you also protect the ancient Egyptians from seeming to have a possible significant non-African admixture
and the Egyptians are the direct neigbors of the Levant, not the Moroccans or Libyans
Pharoah Seti I,
father of Ramesses II
quote:--Mae Goder-Goldberger
There is clear evidence of lithic technological variability in Middle Paleolithic (MP) assemblages along the Nile valley and in adjacent desert areas. One of the identified variants is the Khormusan, the type-site of which, Site 1017, is located north of the Nile's Second Cataract. The industry has two distinctive characteristics that set it apart from other MP industries within its vicinity. One is the use of a wide variety of raw materials; the second is an apparent correlation between raw material and technology used, suggesting a cultural aspect to raw material management. Stratigraphically, site 1017 is situated within the Dibeira-Jer formation which represents an aggradation stage of the Nile and contains sediments originating from the Ethiopian Highlands. While it has previously been suggested that the site dates to sometime before 42.5 ka, the Dibeira-Jer formation can plausibly be correlated with Nile alluvial sediments in northern Sudan recently dated to 83 ± 24 ka (MIS 5a). This stage coincides with the 81 ka age of sapropel S3, indicating higher Nile flow and stronger monsoon rainfall at these times.
Other sites which reflect similar raw material variability and technological traditions are the BNS and KHS sites in the Omo Kibish Formation (Ethiopia) dated to ∼100 ka and ∼190 ka respectively. Based on a lithic comparative study conducted, it is suggested that site 1017 can be seen as representing behavioral patterns which are indicative of East African Middle Stone Age (MSA) technology, adding support to the hypothesis that the Nile Valley was an important dispersal route used by modern humans prior to the long cooling and dry trend beginning with the onset of MIS 4. Techo-typological comparison of the assemblages from the Khormusan sites with other Middle Paleolithic sites from Nubia and East Africa is used to assess the possibility of tracing the dispersal of technological traits across the landscape and through time.
quote:Well i am the one that actually purchased the book, and uploaded the scan. What I didnt want to do is give a full break down of my analysis because I wanted to see what the forum could do with the information. This same image was posted in another forum. They didnt know where to start so I posted it here seeing that the OP subject had to do with North African mtdna. XYYMAN you were being the expert so I challenged your expertise.
Originally posted by xyyman:
Maybe you missed the point of the topic. Swenet and I have our differences but what he has clearly shown is that the people interred at Kellis 2 are indigenous Africans(your!!!! SSA). Unlike some others who have switched sides. Hemade it clear from the OP. That these are indigenous Africans.
TPs point showed that it is very unlikely these are Romans because of the deep location in the Sahara.
We need to keep perspective here.
Sage started off questioning the ownership of 16223T by Africans.
I am not sure where Beyoku stand, maybe just pouting on th side lines. Who knows? With that brotha.
But Swenet put forward a logical and convincing case.
Conclusion??? It is clear.
quote:http://www.mitosearch.org/
Correct, I wish I had all the information. He notes burials 2 an 6 look the same but are "DIFFERENT outside the HV1 range shown in the table." Maybe there is the full data floating around. Also, I have not used mitosearch before so I dont know how much sampling bias accounts to the results. What I DO see is possible African presence (mostly L3 and L3e1) in about half of the samples. The rest could be a combination of H, HV, V, T, T2, U6a, W, I, M, and an assortment of uncharacterized L lineages. Knowing how extensive the database is for Africans could clear things up. A bit of research leads me to believe this site contains personal results and not published ones. I will check to see if there is a better site.
quote:In ref to Hpai 3592 - I refer to an old article here:
The thing is HpaI +3592 only describes SOME African lineages, in fact it also describes some Eurasian markers too, this is a detail many people dont even point out, they likely dont know. So while they say it is more African today than it was before they are speaking on the increased frequency of L0, L1 and L2.....not African lineages in their totality. I have seen the raw data from the Dakleh Oasis remains and many of the lineages are L3 in fact they fit into L3e.
quote:We can all use mito search and pull up the speculative % of L lineages. A reduction of Hpai 3592 negative L lineages from the ancient remains and an increase of Hpai 3592 positive lineages in the contemporary population is NOT strictly indicative of MORE sub Saharan Gene flow.
However, significant differences were found between these populations. Based on an increased frequency of HpaI 3592 (+) haplotypes in the contemporary Dakhlehian population, the authors suggested that, since Roman times, gene flow from the Sub-Saharan region has affected gene frequencies of individuals from the oasis Source
quote:From Keita and Boyce in 'Egypt in Africa'.
The information from the living Egyptian population may not be as useful because historical records indicate substantial immigration into Egypt over the last several millennia, and it seems to have been far greater from the Near East and Europe than from areas far south of Egypt.
quote:^Amun Ra the Anticlimax is still butt hurt over the
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
Bottom line , we can't use modern egypt or cemetery from the Roman era
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Again you're too dumb for your own good, and you ignore what DNA Tribes say about what implications their analysis has. More than one year after the fact, you're still lying to yourself and telling yourself that Match Likelihood scores are admixture percentages. Meanwhile, in the real world (where you have yet to return to), DNA markers that actually DO indicate admixture and/or descent, cluster Afrasan speakers in Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia and even Yemen closely:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
As you probably have noted, DNA Tribes results of the 18th dynasty and 20th dynasty mummies aDNA mainly matches Great Lakes Africans, Southern Africans, Tropical West Africans and Sahelians.
quote:--Boattini et al 2013
One
cluster is widespread in Ethiopia, where it is associated
with different AA-speaking populations, and shows
shared ancestry with Semitic-speaking groups from
Yemen and Egypt and AA-Chadic-speaking groups
from Central Africa. Two clusters included populations
from Southern Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania. Despite
high and recent gene-flow (Bantu, Nilo-Saharan pastoralists),
one of them is associated with a more ancient
AA-Cushitic stratum.
quote:Even Keita and Boyce told us, we can't use modern Egyptian due to I quote: substantial immigration into Egypt over the last several millennia.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I confronted him with the fact that the full
modern Egyptian
quote:
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
You fucking retarded or what? Stupid racist.
quote:--Salas et al 2002
PC2 (11% of the genetic variance), by contrast, clusters
southeastern Africans with West Africans and clusters
the Mbuti with East Africans. Again, North Africans
tend to cluster with West Africans, suggesting that the
sub-Saharan component of North Africans originates
primarily from West rather than East Africa (as expected,
on geographical grounds). Unlike other North
Africans, Egyptians are closer to East than to West Africans.
quote:--Salas et al 2002
Principal component (PC) analysis was performed
on the basis of the haplogroup composition
(relative frequencies) in the various population
samples (considering L-haplogroups plus U6 and
M1).
(...)
PC2 (11% of the genetic variance), by contrast,
clusters southeastern Africans with West Africans
and clusters the Mbuti with East Africans. Again,
North Africans tend to cluster with West Africans,
suggesting that the sub-Saharan component of
North Africans originates primarily from West
rather than East Africa (as expected, on geographical
grounds). Unlike other North Africans, Egyptians
are closer to East than to West Africans.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
You fucking retarded or what? Stupid racist.
Don't get angry now, troll. Either refute what I'm
saying or go pout somewhere in the corner, like the
little nutjob that you are. Fact is, when one
removes all the Eurasian lineages modern Egyptians
have, you end up with is most likely to have been
their most ancient African component. This most
ancient component, i.e. their L types, clusters
away from West and Central Africans, and places
them squarely in the L cluster carried by northeast
African groups.
quote:--Salas et al 2002
PC2 (11% of the genetic variance), by contrast, clusters
southeastern Africans with West Africans and clusters
the Mbuti with East Africans. Again, North Africans
tend to cluster with West Africans, suggesting that the
sub-Saharan component of North Africans originates
primarily from West rather than East Africa (as expected,
on geographical grounds). Unlike other North
Africans, Egyptians are closer to East than to West Africans.
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
There is no evidence that all Negro-Egyptian languages originated in East or Northeast Africa,
quote:
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Mainstream linguists place the origin of all the main African languages (NS, NG, C,Chadic and Khoisan too for that matter) in Eastern Africa....
According to Obenga, the Semitic language family are unrelated to the Negro-Egyptian language family....
The only relationship of AEians and Semitic languages was done through borrowing (since AEians conquered those lands (as a form of preventive strike)) in dynastic time. ...
AEians were mostly indigenous black Africans, not people from West Asia or Europe. They are the extension of the Naqada culture from the south, itself extension of the Badarian, Tasian and wavy-line pottery culture (green Sahara) sometimes called the saharan-sudanese neolithic/culture. Before that, those African people all have their common origin postdating the OOA migrations of non-African in Eastern Africa maybe around Sudan/Ethiopia/Nubia. For example, the E-P2 haplogroups, carried by the majority of African people now along with the A and B haplogroups, has its origin somewhere in Eastern Africa maybe around Sudan....
the only relationship between Negro-Egyptian (including descendant languages like AEians and modern African languages) and Semitic languages was done through borrowings . The same way there's some European words in modern African languages. (and vice versa to a lower degree, this is common between any languages)
We know AEians conquered semitic land setting the stage for interaction of people from different language family. This is a period where some AEians borrowings can be seen in Semitic language.
Eventually muslim conquest/expansion in Africa expanded Semitic languages in Africa at the same time, setting the stage for borrowing in the other direction from Semitic languages(mainly Arabic) toward African languages. (of course there was also arabisation/language switch for those who don't speak their ancestral language anymore).
. We can clearly see before 8500BC the clustering of populations around the Sudanese/Nubian area. Populations who then expanded into the Sahara (possibly a bit previously too) following rains, animals and flora at the start of the wet Saharan period. With many of those populations moving to the Nile valley during the (re)desertification of the Sahara. Laying the foundation for the Ancient Egyptian state.
Both Obenga with his Negro-Egyptian phylum and mainstream linguists like Ehret place the common origin of all the African languages families (Cushitic, Chadic, NK, NS, AE) somewhere in Eastern Africa (Sudan, Ethiopia, Southern Egypt, etc). Obenga was more precise by proposing Sudan. They all place the timeframe before 10 000BC for the expansion of those language "dialects" (who would later become language families of their own).....
Yes the Green Sahara was very important in the history of Africa. For example, pottery seem to have been invented in Mali then later spread to central and eventually the Egyptian Western desert and the Nile valley. But before the Sahara was green, toward the end of the Pleistocene, the Sahara was still a desert, so it can't be where it's future inhabitants during the green sahara period came from. They came from elsewhere, that is somewhere in Eastern Africa (Sudan, Ethiopia, etc), to eventually populate the Sahara during its wet phase. To eventually leave it again and settle along the Nile, among other locations, during the re-desertification....
Obenga's Negro-Egyptian language is the mother language of almost all modern African languages, it was spoken maybe around Sudan beyond 10 000BC. Maybe it was even spoken as far as 15 000BC. So much before the Ancient Egyptian state even existed. Also before Naqada, Badarian, Tasian, Sahelian-Sudanese neolithic/wavy line pottery culture even existed. The Negro-Egyptian language was spoken before 10 000BC. So before all those culture.....
6000 years later from 10000BC at around 4000BC the Negro-Egyptian language didn't exist anymore and was already diversified into the various language family we know today (Cus,Chad,NK,NS,AE). So after many different tribes migrated toward the Nile Valley in search of greener pasture during the dessication of the Sahara. They possibly still needed a lingua franca to communicate to each other and the Ancient Egyptian language was choosen for that task after the unification of Egypt by Narmer (possibly the language of Narmer's people).
quote:--Frigi et al., 2010
Our results demonstrate an ancient local evolution in Tunisia of some African haplogroups (L2a, L3*, and L3b).
[...]
Indeed, taking into account the Tunisian sequences belonging to haplogroup L2a from Sejnane, Zriba, Kesra, Matmata, Sned, and Chenini-Douiret, we obtain a divergence age of about 28,000 ± 8,900 years, which is the same age calculated for this haplogroup including all the described sequences. However, we noticed two pairs of related haplotypes in the Kesra population, where we detected a local evolution of the L2a cluster, suggesting that this haplogroup could have been introduced earlier in Kesra.
quote:Whole-mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages
Evolutionary history of mtDNA haplogroup structure in African populations inferred from mtDNA d-loop and RFLP analysis.
(A) Relationships among different mtDNA haplogroup lineages inferred from mtDNA d-loop sequences and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies (Kivisild, Metspalu, et al. 2006). Dashed lines indicate previously unresolved relationships.
(B) Relative frequencies of haplogroups L0, L1, L5, L2, L3, M, and N in different regions of Africa from mtDNA d-loop and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies.
(C) Relative frequencies of haplogroups L0, L1, and L5 subhaplogroups (excluding L2 and L3) in different regions of Africa from mtDNA d-loop and mtDNA coding region SNPs from previous studies. Haplogroup frequencies from previously published studies include East Africans (Ethiopia [Rosa et al. 2004], Kenya and Sudan [Watson et al. 1997; Rosa et al. 2004]), Mozambique (Pereira et al. 2001; Salas et al. 2002), Hadza (Vigilant et al. 1991), and Sukuma (Knight et al. 2003); South Africans (Botswana !Kung [Vigilant et al. 1991]); Central Africans (Mbenzele Pygmies [Destro-Bisol et al. 2004], Biaka Pygmies [Vigilant et al. 1991], and Mbuti Pygmies [Vigilant et al. 1991]); West Africans (Niger, Nigeria [Vigilant et al. 1991; Watson et al. 1997]; and Guinea [Rosa et al. 2004]). L1*, L2*, and L3* from previous studies indicate samples that were not further subdivided into subhaplogroups.
quote:Like the modern berber language for example.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
...same way there's some European words in modern African languages. (and vice versa to a lower degree, this is common between...
quote:be careful the quote is Amun-Ra The Ultimate
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Like the modern berber language for example.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
...same way there's some European words in modern African languages. (and vice versa to a lower degree, this is common between...
quote:and your comment, exactly what you mean in reply to that Amun Ra quote is unclear
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate
the only relationship between Negro-Egyptian (including descendant languages like AEians and modern African languages) and Semitic languages was done through borrowings . The same way there's some European words in modern African languages. (and vice versa to a lower degree, this is common between any languages)
quote:I leave the east vs west thing to the undercover racist.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I never used modern Egyptians as a whole, troll. I
know the facts are hard to swallow, but I used the
section of their mtDNAs which is exclusively African
(i.e. their L types). This section was determined
to be ancient in several analyses. Face the facts,
boy:
quote:--Salas et al 2002
Principal component (PC) analysis was performed
on the basis of the haplogroup composition
(relative frequencies) in the various population
samples (considering L-haplogroups plus U6 and
M1).
(...)
PC2 (11% of the genetic variance), by contrast,
clusters southeastern Africans with West Africans
and clusters the Mbuti with East Africans. Again,
North Africans tend to cluster with West Africans,
suggesting that the sub-Saharan component of
North Africans originates primarily from West
rather than East Africa (as expected, on geographical
grounds). Unlike other North Africans, Egyptians
are closer to East than to West Africans.
quote:Face the facts, pinhead. Egypt (Eg) clustering
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
I leave the east vs west thing to the undercover racist.
quote:Which Keita, obtuse douchebag? You mean the same
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
Even helped by Keita and Boyce.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
quote:--Keita
The peoples of the Egyptian and northern Sudanese Nile valley, and
supra-Saharan Africa now speak Arabic in the main but, as noted, this
largely represents language shift. Ancient Egyptian is Afroasiatic, and current
inhabitants of the Nile valley should be understood as being in the
main, although not wholly, descendants of the pre-neolithic regional
inhabitants, although this apparently varies by geography as indicated by
the frequency of Near Eastern haplotypes/lineages (Table 1, Lucotte and
Mercier 2003a, Manni et al. 2002, Cruciani 2002).
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Correction. Per DNATribes database (circa recent ie not Salas 2002). Based upon autosomal markers.
AEians cluster
FIRST – South Africans
Second – Great Lakes
Third – West Africans.
??- Ethiopians etc
mtDNA hg L is an omnipresent African haplogroup, so…..
quote:To those who haven’t read this June2014 paper. She is proposing that MODERN populations of the Levant are NOT the Neolithic farmers.
Originally posted by xyyman:
Anyone seen the new Eva Fernandez paper?
quote:See the paper what both PCs are correlated with.
Originally posted by xyyman:
MtDNA Hg-L(Salas2002?) is ubiquitous Africa. (speaking from memory) but what is Salas's justification to assign hg-L to Ethiopia over West Africans....or Great lakes?
Resolution?
quote:Of course they are. What is your point? You better
Are the Ethiopians closer to the AEians per hg-L than West Africans?
If they are not then STFU....PLEAAASEE!
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
one more time....
where is the genetic proof that Ethiopians are closer genetically to AEians than West Africans, South Africans and GL?
No smoke and mirrors.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
In Fox et al only 25% of the mtDNAs were positive
for Hpal 3,592. This is a typical signature of
East African populations, not western African
ones, due to their tendency to possess excesses
of Hpal 3,592 negative L types. Moreover, the
Mesolithic and post-Mesolithic dispersals out of
Egypt to West Asia and Europe are associated with
U6, M1, L3h, L3x, L3f, L0a, etc, and Wet Sahara
lineages like L2a1, L1b1a, L3e, L3b and L3d. Taken
together, in concert, they are no different
from the modern day eastern African signatures.
They differ from the West African L1c, L1b, L2a1,
L2c, L3e, L3b and L3d heavy populations.
The Y chromosomes that Egypt passed on to the
circum-Mediterranean are mostly all eastern African
as well. You can't get these signatures leaving
Egypt if they weren't in Egypt. Then there is the
fact that there is no reason why foreign immigration
to dynastic Egypt would selectively wipe out all
more stereotypical West African L type signatures
spare the eastern African lineages. What would
have happened to them? Would the same magical
process have selectively wiped out all West
African signatures in Egypt's sister populations,
i.e. Nubians? How exactly would that work? SMH.
Only on Egyptsearch you find yourself arguing the
obvious.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
If it's BS then you should have no trouble to refute
it, no? But we all know what your real motive is for
avoiding that post like the plague! Someone tell
gramps to get it over with and explain the closeness
of modern Egyptian L types to eastern African L types
as due to foreign mtDNA types selectively affecting
West African mtDNAs. So, how did the AE become
closer to South Africans than to Nubians? Lol. You
people, man. Ya'll something else.
quote:Not only did you fail horribly to post an on-topic
Originally posted by Xxyman:
AEians are closer to West Africans than Ethiopians. SMH
quote:
OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a
MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b
quote:--Dujougon et al 2009
For example, L1b and L3e5 subclades,
mainly detected in Western and Central African
populations, are more frequent in the Maghreb (7%
to 10% and 3% to 17%) than in Siwa (1%). Conversely,
the L3e1 South-East African clade and the L0a1,
L3i2, L4* and L4b2 East-African lineages are only
observed in the Egyptian Berbers. The East-African
M1 clade has a frequency four times higher in Siwa
(16%) than in Morocco (from 2.6% to 4.2%).
quote:--Hirbo et al 2011
Specifically, the mtDNA L5 haplotype
was observed at low frequency in one of the
putative modern descendant populations of the
Pharaonic era, namely the Gurna of the Nile
valley (Appendix 6b) [369]. Moreover, the
mtDNA L5 haplotype was also found among
populations from northern Egypt at low frequency
(Appendix 6b) [369]. MtDNA haplotype L3h was
observed in Egyptian populations from northern
Egypt at low frequency [305], but was not
observed among the Gurna populations [369].
quote:--Hirbo et al 2011
The inferred dates of demographic
expansion associated with the mtDNA L3f
lineage are 13-15 kya and 6-8 kya (Table
3.6.1, Appendix 14). These two periods possibly
correspond to the expansion of Afroasiatic
speakers [101] from the Nile Valley/northern
fringe of the Ethiopian highlands 14 kya, and
initial dispersal of pastoralist populations in
North Africa 8 kya [380], respectively.
quote:
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
What about these actual ancient Egyptian mtDNA results which everyone here has already seen? Are their L-haplogroups closer to those of West/Central Africans or Horners?
quote:
OK A-M13 L3f
Ok A-M13 L0a1
OK B-M150 L3d
OK E-M2 L3e5
OK E-M2 L2a1
OK E-M123 L5a1
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1
OK E-M41 L1b1a
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b
OK J-M267 L3i
OK R-M173 L2
OK T-M184 L0a
MK A-M13 L3x
MK E-M75 L2a1
MK E-M78 L3e5
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a
MK E-V6 L3
MK B-M112 L0b
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
When did DNA Tribes isolate the African component
in Horners to test it against the Amarna family, in
order for you to fabricate that Salas' L type analysis
has been undermined by DNA Tribes?
Xxyman is holding out better than expected, you
know, being senile and all. He knows by now to steer
clear and prevent taking that L, with his non-
existent case.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
When did DNA Tribes isolate the African component
in Horners to test it against the Amarna family, in
order for you to fabricate that Salas' L type analysis
has been undermined by DNA Tribes?
Xxyman is holding out better than expected, you
know, being senile and all. He knows by now to
steer clear and prevent taking that L, with his
glaring lack of a coherent answers to the
aforementioned outstanding matters.
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
Sage started off questioning the ownership of 16223T by Africans.
quote:.
Originally posted by beyoku:
Well i am the one that actually purchased the book, and uploaded the scan. What I didnt want to do is give a full break down of my analysis because I wanted to see what the forum could do with the information. This same image was posted in another forum. They didnt know where to start so I posted it here seeing that the OP subject had to do with North African mtdna. XYYMAN you were being the expert so I challenged your expertise.
This is what I had to say regarding it in January:
quote:http://www.mitosearch.org/
Correct, I wish I had all the information. He notes burials 2 an 6 look the same but are "DIFFERENT outside the HV1 range shown in the table." Maybe there is the full data floating around. Also, I have not used mitosearch before so I dont know how much sampling bias accounts to the results. What I DO see is possible African presence (mostly L3 and L3e1) in about half of the samples. The rest could be a combination of H, HV, V, T, T2, U6a, W, I, M, and an assortment of uncharacterized L lineages. Knowing how extensive the database is for Africans could clear things up. A bit of research leads me to believe this site contains personal results and not published ones. I will check to see if there is a better site.
See also:
http://mtmanager.yonsei.ac.kr/search_sample.php
I had assumed someone would post these links.
This is something I wrote in April.
quote:In ref to Hpai 3592 - I refer to an old article here:
The thing is HpaI +3592 only describes SOME African lineages, in fact it also describes some Eurasian markers too, this is a detail many people dont even point out, they likely dont know. So while they say it is more African today than it was before they are speaking on the increased frequency of L0, L1 and L2.....not African lineages in their totality. I have seen the raw data from the Dakleh Oasis remains and many of the lineages are L3 in fact they fit into L3e.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/428-mtDNA-analysis-in-ancient-Nubians-supports-the-existence-of-gene-flow-between
And this underlies the significance of the Euroclowns and what they do. This is why I posted this other quote:
quote:We can all use mito search and pull up the speculative % of L lineages. A reduction of Hpai 3592 negative L lineages from the ancient remains and an increase of Hpai 3592 positive lineages in the contemporary population is NOT strictly indicative of MORE sub Saharan Gene flow.
However, significant differences were found between these populations. Based on an increased frequency of HpaI 3592 (+) haplotypes in the contemporary Dakhlehian population, the authors suggested that, since Roman times, gene flow from the Sub-Saharan region has affected gene frequencies of individuals from the oasis Source
IMO if "WE" go through the trouble to buy the books and do the research I dont want to give out the results of my quality time to Euro-clowns. Sometimes I am silent because I dont want the results of may hard research being used to argue Ancient Egyptian biological affinity.....with some Trash on some ABC forum about motorcycles or videogames. Especially when both parties arguing really dont have a grasp of what they are arguing nor a genuine interest in the subject.
So who is going to contact PARR and see if they can get the full source? Who is going to post results of mitosearch? XXY...the expert, had a nice analysis noting many of the lineages were African yet came to the conclusion they were mtdna N........and not one L in the pile?
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
I am one of the few that contends modern Berbers/Maghrebians are indigenous Africans….I believe Sage is of that view now.
quote:As I've said two thread pages ago, there are no
Originally posted by Swenet:
In Africa, Europe and the Levant, 16223T is bound
to be indicative of African haplogroups. The latter
areas are almost completely fixed in L, N and M1
haplogroups. 16223T disappears from N phylogeny
after N and satellite hgs. It never quite leaves M
phylogeny, but in terms of probabilities, that's
generally irrelevant for 16223T positive haplotypes
in Africa, Europe and the Levant for reasons already
mentioned.
quote:
The breakdown of this 7% 16223T figure in Europe
is actually:
2% I
1% W
2% X
2% African and Asian lineages
quote:Mitchondrial DNA diversity of Maurusian,
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Since my initial entry to this
forum back in November 2004
my position on N Africans is they
are indigenees with a continuous
trickle of maternal South European
gene flow to N Africa's Mediterranean
coasts since at least the Chalcolithic.
See Pre700CE Northern Africans from historic nongenetic sources
and Writing the facts about Libya
and Four races of Ham for example.
I have seen nothing convincing of
anything other than those facts,
only now I see female mitigated
gene flow securely dates to
early Holocene times.
Pre-Islamic gene flow to N Africa
from the east is very minor and
attributed to Hebrew-Canaanitic
speaking Levantines, i.e., Canaanites,
"Phoenicians," Hebrews (Edom, Moab?,
Ammon?, Israel, Judah).
quote:For the record, I agree that if you remove the Eurasian components and isolate the African components of Horners and modern Egyptians, they would match Ancient Egyptians aDNA much closer.
Originally posted by Swenet:
When did DNA Tribes isolate the African component
in Horners to test it against the Amarna family,
quote:I wonder when you're going to show "incoming" industries relating to this hype.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Mitchondrial DNA diversity of Maurusian,
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Since my initial entry to this
forum back in November 2004
my position on N Africans is they
are indigenees with a continuous
trickle of maternal South European
gene flow to N Africa's Mediterranean
coasts since at least the Chalcolithic.
See Pre700CE Northern Africans from historic nongenetic sources
and Writing the facts about Libya
and Four races of Ham for example.
I have seen nothing convincing of
anything other than those facts,
only now I see female mitigated
gene flow securely dates to
early Holocene times.
Pre-Islamic gene flow to N Africa
from the east is very minor and
attributed to Hebrew-Canaanitic
speaking Levantines, i.e., Canaanites,
"Phoenicians," Hebrews (Edom, Moab?,
Ammon?, Israel, Judah).
Taforalt Morocco Population
Limb proportions Maurusian
Afalou ( Mechta-Afalou)
Trenton Holiday
Do you think that the H and JT haplogroups found in 12k North African Maurusians and their cold adapted limb ratios
could mean significant non-African gene flow from Eurasia to Africa for that particular population at that time?
quote:--Lawrence Barham
Frequently termed Mechta-Afalou or Mechtoid, these were a skeletally robust people and definitely African in origin, though attempts, such as those of Ferembach (1985), to establish similarities with much older and rarer Aterian skeletal remains are tenuous given the immense temporal separation between the two (Close and Wendorf 1990). At the opposite end of the chronological spectrum, dental morphology does suggest connections with later Africans, including those responsible for the Capsian Industry (Irish 2000) and early mid-Holocene human remains from the western half of the Sahara (Dutour 1989), something that points to the Maghreb as one of the regions from which people recolonised the desert (MacDonald 1998).
quote:--A. Bouzouggar, et al.
we suggest that there may have been a relationship, albeit a complex one, between climatic events and cave activity on the part of Iberomaurusian populations.
quote:--Fiona Marshall
Large-scale climate change forms the backdrop to the beginnings of food production in northeastern Africa (Kröpelin et al. 2008).[ Hunter-gatherer communities deserted most of the northern interior of the continent during the arid glacial maximum and took refuge along the North African coast, the Nile Valley, and the southern fringes of the Sahara (Barich and Garcea 2008; Garcea 2006; Kuper and Kröpelin 2006). During the subsequent Early Holocene African humid phase, from the mid-eleventh to the early ninth millennium cal BP, ceramic-using hunter-gatherers took advantage of more favorable savanna conditions to resettle much of northeastern Africa (Holl 2005; Kuper and Kröpelin 2006). Evidence of domestic animals first appeared in sites in the Western Desert of Egypt, the Khartoum region of the Nile, northern Niger, the Acacus Mountains of Libya, and Wadi Howar (Garcea 2004, 2006; Pöllath and Peters 2007; fig. 1).
quote:--Nick Brooks et al.
Evidence from throughout the Sahara indicates that the region experienced a cool, dry and windy climate during the last glacial period, followed by a wetter climate with the onset of the current interglacial, with humid conditions being fully established by around 10,000 years BP, when we see the first evidence of a reoccupation of parts of the central Sahara by hunter gathers, most likely originating from sub-Saharan Africa (Cremaschi and Di Lernia, 1998; Goudie, 1992; Phillipson, 1993; Ritchie, 1994; Roberts, 1998).
[...]
Conical tumuli, platform burials and a V-type monument represent structures similar to those found in other Saharan regions and associated with human burials, appearing in sixth millennium BP onwards in northeast Niger and southwest Libya (Sivilli, 2002). In the latter area a shift in emphasis from faunal to human burials, complete by the early fifth millennium BP, has been interpreted by Di Lernia and Manzi (2002) as being associated with a changes in social organisation that occurred at a time of increasing aridity. While further research is required in order to place the funerary monuments of Western Sahara in their chronological context, we can postulate a similar process as a hypothesis to be tested, based on the high density of burial sites recorded in the 2002 survey. Fig. 2: Megaliths associated with tumulus burial (to right of frame), north of Tifariti (Fig. 1). A monument consisting of sixty five stelae was also of great interest; precise alignments north and east, a division of the area covered into separate units, and a deliberate scattering of quartzite inside the structure, are suggestive of an astronomical function associated with funerary rituals. Stelae are also associated with a number of burial sites, again suggesting dual funerary and astronomical functions (Figure 2). Further similarities with other Saharan regions are evident in the rock art recorded in the study area, although local stylistic developments are also apparent. Carvings of wild fauna at the site of Sluguilla resemble the Tazina style found in Algeria, Libya and Morocco (Pichler and Rodrigue, 2003), although examples of elephant and rhinoceros in a naturalistic style reminiscent of engravings from the central Sahara believed to date from the early Holocene are also present.
quote:What is lacking and not being addressed here is that you still haven't shown incoming industries. And the explanation why the remains cluster with other African samples. Which correlates with migrations within Africa itself. All you show is a genetic correlation, without explanation. And that in itself is a huge problem.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Barham's non-primary research does not address mtDNA of Iberomaurusian in Morocco, so his commentary on Iberomaurusians is lacking.
Your theory, Trollkillah, is that haplogroup H is African you will not find supported in current research
___________________________________________
primary, recent analysis of Iberomaurusian physical morphology>
Modern Origins: A North African Perspective
edited by Jean-Jacques Hublin, Shannon P. McPherron
Late pleistocene hominids from Northwestern Africa
Harvati, Hublin
______^^^ bottom sentence:
"...Iberomaurusian is closely connected to the Upper Paleolithic European sample"
quote:
This mandible is the oldest human fossil uncovered from scientific excavations in Morocco. The discovery will help better define northern Africa's possible role in first populating southern Europe.
quote:--On the industrial attributions of the Aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb, Harold L. Dibble et al.
North Africa is quickly emerging as one of the more important regions yielding information on the origins of modern Homo sapiens. Associated with significant fossil hominin remains are two stone tool industries, the Aterian and Mousterian, which have been differentiated, respectively, primarily on the basis of the presence and absence of tanged, or stemmed, stone tools. Largely because of historical reasons, these two industries have been attributed to the western Eurasian Middle Paleolithic rather than the African Middle Stone Age. In this paper, drawing on our recent excavation of Contrebandiers Cave and other published data, we show that, aside from the presence or absence of tanged pieces, there are no other distinctions between these two industries in terms of either lithic attributes or chronology. Together, these results demonstrate that these two ‘industries’ are instead variants of the same entity.
Moreover, several additional characteristics of these assemblages, such as distinctive stone implements and the manufacture and use of bone tools and possible shell ornaments, suggest a closer affinity to other Late Pleistocene African Middle Stone Age industries rather than to the Middle Paleolithic of western Eurasia.
quote:--Frigi et al., 2010
Our results demonstrate an ancient local evolution in Tunisia of some African haplogroups (L2a, L3*, and L3b).
[...]
Indeed, taking into account the Tunisian sequences belonging to haplogroup L2a from Sejnane, Zriba, Kesra, Matmata, Sned, and Chenini-Douiret, we obtain a divergence age of about 28,000 ± 8,900 years, which is the same age calculated for this haplogroup including all the described sequences. However, we noticed two pairs of related haplotypes in the Kesra population, where we detected a local evolution of the L2a cluster, suggesting that this haplogroup could have been introduced earlier in Kesra.
quote:--Bengston, John D.(ed.), In Hot Pursuit of
"It is of interest that the M35 and M2 lineages are
united by a mutation - the PN2 transition. This PN2
defined clade originated in East Africa, where various
populations have a notable frequency of its underived
state. This would suggest that an ancient population
in East Africa, or more correctly its males, form the
basis of the ancestors of all African upper Paleolithic
populations - and their subsequent descendants in the
present day."
quote:And now this Hofmeyr?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Barham's non-primary research does not address mtDNA of Iberomaurusian in Morocco, so his commentary on Iberomaurusians is lacking.
Your theory, Trollkillah, is that haplogroup H is African you will not find supported in current research
___________________________________________
primary, recent analysis of Iberomaurusian physical morphology>
Modern Origins: A North African Perspective
edited by Jean-Jacques Hublin, Shannon P. McPherron
Late pleistocene hominids from Northwestern Africa
Harvati, Hublin
______^^^ bottom sentence:
"...Iberomaurusian is closely connected to the Upper Paleolithic European sample"
quote:http://m.sciencemag.org/content/315/5809/226
Abstract
The lack of Late Pleistocene human fossils from sub-Saharan Africa has limited paleontological testing of competing models of recent human evolution. We have dated a skull from Hofmeyr, South Africa, to 36.2 ± 3.3 thousand years ago through a combination of optically stimulated luminescence and uranium-series dating methods. The skull is morphologically modern overall but displays some archaic features. Its strongest morphometric affinities are with Upper Paleolithic (UP) Eurasians rather than recent, geographically proximate people. The Hofmeyr cranium is consistent with the hypothesis that UP Eurasians descended from a population that emigrated from sub-Saharan Africa in the Late Pleistocene.
quote:--J.-J. Hublin, C. Verna, S. Bailey, T. Smith, A. Olejniczak, F. Z. Sbihi-Alaoui, and M. Zouak (2012)
Abstract The Aterian fossil hominins represent one of the most abundant series of human remains associated with Middle Stone Age/Middle Paleolithic assemblages in Africa.
[...]
A complete mandible of Homo erectus was discovered at the Thomas I quarry in Casablanca by a French-Moroccan team co-led by Jean-Paul Raynal, CNRS senior researcher at the PACEA(1) aboratory (CNRS/Université Bordeaux 1/ Ministry of Culture and Communication). This mandible is the oldest human fossil uncovered from scientific excavations in Morocco. The discovery will help better define northern Africa's possible role in first populating southern Europe.
A Homo erectus half-jaw had already been found at the Thomas I quarry in 1969, but it was a chance discovery and therefore with no archeological context.
This is not the case for the fossil discovered May 15, 2008, whose characteristics are very similar to those of the half-jaw found in 1969. The morphology of these remains is different from the three mandibles found at the Tighenif site in Algeria that were used, in 1963, to define the North African variety of Homo erectus, known as Homo mauritanicus, dated to 700,000 B.C.
The mandible from the Thomas I quarry was found in a layer below one where the team has previously found four human teeth (three premolars and one incisor) from Homo erectus, one of which was dated to 500,000 B.C. The human remains were grouped with carved stone tools characteristic of the Acheulian(2) civilization and numerous animal remains (baboons, gazelles, equines, bears, rhinoceroses, and elephants), as well as large numbers of small mammals, which point to a slightly older time frame. Several dating methods are being used to refine the chronology.
The Thomas I quarry in Casablanca confirms its role as one of the most important prehistoric sites for understanding the early population of northwest Africa. The excavations that CNRS and the Institut National des Sciences de l’Archéologie et du Patrimoine du Maroc have led there since 1988 are part of a French-Moroccan collaboration. They have been jointly financed by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs(3), the Department of Human Evolution at the Max Plank Institute in Leipzig (Germany), INSAP(4)(Morocco) and the Aquitaine region.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:As I've said two thread pages ago, there are no
Originally posted by Swenet:
In Africa, Europe and the Levant, 16223T is bound
to be indicative of African haplogroups. The latter
areas are almost completely fixed in L, N and M1
haplogroups. 16223T disappears from N phylogeny
after N and satellite hgs. It never quite leaves M
phylogeny, but in terms of probabilities, that's
generally irrelevant for 16223T positive haplotypes
in Africa, Europe and the Levant for reasons already
mentioned.
hgs in the Levant and Europe that are 16223T
positive, unless they are N hgs, N satellite hgs,
M hgs, or fall into L hgs. While some deep mtDNA R
extremities bear the mutation, for almost all of
Tukuler's 16223T positive R hgs, this mutation
has not been demonstrated to occur on the
haplogroup level. In other words, if an 16223T
positive H6a1b2 exists, it doesn't mean that H6a1b2
itself has 16223T, unless you can prove that 16223T
co-defines that hg. Mining the web indiscriminately
for any and all 16223T positive non-L haplotypes,
does not mean that you've addressed the goalpost,
i.e. European and Levant hgs, as opposed to any
global 16223T positive haplotype. Moreover even if
all the listed 16223T R derivative haplotypes are
representative of their respective hgs when it
comes to 16223T, the mere existence of such hgs
does not disconfirm, re:
bound to be indicative of African haplogroups
As I've already pointed out, such 16223T positive
R derrivative haplotypes in Europe look like they
are below or barely on detection levels of regular
European sample amounts, and so, they apparently,
don't surpass African or East Asian hgs freqs in
Europe:
quote:
The breakdown of this 7% 16223T figure in Europe
is actually:
2% I
1% W
2% X
2% African and Asian lineages
quote:It's not like you have a choice to agree or disagree.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:For the record, I agree that if you remove the
Originally posted by Swenet:
When did DNA Tribes isolate the African component
in Horners to test it against the Amarna family,
Eurasian components and isolate the African
components of Horners and modern Egyptians, they
would match Ancient Egyptians aDNA much closer.
quote:--Fox et al 1997
The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a
selectively neutral mutation that is very common
in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in
North African and European populations. It has
been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient
Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior
enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan
genetic influences in this population. From 29
individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive
amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying
the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa 1 (np3,592)
marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations
at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the
frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic
Nubian population can be estimated at around 39%
(with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%).
quote:You've mentioned the Hyksos,
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
Those undercover racists always come with the same trickery, so it becomes easy to counter them.
CHANGE IN THE ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF MODERN EGYPT:
We all know in terms of ethnic composition, modern Egypt, is much different from Ancient Egypt.
Contemporary Egypt, is mostly an ethnic admixture between foreign invaders and conquerors and indigenous African people. Autosomally, as a whole, they tend to cluster more with Eurasian especially the Middle East. In the south, populations like Nubians probably cluster more with Africans (and thus Ancient Egyptians). All this is because of massive immigration from Europe and western Asian which started already in dynastic time, culminating in the Hyksos (Aamu) foreign rule during the second intermediate period, as well as during the late periods up to now (Assyrians, Greeks, Persians, Roman, Arab conquest, British colonization, etc).
quote:- From The Oxford Encyclopedia of African Thought, Volume 1 (2010)
As a consequence the many invasions of ancient Egypt, the population has changed over the years. There were Hyksos (Heka Khasut) from Asia, who melted into the Delta Region around 1500 B.C.E., and then a series of invasions by the Assyrians, Persians and Greeks. With the arrival of large groups of Arabians in the seventh century C.E., the racial character of Egypt began to change.
The resultant mixtures of Africans, Arabs, Greeks and Persians were to be jointed with Turks, Russians, Albanians, British, and French to create a different population that there had been during the ancient times.
One cannot say that today's Egypt is the same as the Egypt of antiquity anymore than one can say that today's North America is the same as it was 5000 years ago.
http://tinyurl.com/qbu8evq
quote:http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/9/40/66979/Heritage/Ancient-Egypt/Hyksos-buildings-are-the-latest-ancient-discovery-.aspx
Hyksos buildings are the latest ancient discovery in Tel Habuwa - Ancient Egypt - Heritage - Ahram Online
Important new discoveries at the Tel Habuwa dig east of the Suez
Canal shed light on the campaign by Ahmose I (c.1550–1525 BC)
against the Hyksos invaders
A team of Egyptian archaeologists digging at Tel Habuwa, near the town of Qantara East and three kilometres east of the Suez Canal, have made a major discovery.
The find comes as part of the search for more of the ancient forts that played a major role in protecting ancient Egypt's eastern gateway from foreign invasion.
During excavation works, archaeologists chanced upon the remains of administrative buildings dating back to the Hyksos and the New Kingdom periods in the second millennium BC, as well as a great many grain silos.
Each administrative edifice is a two-storey structure with a number of mud brick rooms and courtyards. Inside these halls a collection of coffins, skulls and skeletons of human beings and animals were found buried in sand.
Early studies of the skeletons reveal that they bear deep scars and wounds as the result of being stabbed with arrows or spears.
"This indicates that the battles between the Hyksos and the military troops led by the ancient Egyptian king Ahmose I (c.1550–1525 BC) were violent and aggressive," said Minister of State for Antiquities Mohamed Ibrahim.
Ibrahim said that a large number of grain silos and army storage galleries from the reign of kings Tuthmose III and Ramses II were also discovered. These silos can store more than 280 tonnes of grain, which indicates the great number of the Egyptian army forces which were at Tel Habuwa at that time.
Mohamed Abdel Maqsoud, leader of excavation work and deputy of the Ancient Egyptian antiquities department at the antiquities ministry, told Ahram Online that the remains of burned buildings were also found, confirming written accounts on papyrus that describe a great conflagration during Ahmose I's battle against the Hyksos.
"This this is a very important discovery which provides us with a better understanding of the Rind papyrus -- now on display in the British Museum -- and the military strategy used by the Pharaoh Ahmose I to liberate Egypt from the Hyksos," said Abdel-Maqsoud.
He pointed out that the Rind papyrus mentions that Ahmose attacked Tharo and imposed his authority on the town in order to lay siege to the Hyksos in their capital Avaris -- near the Delta town of Sharqiya -- and block any contact with their allies in the east.
Until 2003, when the fortified city of Tharo was found, Abdel Maqsoud said, nothing was known about this military town.
At that time several objects were found testifying that Tharo dated from the New Kingdom, so Egyptologists believed that it was built by Ahmose I's successors in an attempt to protect Egypt's eastern gate from any further invaders.
This latest discovery, however, proves that Tharo was built long before that, since the Hyksos took over it as a military base on Egypt's eastern border. The town expanded after the war of liberation, and forts were built throughout the period of the New Kingdom.
quote:Moving the goalpost doesn't negate the
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Bottomline:
This statement is falsifiableif 16223T in Africa, Europe AND
- In Africa, Europe and the Levant,
16223T is bound to be indicative
of African haplogroups.
the Levant is found in haplogroup
which is not African. Since we do
find 16223T in Europe and the Levant
it is disconfirmed.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
1) I never said M and N are African [* strawman - who said you did? *].
I listed them as exceptions to the absence of naive 16223T positive
hgs [* private lingo *] Europe and the Levant since my first post,
and all you did henceforth was reiterating this
and other captain obvious facts [* ridicule *] as "news", as if
they weren't already considered.
The latter areas are almost completely fixed
in L, N and M1 haplogroups. 16223T disappears
from N phylogeny after N and satellite hgs [* private
lingo and sheesh of course nothing appears in superhaplogroup
N after I W A X S O Y because that's the end of the phylogeny
-- talk about captain obvious facts *].
--Swenet
Re: "Europe and the Levant are almost [* moving goalpost
- hey what happened to completely? *] fixed in N,
L and M1", which is followed by me saying 16223T
is in N and its immediate descendants. Clearly I'm
not saying that there is no 16223T positive hg
native to these areas, nor am I saying that N and
M are African. [* Then those areas have C16223T that is not African *]
2) I never said "bound to be African", I said
"bound to [i]be indicative of African hgs". Huge
difference. [* ??? *] You can't have falsified the latter
[* what I falsified precedes this quote section not the strawman you built *]
seeing as none of your R derivatives have been
shown to be 16223T at the haplogroup level,
hence, even it occurs on some rare (xM, N, L)
native European haplotypes, it hasn't been show to
inherently characterize those hgs, contrary to N,
M and L. [* Did I not say T16223C characterizes
macrohaplogroup R and C16223T in R is back mutation? *]
Such a seeming lack of 16223T defined R
hgs in Europe and the Levant would statistically
make 16223T haplotypes in Europe even more indicative
of L types. [* How so when C16223T is characteristic of
macrohaplogroups N and M? *] You haven't falsified anything other
than the strawman that I supposedly said there
are no non-L 16223T haplotypes period in Europe,
the Levant, the Americas, South Asia, East Asia,
Southeast Asia, Australia, etc. [*strawman - who
said you said any such thing? *] Such a position
is naturally untenable, given the polymorphic
properties of HVS-I, which makes that accusation
an easy strawman to knock down for those who have
no interest in actually reading what people are
saying. [* ridicule best describing yourself *]
3) You still have yet to put a single Europe-wide
percentage behind your 16223T positive R derivative
haplotypes and show they surpass M1, and L types
in Europe. [* strawman - I never posited any such thing
and have no need to *] One might even add X1 to that list of
"African" hgs which 16223T can be suggestive of
in Europe. [* X1 is covered by superhaplogroup N - amazing
how X1 <- X <- N is an "African" Hg here
but U6 <- U <- R is not an "African" Hg in other arguments]
Anything other than this is just reckless quote mining.
quote:I agree with you and you act as if I just slapped you in the face. Why are you always acting so butthurt?
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:It's not like you have a choice to agree or disagree.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:For the record, I agree that if you remove the
Originally posted by Swenet:
When did DNA Tribes isolate the African component
in Horners to test it against the Amarna family,
Eurasian components and isolate the African
components of Horners and modern Egyptians, they
would match Ancient Egyptians aDNA much closer.
The main substratum in the Nile Valley is an East
African one. The more West African, South African,
or Great Lakes you want their mtDNA/genepool to
be, the more you run into the unforgiving brick
wall we call reality (a wall you seem to be
running into quite a lot):
quote:...which no one was claiming to begin with. You've
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Meanwhile C16223T remains not
necessarily indicative of an
African haplogroup in Europe
nor the Levant as shown by
the C16223T bearing Hgs
posted earlier.
quote:You've been telling these lies since 2012 when DNA
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:I agree with you and you act as if I just slapped you in the face. Why are you always acting so butthurt?
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:It's not like you have a choice to agree or disagree.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:[qb]For the record, I agree that if you remove the
Originally posted by Swenet:
When did DNA Tribes isolate the African component
in Horners to test it against the Amarna family,
Eurasian components and isolate the African
components of Horners and modern Egyptians, they
would match Ancient Egyptians aDNA much closer.
The main substratum in the Nile Valley is an East
African one. The more West African, South African,
or Great Lakes you want their mtDNA/genepool to
be, the more you run into the unforgiving brick
wall we call reality (a wall you seem to be
running into quite a lot):
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:--Fox et al 1997
The Hpal (np3,592) mitochondrial DNA marker is a
selectively neutral mutation that is very common
in sub-Saharan Africa and is almost absent in
North African and European populations. It has
been screened in a Meroitic sample from ancient
Nubia through PCR amplification and posterior
enzyme digestion, to evaluate the sub-Saharan
genetic influences in this population. From 29
individuals analysed, only 15 yield positive
amplifications, four of them (26.7%) displaying
the sub-Saharan African marker. Hpa 1 (np3,592)
marker is present in the sub-Saharan populations
at a frequency of 68.7 on average. Thus, the
frequency of genes from this area in the Merotic
Nubian population can be estimated at around 39%
(with a confidence interval from 22% to 55%).
"Hpa 1 (np3,592) marker is present in the sub-
Saharan populations at a frequency of 68.7 on
average."
This pattern of only ~25% HpaI 3592 is a pattern
consistently found only in northeastern African
Afro-asiatic speaking eastern Africans like Beja,
modern day Nubians and Borana. It's a wrap.
Whether you like it or not.
quote:.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:...which no one was claiming to begin with.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Meanwhile C16223T remains not
necessarily indicative of an
African haplogroup in Europe
nor the Levant as shown by
the C16223T bearing Hgs
posted earlier.
quote:That's a strawman argument, so I didn't need to make any concession.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:You've been telling these lies since 2012 when DNA
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:I agree with you and you act as if I just slapped you in the face. Why are you always acting so butthurt?
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:It's not like you have a choice to agree or disagree.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:[qb]For the record, I agree that if you remove the
Originally posted by Swenet:
When did DNA Tribes isolate the African component
in Horners to test it against the Amarna family,
Eurasian components and isolate the African
components of Horners and modern Egyptians, they
would match Ancient Egyptians aDNA much closer.
The main substratum in the Nile Valley is an East
African one. The more West African, South African,
or Great Lakes you want their mtDNA/genepool to
be, the more you run into the unforgiving brick
wall we call reality (a wall you seem to be
running into quite a lot):
Tribes' analysis came out. You've made concessions
or fled the scene whenever you views came under
scrutiny, and every time you came back with that
crap about modern Egyptian variants supposedly
not being representative of Ancient Egyptians,
and that Djehuti and others who dare to discuss
these variants are "Eurasianuts". You're not
fooling anyone by saying you "agree" with me,
which is really just a way for you to prevent
your lies coming to the fore for everyone to see.
--No, AE are NOT closer to South Africans than to
upriver Nubians.
--No, AE are NOT closer to Great Lakes folks than
to upriver Nubians.
--No, AE are NOT closer to West African folks than
to upriver Nubians.
You do not have ancient Nubian MLI scores, you
don't have ancient Libyan MLI scores, but yet you
post these lies. Every time you advertise these
lies I will be right here to expose them.
quote:Exactly. And nowhere does it say "necessarily
Originally posted by Tukuler:
This is an unedited quote directly from you
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
indicative (ɪnˈdɪkətɪv)
adj
1. Serving to indicate: symptoms indicative of anemia; an insignia indicative of high rank.
1. (foll by: of) serving as a sign; suggestive: indicative of trouble ahead.
Bottom line: no one even claimed that 16223T
necessarily pin-points L types. The rationale for
why I deem M and R 16223T positive candidates as
unlikelier than African hgs in those two regions
was laid out in my first post in this thread.
quote:Let's stick to the facts liar. There can be no
Originally posted by Tukuler:is disconfirmed because
- In Africa, Europe and the Levant,
16223T is bound to be indicative
of African haplogroups.
* 16223T
* is not "bound to be indicative of African haplogroups"
* in Europe and the Levant.
code:All you've done isBowcock CS 1987 Study of 47 DNA markers in five populations Gene Geogr. 1(1) 47-64. Apr 1987 1987 Apr;1(1):47-64.
Bowcock cs 1991 Human Evol DNA polymorphisms RFLPs Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 88, pp. 839-843, February 1991 Evolution
Bowcock cs 1991 Study of an additional 58 DNA markers Gene Geogr. 5(3) 151-73. Dec 1991 1991 Dec;5(3):151-73.
Bowcock Kidd CS 1994 microsatellites Nature Vol. 368 pp. 455-457, March 1994 Letters to Nature
Mountain CS 1994 nDNA RFLPs Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 91, pp. 6515-6519, July 1994 Evolution
Lin CS 1994 ??? data Gene Geogr. in press in press in press 1994
Cavalli-Sforza 1994 History Geography Human Genes Book Ch. 2 89-93 1994
Cavalli-Sforza 1997 Genes Peoples Languages article Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 94, pp. 7719–7724, July 1997 Colloquium Paper
Cavalli-Sforza 2000 Genes Peoples Languages book Book 75-76 2000
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:You told the same thing to Djehuti in your Sforza
Originally posted by Tukuler:
You were wrong man
thread when he shoved your face in the facts. Only
this time the conditions are even more damning for
your lying ass. There can be no mistake that you're
flatout lying, since you're deliberately ignoring
the fact my first post said:
Europe and the Levant are almost fixed in
N, [...]
--Swenet
and:
16223T disappears from N phylogeny after N and
satellite hgs.
--Swenet
Tsk tsk tsk. SMH.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Let's stick to the facts liar. There can be no
Originally posted by Tukuler:is disconfirmed because
- In Africa, Europe and the Levant,
16223T is bound to be indicative
of African haplogroups.
* 16223T
* is not "bound to be indicative of African haplogroups"
* in Europe and the Levant.
mistake that you're flatout lying to save your
hide, since you're deliberately and knowingly
making accusations which have been shown to be
false. My first post said:
Europe and the Levant are almost fixed in
N, [...]
--Swenet
and this N carries what?
16223T disappears from N phylogeny after
N and satellite hgs.
--Swenet
Tsk tsk tsk. SMH. How can a person lie so fuching
much?
quote:.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I'm done talking to known liars. You're not even
denying your lies, so that makes it that much
easier for readers to sort out the facts for
themselves. Thanks!
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Let's stick to the facts liar. There can be no
Originally posted by Tukuler:is disconfirmed because
- In Africa, Europe and the Levant,
16223T is bound to be indicative
of African haplogroups.
* 16223T
* is not "bound to be indicative of African haplogroups"
* in Europe and the Levant.
mistake that you're flatout lying to save your
hide, since you're deliberately and knowingly
making accusations which have been shown to be
false. My first post said:
Europe and the Levant are almost fixed in
N, [...]
--Swenet
and this N carries what?
16223T disappears from N phylogeny after
N and satellite hgs.
--Swenet
Tsk tsk tsk. SMH. How can a person lie so fuching
much?
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
I'm done talking to known liars. You're not even
denying your lies, so that makes it that much
easier for readers to sort out the facts for
themselves. Thanks!
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Let's stick to the facts liar. There can be no
Originally posted by Tukuler:is disconfirmed because
- In Africa, Europe and the Levant,
16223T is bound to be indicative
of African haplogroups.
* 16223T
* is not "bound to be indicative of African haplogroups"
* in Europe and the Levant.
mistake that you're flatout lying to save your
hide, since you're deliberately and knowingly
making accusations which have been shown to be
false. My first post said:
Europe and the Levant are almost fixed in
N, [...]
--Swenet
and this N carries what?
16223T disappears from N phylogeny after
N and satellite hgs.
--Swenet
Tsk tsk tsk. SMH. How can a person lie so fuching
much?
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
I'm done talking to known liars. You're not even
denying your lies, so that makes it that much
easier for readers to sort out the facts for
themselves. Thanks!
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Let's stick to the facts liar. There can be no
Originally posted by Tukuler:is disconfirmed because
- In Africa, Europe and the Levant,
16223T is bound to be indicative
of African haplogroups.
* 16223T
* is not "bound to be indicative of African haplogroups"
* in Europe and the Levant.
mistake that you're flatout lying to save your
hide, since you're deliberately and knowingly
making accusations which have been shown to be
false. My first post said:
Europe and the Levant are almost fixed in
N, [...]
--Swenet
and this N carries what?
16223T disappears from N phylogeny after
N and satellite hgs.
--Swenet
Tsk tsk tsk. SMH. How can a person lie so fuching
much?
quote:.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Respond to Tukular's data instead of fishing for an extremely boring curse ridden Explorer type marathon battle to satisfy some emotional need you have.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
indicative (ɪnˈdɪkətɪv)
adj
1. Serving to indicate: symptoms indicative of anemia; an insignia indicative of high rank.
1. (foll by: of) serving as a sign; suggestive: indicative of trouble ahead.
Bottom line: no one even claimed that 16223T
necessarily pin-points L types.
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
Sage started off questioning the ownership of
Don't try to be my mouth
piece. Ask me what I think and then
ask for further clarification or
expansion
I uncovered C16223T is not limited to African (L) haplogroups in Eurasia but is found in M N and even R clades. And this is supposed to be some doubt of African L C16223T? Imaginative strectch.
Do you imagine in my critique of Kefi I express doubt 16223T is African? And yes for me M1 is African and so is some of N1 probably, even though in this thread I use the field standards that M N and R are wholly Eurasian.
.
quote:Why do you keep saying this when the chart below shows R-M269 does exist in Africa.
Originally posted by xyyman:
I have SPECULATED that R1b is also of African origin. But that is only my speculation. I have no proof. But I speak of R-M269 eg (S116) and NOT R-V88 .
I agree R1 probably originated in Africa ...but current sampling does not show R-M269 in ANY popualtion in Africa....except about 1% in Algeria. The R-M269 there is similar to Modern Europeans. NOT the upstream R-M269 which will imply a pre-historic origin like R-V88
quote:In other words, it's a relative statistic that says
Originally posted by xyyman:
Each MLI score identifies the likelihood of occurrence of an STR profile in that region VERSUS the likelihood of occurrence in the world as a whole.
quote:But lets put this in context to understand what it really means. Take that highest MLI score of 326.94.
Originally posted by xyyman:
For record and clearing up that BS.
www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf
Here are the facts:
Genetic Analysis of Amarna Mummies
Geographical analysis of the Amarna mummies was performed using their autosomal STR profiles based on 8 tested loci.4 Results are summarized in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 1. Maps for individual Amarna mummies are included in Figures 2-8 in the Appendix.
Discussion: Average MLI scores in Table 1 indicate the STR profiles of the Amarna mummies would be MOST FREQUENT in present day populations of several African regions: including the (1)Southern African (average MLI 326.94), (2)African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and (3)Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions. These regional matches do not necessarily indicate an exclusively African ancestry for the Amarna pharaonic family. However, results indicate these ancient individuals inherited some alleles that today are more frequent in populations of Africa than in other parts of the world (such as D18S51=19 and D21S11=34).
Table 1: Top MLI (Match Likelihood Index) scores for Amarna mummies based on the world regions identified by DNA Tribes® STR analysis. Each MLI score identifies the likelihood of occurrence of an STR profile in that region VERSUS the likelihood of occurrence in the world as a whole.
Southern African = 326.94
African Great Lakes = 323.76
Tropical West African = 83.74
Ethiopia = 14.79****!!!!!
Sahelians= 14.33
North Africans =4.14
This is not rocket science.
The facts are – based upon genetic data disclosed up to this point. AEians are closer to West Africans than Ethiopians, North Africans and Sahelians. Get it! got It!
quote:Hi the sample statistics are below:
Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Dr. Winters. That Gonzalez Report on Equitorial Africans , IIRC, were of Africans living in Europe albeit first generation/migrants. There is speculation that the R-M269 was from European admixture. IIRC what was fascinating from the report was the pygmies displayed R-V88!!! I will have to double check.
quote:As you can see the subjects of the study were 112 unrelated males born in Equatorial Guinea .
Population sample and DNA extraction
A total of 112 unrelated males from Equatorial Guinea (living in Madrid, Spain, at the time of sample collection) were analysed for 17 STRs and 49 biallelic polymorphisms (single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) in the male-specific region of the Y chromosome.
Sample collection was performed in 2001, from adult males that were born and had lived in Equatorial Guinea before moving to Spain for work, keeping their Guinean nationality. The great majority of the population in Equatorial Guinea is of Bantu origin (the largest tribe, Fang, represents 85.7% of the population), according to the 1994 census.12 This strong Bantu influence is also noted in the language; apart from the more recent official European languages (Spanish and French) and two creole languages (admixture with Indo-European), all of the others belong to the Narrow Bantu linguistic group.13 Although no information was available concerning the ethnic background of each male, it is expected that they mostly represent a mixture of Fang and Bubi groups from different regions in Equatorial Guinea.
DNA was extracted using a standard Chelex-100 (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA) method.14
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
quote:But lets put this in context to understand what it really means. Take that highest MLI score of 326.94.
Originally posted by xyyman:
For record and clearing up that BS.
www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf
Here are the facts:
Genetic Analysis of Amarna Mummies
Geographical analysis of the Amarna mummies was performed using their autosomal STR profiles based on 8 tested loci.4 Results are summarized in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 1. Maps for individual Amarna mummies are included in Figures 2-8 in the Appendix.
Discussion: Average MLI scores in Table 1 indicate the STR profiles of the Amarna mummies would be MOST FREQUENT in present day populations of several African regions: including the (1)Southern African (average MLI 326.94), (2)African Great Lakes (average MLI 323.76), and (3)Tropical West African (average MLI 83.74) regions. These regional matches do not necessarily indicate an exclusively African ancestry for the Amarna pharaonic family. However, results indicate these ancient individuals inherited some alleles that today are more frequent in populations of Africa than in other parts of the world (such as D18S51=19 and D21S11=34).
Table 1: Top MLI (Match Likelihood Index) scores for Amarna mummies based on the world regions identified by DNA Tribes® STR analysis. Each MLI score identifies the likelihood of occurrence of an STR profile in that region VERSUS the likelihood of occurrence in the world as a whole.
Southern African = 326.94
African Great Lakes = 323.76
Tropical West African = 83.74
Ethiopia = 14.79****!!!!!
Sahelians= 14.33
North Africans =4.14
This is not rocket science.
The facts are – based upon genetic data disclosed up to this point. AEians are closer to West Africans than Ethiopians, North Africans and Sahelians. Get it! got It!
http://www.dnatribes.com/sample-results/dnatribes-sample-african-american.pdf
Compare the Global MLI scores to that of an African American that range from 70,000 to 11,000.. OR BETTER YET - The High Resolution World Region Match Results as used for the Mummies:
-9740 Tropical West African.
-154 - Horn of Africa
-48 - POLYNESIA
What information cam you get from the idea that the An African Americans genome is about 10 times as likely to be found in the Horn of Africa...than these Mummies genome is to be found in the Horn of Africa? Or an African Americans Genome is about 3 times as likely to be found in POLYNESIA than these mummies genome is to be found in Ethiopia?
What about this - A white american:
http://www.dnatribes.com/sample-results/dnatribes-sample-us-caucasian.pdf
Horn of Africa / white American = 38.
horn of Africa / Egyptian mummy = Ethiopia = 14.79****!!!!!
So a White American has a genome that is twice as likely to be found in Ethiopia compared to an Egyptian mummmy?
Looking at the low MLI scores and comparing the scores to other populations results in the DNA tribes data base it basically looks like this Ancient Egyptian PROFILE for the most part IS EXTINCT. Of course its African.............But it has far since disappeared with only remnants found here and there..........in VERY small amounts.
quote:Hi the sample statistics are below:
Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Dr. Winters. That Gonzalez Report on Equitorial Africans , IIRC, were of Africans living in Europe albeit first generation/migrants. There is speculation that the R-M269 was from European admixture. IIRC what was fascinating from the report was the pygmies displayed R-V88!!! I will have to double check.
quote:As you can see the subjects of the study were 112 unrelated males born in Equatorial Guinea .
Population sample and DNA extraction
A total of 112 unrelated males from Equatorial Guinea (living in Madrid, Spain, at the time of sample collection) were analysed for 17 STRs and 49 biallelic polymorphisms (single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) in the male-specific region of the Y chromosome.
Sample collection was performed in 2001, from adult males that were born and had lived in Equatorial Guinea before moving to Spain for work, keeping their Guinean nationality. The great majority of the population in Equatorial Guinea is of Bantu origin (the largest tribe, Fang, represents 85.7% of the population), according to the 1994 census.12 This strong Bantu influence is also noted in the language; apart from the more recent official European languages (Spanish and French) and two creole languages (admixture with Indo-European), all of the others belong to the Narrow Bantu linguistic group.13 Although no information was available concerning the ethnic background of each male, it is expected that they mostly represent a mixture of Fang and Bubi groups from different regions in Equatorial Guinea.
DNA was extracted using a standard Chelex-100 (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA) method.14
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:In other words, it's a relative statistic that says
Originally posted by xyyman:
Each MLI score identifies the likelihood of occurrence of an STR profile in that region VERSUS the likelihood of occurrence in the world as a whole.
nothing about the ancestral components in these AE
samples (e.g. Chadic, Nilo-Saharan, Cushitic, etc.)
and their proportions. At best, it suggest that the
Ancient Egyptians were indigenous Africans. Thanks
for confirming that you have nothing to argue
against my posts on Fox et al 1997 and Salas et
al 2002.
I can learn a lot from you, Sir. Hold up! Let me get my note book out.
]
quote:Thank you.
Originally posted by Swenet:
I had already thought of posting those hgs, but I
knew gramps was going to run away from addressing
them. In their entirety they mostly overlap most
with L types carried by eastern Africans. In fact,
they look a lot like the L types in modern Egyptian
and Nubian aDNA. Note that he'll just explain them
away as fake or whatever. Gramps is always MIA when
it gets too hot under his feet.
quote:--Dujougon et al 2009
For example, L1b and L3e5 subclades,
mainly detected in Western and Central African
populations, are more frequent in the Maghreb (7%
to 10% and 3% to 17%) than in Siwa (1%). Conversely,
the L3e1 South-East African clade and the L0a1,
L3i2, L4* and L4b2 East-African lineages are only
observed in the Egyptian Berbers. The East-African
M1 clade has a frequency four times higher in Siwa
(16%) than in Morocco (from 2.6% to 4.2%).
quote:--Hirbo et al 2011
Specifically, the mtDNA L5 haplotype
was observed at low frequency in one of the
putative modern descendant populations of the
Pharaonic era, namely the Gurna of the Nile
valley (Appendix 6b) [369]. Moreover, the
mtDNA L5 haplotype was also found among
populations from northern Egypt at low frequency
(Appendix 6b) [369]. MtDNA haplotype L3h was
observed in Egyptian populations from northern
Egypt at low frequency [305], but was not
observed among the Gurna populations [369].
quote:--Hirbo et al 2011
The inferred dates of demographic
expansion associated with the mtDNA L3f
lineage are 13-15 kya and 6-8 kya (Table
3.6.1, Appendix 14). These two periods possibly
correspond to the expansion of Afroasiatic
speakers [101] from the Nile Valley/northern
fringe of the Ethiopian highlands 14 kya, and
initial dispersal of pastoralist populations in
North Africa 8 kya [380], respectively.
Compare with the aDNA results and judge for yourself.
OK A-M13 L3f------East African
Ok A-M13 L0a1-----East African
OK B-M150 L3d-----West/Central Africa-Wet Sahara
OK E-M2 L3e5------Chadic-Wet Sahara
OK E-M2 L2a1------West/Central Africa-Wet Sahara
OK E-M123 L5a1----East African
OK E-M35 R0a
OK E-M41 L2a1-----West/Central Africa-Wet Sahara
OK E-M41 L1b1a----West/Central Africa-Wet Sahara
OK E-M75 M1
OK E-M78 L4b------East African
OK J-M267 L3i-----East African
OK R-M173 L2------?
OK T-M184 L0a-----East African
MK A-M13 L3x------East African
MK E-M75 L2a1-----West/Central Africa-Wet Sahara
MK E-M78 L3e5-----Chadic-Wet Sahara
MK E-M78 M1a
MK E-M96 L4a------East African
MK E-V6 L3--------East African
MK B-M112 L0b-----East African
Note that the lineages tagged here as "West/Central
Africa-Wet Sahara" are today carried by eastern
Africans and don't really discriminate that much
between western and eastern Africans for this
reason.
quote:I don't remember hearing about that Nubian child, or at least not one with L5 and an "intermediate" autosomal profile. But isn't it dated to the Christian Period, when Nubia would have had intercourse with Coptic groups? I wouldn't extrapolate too much from a single skeleton dated to this period.
Originally posted by Swenet:
^That was my tentative position a couple of months
ago, yes. But remember that mtDNA L5 Nubian child
(East African lineage, as you know) who was
autosomally "intermediate" between Africans and
Europeans, by actual SNP testing? Throws another
curveball in that interpretation, maybe not if you
factor in Basal Eurasian. All I know is any literal
interpretation of DNA Tribes (i.e. that the MLI
scores of the African regions represent linear
expressions of African ancestry from those
respective regions) that makes South Africans
genetically closer to Egyptians than Nubians,
Chadians, Beja and other closeby Afro-Asiatic
populations is going to need a multi-disciplinary
context which simply does not exist. Therefore, I
reject any literal interpretation of DNA Tribes'
analysis of Hawass 2010 and 2012.
quote:The earliest evidence of non-African DNA in the
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
But isn't it dated to the Christian Period
quote:Clyde if you look at these Match Likelihood scores, the averages on the right of the chart that xyyman is talking about, South Africans match Amarna Egyptians about four times more than West Africans.
Originally posted by xyyman:
For record and clearing up that BS.
www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf
Here are the facts:
Southern African = 326.94
African Great Lakes = 323.76
Tropical West African = 83.74
Ethiopia = 14.79****!!!!!
Sahelians= 14.33
North Africans =4.14
quote:Meh, Meroitic is still relatively recent if that's the earliest period to yield non-African hapologroups in Nubia. Don't we have aDNA data going back to the Neolithic, as per the very same Hassan report? I recall that showed a preponderance of Haplogroup A.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:The earliest evidence of non-African DNA in the
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
But isn't it dated to the Christian Period
Nile Valley Meroitic aDNA. See Hassan. Other than
saying I'm not buying the literal interpretation,
I'm holding out judgement as far as DNA Tribes'
MLI scores go. I want to see some UEPs. All I
know is that one has to wilfully ignore a lot of
data to believe that the MLI scores should be
taken literally.
quote:Can you provide a link to the Gonzales paper?
Originally posted by xyyman:
I hope Beyoku understand why I spent so much time on the Bediouns. They are the most significant/indigenous group in the Levant. That is why they are always included in these studies. They are the remnants of the original inhabitants of the Levant. Remnants of the Natufians.
Many of the ethnic groups that live there now are newcomers...Gonzalez et al June 2014
Get it? got it?!
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Can you provide a link to the Gonzales paper?
Originally posted by xyyman:
I hope Beyoku understand why I spent so much time on the Bediouns. They are the most significant/indigenous group in the Levant. That is why they are always included in these studies. They are the remnants of the original inhabitants of the Levant. Remnants of the Natufians.
Many of the ethnic groups that live there now are newcomers...Gonzalez et al June 2014
Get it? got it?!
.
quote:^^^^ This is BS
Originally posted by xyyman:
Speaking about Neolithics...
In the vain of AEians affinity to South Africans.
The closest "living" relatives of the Neolithic farmers in the Levant are ...for those who learn through pictures.
Gonzalez et al June2014
quote:Just so we don't miscommunicate: I referred to
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Meh, Meroitic is still relatively recent if that's the earliest period to yield non-African hapologroups in Nubia. Don't we have aDNA data going back to the Neolithic, as per the very same Hassan report? I recall that showed a preponderance of Haplogroup A.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:The earliest evidence of non-African DNA in the
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
But isn't it dated to the Christian Period
Nile Valley Meroitic aDNA. See Hassan. Other than
saying I'm not buying the literal interpretation,
I'm holding out judgement as far as DNA Tribes'
MLI scores go. I want to see some UEPs. All I
know is that one has to wilfully ignore a lot of
data to believe that the MLI scores should be
taken literally.
Mind you, I'm not saying there was no Eurasian genetic input into ancient Egypt and Nubia whatsoever. I just don't know if it was comparable to what you see in modern-day (not ancient) Northeast Africans.
Still doesn't make the Egypto-Nubians South African or whatever.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb] Speaking about Neolithics...
stop trying to trick people with your made up fake crap
____________________________________
xyyman is constantly destroying scientific articles here and at Egyptsearch Reloaded
xyyman is really attempting miseducate people.
He force an interpretation us how we should interpret it,
xyyman is the worst corrupter of knowledge in this forum
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Speaking about Neolithics...
xyyman is constantly destroying scientific articles here and at Egyptsearch Reloaded
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
I hate beating up on my brother Sweetness but...he is loves punishment.
Learning through pictures. A secondary source also confirms West Africans are closer to AEians than Horners.
Two INDEPENDENT sources cannot be wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
I'm writing this with a smirk on my face, as it's
going to be hilarious to see Xxyman and Amun Ra the
Anticlimax squirm out of the following question:
Why does Ramses III's MLI score have, by far, the
highest TribeScore with the Horn of Africa region?
What are the implications of this? No running away,
no sleight of mouth, no trolling; I expect an answer.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:I bumped into this surprising paper, yesterday.
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Hi the sample statistics are below:
Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Dr. Winters. That Gonzalez Report on Equitorial Africans , IIRC, were of Africans living in Europe albeit first generation/migrants. There is speculation that the R-M269 was from European admixture. IIRC what was fascinating from the report was the pygmies displayed R-V88!!! I will have to double check.
quote:As you can see the subjects of the study were 112 unrelated males born in Equatorial Guinea .
Population sample and DNA extraction
A total of 112 unrelated males from Equatorial Guinea (living in Madrid, Spain, at the time of sample collection) were analysed for 17 STRs and 49 biallelic polymorphisms (single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) in the male-specific region of the Y chromosome.
Sample collection was performed in 2001, from adult males that were born and had lived in Equatorial Guinea before moving to Spain for work, keeping their Guinean nationality. The great majority of the population in Equatorial Guinea is of Bantu origin (the largest tribe, Fang, represents 85.7% of the population), according to the 1994 census.12 This strong Bantu influence is also noted in the language; apart from the more recent official European languages (Spanish and French) and two creole languages (admixture with Indo-European), all of the others belong to the Narrow Bantu linguistic group.13 Although no information was available concerning the ethnic background of each male, it is expected that they mostly represent a mixture of Fang and Bubi groups from different regions in Equatorial Guinea.
DNA was extracted using a standard Chelex-100 (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA) method.14
.
quote:--Peter Ralph, Graham Coop
The recent genealogical history of human populations is a complex mosaic formed by individual migration, large-scale population movements, and other demographic events. Population genomics datasets can provide a window into this recent history, as rare traces of recent shared genetic ancestry are detectable due to long segments of shared genomic material. We make use of genomic data for 2,257 Europeans (in the Population Reference Sample [POPRES] dataset) to conduct one of the first surveys of recent genealogical ancestry over the past 3,000 years at a continental scale. We detected 1.9 million shared long genomic segments, and used the lengths of these to infer the distribution of shared ancestors across time and geography. We find that a pair of modern Europeans living in neighboring populations share around 2–12 genetic common ancestors from the last 1,500 years, and upwards of 100 genetic ancestors from the previous 1,000 years. These numbers drop off exponentially with geographic distance, but since these genetic ancestors are a tiny fraction of common genealogical ancestors, individuals from opposite ends of Europe are still expected to share millions of common genealogical ancestors over the last 1,000 years. There is also substantial regional variation in the number of shared genetic ancestors. For example, there are especially high numbers of common ancestors shared between many eastern populations that date roughly to the migration period (which includes the Slavic and Hunnic expansions into that region). Some of the lowest levels of common ancestry are seen in the Italian and Iberian peninsulas, which may indicate different effects of historical population expansions in these areas and/or more stably structured populations. Population genomic datasets have considerable power to uncover recent demographic history, and will allow a much fuller picture of the close genealogical kinship of individuals across the world.
[...]
Discussion
Genetic common ancestry within the last 2,500 years across Europe has been shaped by diverse demographic and historical events. There are both continental trends, such as a decrease of shared ancestry with distance; regional patterns, such as higher IBD in eastern and northern populations; and diverse outlying signals. We have furthermore quantified numbers of genetic common ancestors that populations share with each other back through time, albeit with a (unavoidably) coarse temporal resolution. These numbers are intriguing not only because of the differences between populations, which reflect historical events, but the high degree of implied genealogical commonality between even geographically distant populations.
[...]
Ubiquity of common ancestry.
We have shown that typical pairs of individuals drawn from across Europe have a good chance of sharing long stretches of identity by descent, even when they are separated by thousands of kilometers. We can furthermore conclude that pairs of individuals across Europe are reasonably likely to share common genetic ancestors within the last 1,000 years, and are certain to share many within the last 2,500 years. From our numerical results, the average number of genetic common ancestors from the last 1,000 years shared by individuals living at least 2,000 km apart is about 1/32 (and at least 1/80); between 1,000 and 2,000ya they share about one; and between 2,000 and 3,000 ya they share above 10.
[...]
The fact that most people alive today in Europe share nearly the same set of (European, and possibly world-wide) ancestors from only 1,000 years ago seems to contradict the signals of long-term, albeit subtle, population genetic structure within Europe (e.g., [13],[14]). These two facts can be reconciled by the fact that even though the distribution of ancestors (as cartooned in Figure 1B) has spread to cover the continent, there remain differences in degree of relatedness of modern individuals to these ancestral individuals. For example, someone in Spain may be related to an ancestor in the Iberian peninsula through perhaps 1,000 different routes back through the pedigree, but to an ancestor in the Baltic region by only 10 different routes, so that the probability that this Spanish individual inherited genetic material from the Iberian ancestor is roughly 100 times higher. This allows the amount of genetic material shared by pairs of extant individuals to vary even if the set of ancestors is constant.
[...]
The Signal of History
As we have shown, patterns of IBD provide ample but noisy geographic and temporal signals, which can then be connected to historical events. Rigorously making such connections is difficult, due to the complex recent history of Europe, controversy about the demographic significance of many events, and uncertainties in inferring the ages of common ancestors. Nonetheless, our results can be plausibly connected to several historical and demographic events.
The migration period.
One of the striking patterns we see is the relatively high level of sharing of IBD between pairs of individuals across eastern Europe, as high or higher than that observed within other, much smaller populations. This is consistent with these individuals having a comparatively large proportion of ancestry drawn from a relatively small population that expanded over a large geographic area. The “smooth” estimates of Figure 4 (and more generally Figures 5 and S17) suggest that this increase in ancestry stems from around 1,000–2,000 ya, since during this time pairs of eastern individuals are expected to share a substantial number of common ancestors, while this is only true of pairs of noneastern individuals if they are from the same population. For example, even individuals from widely separated eastern populations share about the same amount of IBD as do two Irish individuals (see Figure S3), suggesting that this ancestral population may have been relatively small.
This evidence is consistent with the idea that these populations derive a substantial proportion of their ancestry from various groups that expanded during the “migration period” from the fourth through ninth centuries [51]. This period begins with the Huns moving into eastern Europe towards the end of the fourth century, establishing an empire including modern-day Hungary and Romania, and continues in the fifth century as various Germanic groups moved into and ruled much of the western Roman empire. This was followed by the expansion of the Slavic populations into regions of low population density beginning in the sixth century, reaching their maximum by the 10th century [52]. The eastern populations with high rates of IBD are highly coincident with the modern distribution of Slavic languages, so it is natural to speculate that much of the higher rates were due to this expansion. The inclusion of (non-Slavic speaking) Hungary and Romania in the group of eastern populations sharing high IBD could indicate the effect of other groups (e.g., the Huns) on ancestry in these regions, or because some of the same group of people who elsewhere are known as Slavs adopted different local cultures in those regions. Greece and Albania are also part of this putative signal of expansion, which could be because the Slavs settled in part of these areas (with unknown demographic effect), or because of subsequent population exchange. However, additional work and methods would be needed to verify this hypothesis.
The highest levels of IBD sharing are found in the Albanian-speaking individuals (from Albania and Kosovo), an increase in common ancestry deriving from the last 1,500 years. This suggests that a reasonable proportion of the ancestors of modern-day Albanian speakers (at least those represented in POPRES) are drawn from a relatively small, cohesive population that has persisted for at least the last 1,500 years. These individuals share similar but slightly higher numbers of common ancestors with nearby populations than do individuals in other parts of Europe (see Figure S3), implying that these Albanian speakers have not been a particularly isolated population so much as a small one. Furthermore, our Greek and Macedonian samples share much higher numbers of common ancestors with Albanian speakers than with other neighbors, possibly a result of historical migrations, or else perhaps smaller effects of the Slavic expansion in these populations. It is also interesting to note that the sampled Italians share nearly as much IBD with Albanian speakers as with each other. The Albanian language is a Indo-European language without other close relatives [53] that persisted through periods when neighboring languages were strongly influenced by Latin or Greek, suggesting an intriguing link between linguistic and genealogical history in this case.
Italy, Iberia, and France.
On the other hand, we find that France and the Italian and Iberian peninsulas have the lowest rates of genetic common ancestry in the last 1,500 years (other than Turkey and Cyprus), and are the regions of continental Europe thought to have been least affected by the Slavic and Hunnic migrations. These regions were, however, moved into by Germanic tribes (e.g., the Goths, Ostrogoths, and Vandals), which suggests that perhaps the Germanic migrations/invasions of these regions entailed a smaller degree of population replacement than the Slavic and/or Hunnic, or perhaps that the Germanic groups were less genealogically cohesive. This is consistent with the argument that the Slavs moved into relatively depopulated areas, while Gothic “migrations” may have been takeovers by small groups of extant populations [54],[55].
In addition to the very few genetic common ancestors that Italians share both with each other and with other Europeans, we have seen significant modern substructure within Italy (i.e., Figure 2) that predates most of this common ancestry, and estimate that most of the common ancestry shared between Italy and other populations is older than about 2,300 years (Figure S16). Also recall that most populations show no substructure with regards to the number of blocks shared with Italians, implying that the common ancestors other populations share with Italy predate divisions within these other populations. This suggests significant old substructure and large population sizes within Italy, strong enough that different groups within Italy share as little recent common ancestry as other distinct, modern-day countries, substructure that was not homogenized during the migration period. These patterns could also reflect in part geographic isolation within Italy as well as a long history of settlement of Italy from diverse sources.
quote:In references to DNA-Tribes.
Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Dr Winters. I will.
These are the popualtion with cloest affinity to Neolithic Farmers.
See the correlation? Anyone?
Sub-Saharan admixture = Neolithic Farmers
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Can you provide a link to the Gonzales paper?
Originally posted by xyyman:
I hope Beyoku understand why I spent so much time on the Bediouns. They are the most significant/indigenous group in the Levant. That is why they are always included in these studies. They are the remnants of the original inhabitants of the Levant. Remnants of the Natufians.
Many of the ethnic groups that live there now are newcomers...Gonzalez et al June 2014
Get it? got it?!
.
quote:--Bayazit Yunusbayev, Oleg Balanovsky et al.
Bedouins, Jordanians, Palestinians and Saudi Arabians are located in close proximity to each other, which is consistent with a common origin in the Arabian Peninsula25, whereas the Egyptian, Moroccan, Mozabite Berber, and Yemenite samples are located closer to sub- Saharan populations (Fig. 1a and Supplementary Fig. 2a).
[...]
For example, Y-chromosome data point to a unique paternal genetic link between the Bene Israel community and the Levant, whereas the absence of sub-Saharan African maternal lineages in Yemenite and Moroccan Jews (in contrast to their hosts) suggests limited maternal gene flow.
[...]
Equally interesting are the inferences that can be gleaned from more distant Diaspora communities, such as the Ethiopian and Indian Jewish communities. Strong similarities to their neighbouring host populations may have resulted from one or more of the following: large-scale introgression, asymmetrical sex-biased gene flow, or religious and cultural diffusion during the process of becoming one of the many and varied Jewish communities.
[...]
Genotyping autosomal markers. Illumina 610K or 660K bead arrays were used for genotyping with standard protocols, and Bead Studio software was used to assign genotypes. PLINK 1.05 (ref. 30) was used to perform data management and QC operations. Samples and SNPs with success rates of less than 97% were excluded. A total of 475 novel samples were analysed, 121 of which were from 14 Jewish communities representing most of the known geographic range of Jews during the past 100 years. The other 354 samples were chosen from 27 non- Jewish populations to enable paired analysis with the Jewish sample set.
[...]
Principal component analysis.
PC analysis was performed with the smartpca program of the EIGENSOFT package24. To express the relative importance of the top two eigenvectors in the resulting PC plot, two axes were scaled by a factor equal to the square root of the corresponding eigenvalue (Supplementary Note 2). Our analysis was repeated for the entire set of populations and for the subset of west Eurasian populations (Supplementary Table 1). The R environment was used to perform PCA (using the function princomp) and plot the results for all analyses of uniparental data.
Structure-like analysis.
The recently introduced structure-like approach was applied as assembled in the program ADMIXTURE27 (Supplementary Notes 3 and 4). ADMIXTURE was run on our global and west Eurasian data sets 100 times in parallel at K 5 2 to K 5 10 (using random seeds). Convergence between independent runs at the same K was monitored by comparing the resulting log- likelihood scores (LLs). The minimal variation in LLs (less than 1 LL unit) within a fraction (10%) of runs with the highest LLs was assumed to be a reasonable proxy for inferring convergence28. In the global data set, convergence was observed in the case of all explored K values (K 5 2 to K 5 10). Results from runs at all values of K are shown rather than restricting the reader to one chosen K (Supplementary Note 3). To focus on population structure in the relevant regions of the Middle East and Europe we performed analyses on a data set restricted to west Eurasian samples. In this analysis, convergence was reached at K52 to K55; K57 and K58. Only K54 was highlighted in Supplemen- tary Fig. 5 because components appearing at higher values of K were predomi- nantly restricted to a single population and were therefore less informative for our purposes. Judging from the distribution of LLs of the converged K values, the maximum-likelihood solutions with LLs very close to the highest LLs were also the most frequent solutions (except for K 5 6 of the global data set). One run from the top LLs fraction of each converged K (from global and west Eurasian data set) was plotted with Excel (Supplementary Fig. 4a, b).
Allele sharing distances.
ASD was used for measuring genetic distances between populations. ASD is less sensitive to small sample size than the Fixation Index (FST) and other measures29, and more appropriate for our goal of measuring genetic distances between groups regardless of their internal diversity. Standard errors of ASD values were calculated with a bootstrap approach, accounting for variance resulting from both sample selection and site selection. ASDs between individual Jewish populations and population groups representing a geographic region or ethnic group were calculated. In each case, the population under consideration was removed from all groupings with which it was compared. To test significance of differences in pairs of ASD values in each row in Table 1, a bootstrap approach was used (Supplementary Note 5 and Supplemen- tary Tables 2 and 3).
Genotyping uniparental markers.
Our data from the Ychromosome and mtDNA were combined with previously published data sets from populations of interest (Supplementary Note 6). Markers were chosen to match the phylo- genetic level of resolution achieved in previously reported data sets. A total of 8,210 samples were assembled for Y-chromosome analysis (Supplementary Table 4). Genotypes for these sites were determined by using multiple tech- niques, such as allele-specific PCR, TaqMan, Kaspar and direct sequencing. A total of 13,919 samples were assembled for mtDNA analysis (Supplementary Table 5).
quote:Why is the M89 score, Eurasia?
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Just so we don't miscommunicate: I referred to
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Meh, Meroitic is still relatively recent if that's the earliest period to yield non-African hapologroups in Nubia. Don't we have aDNA data going back to the Neolithic, as per the very same Hassan report? I recall that showed a preponderance of Haplogroup A.
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:The earliest evidence of non-African DNA in the
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
But isn't it dated to the Christian Period
Nile Valley Meroitic aDNA. See Hassan. Other than
saying I'm not buying the literal interpretation,
I'm holding out judgement as far as DNA Tribes'
MLI scores go. I want to see some UEPs. All I
know is that one has to wilfully ignore a lot of
data to believe that the MLI scores should be
taken literally.
Mind you, I'm not saying there was no Eurasian genetic input into ancient Egypt and Nubia whatsoever. I just don't know if it was comparable to what you see in modern-day (not ancient) Northeast Africans.
Still doesn't make the Egypto-Nubians South African or whatever.
the M89 positive Y chromosomes in Meroitic aDNA
to put a preliminary upper bound on the date of
Eurasian input, based on the data we do have,
since the "intermediacy" of the autosomal profile
of this medieval child might lead some to say that
it could have been entirely due to Christian era
and possibly even Arab (Islamic) era foreign
input. The Meroitic M89 positive Y chromosomes
contradict that.
As for the Y chromosomes in Hassan's study, you're
right: the early preponderance and sustained
presence of A-M13 rips the idea of a formative
South African or Great Lakes input into the Nile
Valley to shreds. A-M13 is, in terms of origin and
freq peaks, exclusively East African (Ethiopian,
Chadic, Nilo-Saharan). Obviously, the reluctance
of some to accept modern Egyptian or modern Nubian
L types or Y chromosomes to infer the uniparental
substratum of ancient Egypto-Nubians, because
there supposedly is discontinuity in Nile Valley,
is a total fallacy. The discontinuity between
ancients and moderns is due to non-African input,
not due to African input. Therefore, there can be
little doubt regarding the antiquity of the extant
L types in modern Egypt and Nubia.
quote:http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNATreeTrunk.html
The DE haplogroup appeared approximately 50,000 years bp in North East Africa and subsequently split into haplogroup E that spread to Europe and Africa and haplogroup D that rapidly spread along the coastline of India and Asia to North Asia. The IJ haplogroup characterizes part of the second wave of emigration from Africa that occurred via the Middle East 45,000 years bp and defines two branches I and J that emigrated northwards and eastwards into Europe
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
48.23 vs 42.81, same magnitude. Big deal.
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
I don't know what the figures you're citing even mean.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Mestizo 0.78, African Great Lakes 0.71.
48.23 vs 42.81, same magnitude. Big deal.
quote:Why do C and R share a common ancestry with this older clade?
Originally posted by xyyman:
I have SPECULATED that R1b is also of African origin. But that is only my speculation. I have no proof. But I speak of R-M269 eg (S116) and NOT R-V88 .
I agree R1 probably originated in Africa ...but current sampling does not show R-M269 in ANY popualtion in Africa....except about 1% in Algeria. The R-M269 there is similar to Modern Europeans. NOT the upstream R-M269 which will imply a pre-historic origin like R-V88
quote:--Fulvio Cruciani et al
These chromosomes belong to a clade (haplogroup BT) in which chromosomes C and R share a common ancestor (Figure 2)
quote:http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNATreeTrunk.html
The BT haplogroup split from the root of the Y haplogroup tree 55,000 years before present (bp), probably in North East Africa. The CF(xDE) haplogroup was the common ancestor of all people who migrated outside of Africa until recent times. The defining mutation occurred 31-55,000 years bp in North East Africa and is still most common in Africa today in Ethiopia and Sudan. The DE haplogroup appeared approximately 50,000 years bp in North East Africa and subsequently split into haplogroup E that spread to Europe and Africa and haplogroup D that rapidly spread along the coastline of India and Asia to North Asia.
quote:Yeah, some of it his seems to have polarity.
Originally posted by Swenet:
@ TP
That's interesting. The mutation itself could have
emerged in UP Africa, but I do not think the lineages
in those ancient Sudanese Y chromosomes were
actually M89. They were M89 positive, meaning, it
could have been any lineage within M89. Judging by
the M89 lineages in Sudan today, there is a good
chance that most if it, if not all of it, is J-M267.
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
I trying to get my head around your meaning. What is YOUR understanding/determination of a Eurasian Haplogroup. The flip-fliopping is confusing. It Ok to changed views once new information is available. It is called progressing. That said….
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
Now! Does this make any sense. White women continuosly entering Africa since pre-history. ReallY!
Quote:
Since my initial entry to this forum back in November 2004 my position on N Africans is they are indigenees with a continuous trickle of maternal South European gene flow to N Africa's Mediterranean coasts since at least the Chalcolithic.
A good start is separating Fact from Fiction. White people are the delusional ones. That said. Here are the Facts.
1. H1, H3 are found on BOTH sides of the Med Sea..
2. H3 seems to be older in Africa while H1 is older in Iberia. Based upon the unreliable Coalescence age estimates.
3. Haplotypic diversity seems to be slightly older IN Africa.
4. Frequency seems higher IN Europe.
5. There is NO R1b M-269 IN Africa
6. Kefi new paper (2014abstract) implies that H is more diverse in the Tunisians area compared to other European regions.
7. Actual aDNA for hg-H, Kefi, puts hg-H IN Africa 12kya. There was one UNDUPLICATED sample of hg-H IN Europe 15kya.
Draw your conclusions. White woman were NOT trickling into Africa 12kya
quote:.
Originally posted by beyoku:
Well i am the one that actually purchased the book, and uploaded the scan. What I didnt want to do is give a full break down of my analysis because I wanted to see what the forum could do with the information. This same image was posted in another forum. They didnt know where to start so I posted it here seeing that the OP subject had to do with North African mtdna. XYYMAN you were being the expert so I challenged your expertise.
This is what I had to say regarding it in January:
quote:http://www.mitosearch.org/
Correct, I wish I had all the information. He notes burials 2 an 6 look the same but are "DIFFERENT outside the HV1 range shown in the table." Maybe there is the full data floating around. Also, I have not used mitosearch before so I dont know how much sampling bias accounts to the results. What I DO see is possible African presence (mostly L3 and L3e1) in about half of the samples. The rest could be a combination of H, HV, V, T, T2, U6a, W, I, M, and an assortment of uncharacterized L lineages. Knowing how extensive the database is for Africans could clear things up. A bit of research leads me to believe this site contains personal results and not published ones. I will check to see if there is a better site.
See also:
http://mtmanager.yonsei.ac.kr/search_sample.php
I had assumed someone would post these links.
This is something I wrote in April.
quote:In ref to Hpai 3592 - I refer to an old article here:
The thing is HpaI +3592 only describes SOME African lineages, in fact it also describes some Eurasian markers too, this is a detail many people dont even point out, they likely dont know. So while they say it is more African today than it was before they are speaking on the increased frequency of L0, L1 and L2.....not African lineages in their totality. I have seen the raw data from the Dakleh Oasis remains and many of the lineages are L3 in fact they fit into L3e.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/428-mtDNA-analysis-in-ancient-Nubians-supports-the-existence-of-gene-flow-between
And this underlies the significance of the Euroclowns and what they do. This is why I posted this other quote:
quote:We can all use mito search and pull up the speculative % of L lineages. A reduction of Hpai 3592 negative L lineages from the ancient remains and an increase of Hpai 3592 positive lineages in the contemporary population is NOT strictly indicative of MORE sub Saharan Gene flow.
However, significant differences were found between these populations. Based on an increased frequency of HpaI 3592 (+) haplotypes in the contemporary Dakhlehian population, the authors suggested that, since Roman times, gene flow from the Sub-Saharan region has affected gene frequencies of individuals from the oasis Source
IMO if "WE" go through the trouble to buy the books and do the research I dont want to give out the results of my quality time to Euro-clowns. Sometimes I am silent because I dont want the results of may hard research being used to argue Ancient Egyptian biological affinity.....with some Trash on some ABC forum about motorcycles or videogames. Especially when both parties arguing really dont have a grasp of what they are arguing nor a genuine interest in the subject.
So who is going to contact PARR and see if they can get the full source? Who is going to post results of mitosearch? XXY...the expert, had a nice analysis noting many of the lineages were African yet came to the conclusion they were mtdna N........and not one L in the pile?
quote:This is true. It's something already discussed before. If you take the time to read and understand the following DNA Tribe document (I can always answer some questions too for help). People can see clearly the Horn African region is composed of about 70% of foreigners according to their sample. 70% of individuals who are genetically closer (in term of frequencies of alleles) to other regions than Horn Africa. It's hard to know if it's a sample bias or truly the level of admixture in modern Horn Africa (or a little bit of both). Nevertheless, that's the reason why the genetic profile of the mummies (their STR alleles) were found only at low frequency in the Horn African region. The genetic profile of the mummies, their STR alleles, being more common in other regions of Africa not so admixed with "recent" post dynastic immigration like the Great Lakes, Southern Africa and Tropical West Africa.
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
If today's Horn and Sahelian Africans score lower on MLI relative to the ancient Egyptians, it's probably because they've acquired a large Eurasian component in the last three thousand years that wasn't present in Egypt's formative period. It's this recent Eurasian introduction that's pulling them away from ancient Egyptians and modern West/Central/Southern Africans.
quote:http://www.southern-africa.arroukatchee.fr/namibia/people/himba.htm
The Himba are, basically, from the Nile region in Egypt.
They are historically distant cousins of the Maasai. After a migration of several centuries, they arrived in Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia.
The Himba are an ethnic group, who, like all peoples Herero, belongs to the Bantu language group, a set of ethnic groups covering the entire southern part of Africa. The Bantu are, above all, farmers, sedentary and gained control of the iron.
quote:If you tell this to the average Horn African, they will tell you that you're lying about them.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:This is true. It's something already discussed before. If you take the time to read and understand the following DNA Tribe document (I can always answer some questions too for help). People can see clearly the Horn African region is composed of about 70% of foreigners according to their sample. 70% of individuals who are genetically closer (in term of frequencies of alleles) to other regions than Horn Africa. It's hard to know if it's a sample bias or truly the level of admixture in modern Horn Africa (or a little bit of both). Nevertheless, that's the reason why the genetic profile of the mummies (their STR alleles) were found only at low frequency in the Horn African region. The genetic profile of the mummies, their STR alleles, being more common in other regions of Africa not so admixed with "recent" post dynastic immigration like the Great Lakes, Southern Africa and Tropical West Africa.
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
If today's Horn and Sahelian Africans score lower on MLI relative to the ancient Egyptians, it's probably because they've acquired a large Eurasian component in the last three thousand years that wasn't present in Egypt's formative period. It's this recent Eurasian introduction that's pulling them away from ancient Egyptians and modern West/Central/Southern Africans.
For example, Amenhotep III STR profiles, as determined in the JAMA study, is 222.53 times more prevalent in the African Great Lakes region than the other regions of the world as a whole.
We can see above (if people take the time to read and understand the document) that Horn Africans are composed of about 70% of Eurasian individuals.
It's no wonder they are within the Eurasian cluster on the DNA Tribes STR genetic distance tree. They are composed of 70% of individuals who match Eurasian regions (Arabian, North African, Mesopotamian, etc). At least their str samples of Horn African population is.
Link to DNA Tribes document (same period as the DNA Tribes analysis of the Ancient DNA/aDNA of the mummies): http://www.dnatribes.com/sample-results/dnatribes-global-survey-regional-affinities.pdf
quote:--Bayazit Yunusbayev, Oleg Balanovsky et al.
Bedouins, Jordanians, Palestinians and Saudi Arabians are located in close proximity to each other, which is consistent with a common origin in the Arabian Peninsula25, whereas the Egyptian, Moroccan, Mozabite Berber, and Yemenite samples are located closer to sub- Saharan populations (Fig. 1a and Supplementary Fig. 2a).
quote:And are you the spokesman for a Horn Africans or anyone else for that matter? Your self-proclaimed one?
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^ We don't need clown to make post in this thread. You're not the spokesman of Horn African or anybody else for that matter. And there's nothing special said about Horn Africans here. What are you referring to?
quote:Instead of clowning your way out. Why don't you just read and try to understand the document. My analysis is pretty straightforward.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:And are you the spokesman for a Horn Africans or anyone else for that matter? Your self-proclaimed one?
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^ We don't need clown to make post in this thread. You're not the spokesman of Horn African or anybody else for that matter. And there's nothing special said about Horn Africans here. What are you referring to?
Reread, if you say this to the average Horn African, they will tell you that you're lying about them. Me telling you this has nothing to do with being a spokesman for anyone, I'm merely telling you what you'll get as an answer. That's all.
If not so according to you, get yourself a ticked to the Horn of Africa. And ask them this yourself. Make sure you'll record it, on your phone or cam'.
Ps, if you click the link you'll read more about Horn Africans.
quote:Instead of saying that I'm clowning "my way"..., you need to go to the Horn of Africa and say this. So they can analyze you.
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Instead of clowning your way out. Why don't you just read and try to understand the document. My analysis is pretty straightforward.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:And are you the spokesman for a Horn Africans or anyone else for that matter? Your self-proclaimed one?
Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
^^ We don't need clown to make post in this thread. You're not the spokesman of Horn African or anybody else for that matter. And there's nothing special said about Horn Africans here. What are you referring to?
Reread, if you say this to the average Horn African, they will tell you that you're lying about them. Me telling you this has nothing to do with being a spokesman for anyone, I'm merely telling you what you'll get as an answer. That's all.
If not so according to you, get yourself a ticked to the Horn of Africa. And ask them this yourself. Make sure you'll record it, on your phone or cam'.
Ps, if you click the link you'll read more about Horn Africans.
quote:E1b1b1a1b. V32
The Northeast Africa-based E1b1b1a subclade is defined by SNP M78. Somalia, Sudan and Egypt are among the present day countries with very high frequencies (60-90%) of the E1b1b1a M78 subclade. The STR data also support its origin in this area with a TMRCA estimated at 14-23 kya.
quote:E1b1b1e. V6
The E1b1b1a1b (V32) subclade is a descendant of E1b1b1a1 (V12). E1b1b1a1b/V32 is highest in Somalia (47-75%), Sudan (52%) and Ethiopia (40%). All these chromosomes detected to date fall into the East African M78 g microsatellite cluster, which is associated with Cushitic (Afro-Asiatic) language groups in Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya. There is some notion that the Great Rift Valley acted as a barrier to isolate language and genetic groups in this region. This subclade is abundant in Somalia, although the STR diversity is rather low. This data would suggest that the E1b1b1a1b/V32 Somali population was shaped by a founder effect, somewhat recently.
quote:
his somewhat rare haplogroup, E1b1b1e (V6), has only been observed in East Africa with the most appreciable levels seen in Ethiopia (4-17%). Kenya and Somalia also harbor a moderate frequency (5%) of this subclade.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
I don't know what the figures you're citing even mean.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Mestizo 0.78, African Great Lakes 0.71.
48.23 vs 42.81, same magnitude. Big deal.
quote:Trying to make sense of this myself:
Originally posted by Swenet:
@Gramps
Why does Ramses III's MLI score have, by far, the
highest TribeScore with the Horn of Africa region?
What are the implications of this? No running away,
no sleight of mouth, no trolling; I expect an answer.
Ramses III's TribeScores relative to DNA Tribes'
Old World top 6 regional constructs:
Horn region - 0.93
Great Lakes region - 0.84
Tropical West African - 0.76
Levantine - 0.76
North African - 0.75
Southern African - 0.74
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:So let me get this straight, the juxtaposition of MLI score and TribeScore says that Ramses III's MLI score for the Horn of Africa is higher than 93% of actual Horners?
Q: What are MLI scores?
A: Each DNA Tribes Native and Global Population Match and World Region Match is listed with a Match Likelihood
Index (MLI) score that indicates your odds of belonging to that population relative to your odds of belonging to a
generic human population. For instance, a Native Population Match with Macedonia scored 45.2 indicates your
genetic ancestry is 45.2 times as likely in Macedonia as in the world.
Population and world region match results are provided in a ranked listing, from most likely to least likely. Top
ranked scores indicate your best population or regional matches in the DNA Tribes database. All matches can be
compared against each other as odds ratios. For instance, if you obtain a score of 25.0 for Bavarian and 5.0 for
Macedonian, this means your genetic profile is 25.0/5.0 = 5.0 times as likely to be Bavarian as Macedonian.
Q: What are TribeScores?
TribeScores are a unique scoring method developed by DNA Tribes that compares a person's match scores for a
population to the scores of actual members within that ethnic group or region. Each DNA Tribes match includes a
TribeScore in parentheses, listing your MLI score’s percentile in that population. TribeScores compares your MLI
scores to members of each ethnic group and world region. For instance, results listing “Switzerland (0.73)”
indicate that your MLI score is higher than 73% of scores from this Swiss reference population, and lower than 27%
of these Swiss individuals. TribeScores of (0.05) and above are within the expected range for a population, and
TribeScores between the (0.25) and above are ordinary or typical for members of that population. TribeScores
indicate how high or low your score is in the specific context of each population, providing the necessary point
of reference to explain each MLI score.
quote:Thanks for the clarification.
Originally posted by Swenet:
They say it a little clumsy but what it boils down
to is that Ramses III's STR profile is in the top 7%
of the best matches for the Horn of African region,
while Ramses III's STR is in the top 16% best matches
for the Great Lakes region, and so on. It's a ranking
of how well Ramses III fits each respective region,
in the context of that region's known affinity to
all other regions. So, if Tropical West Africa region
has a TribeScore of 1 in my results, it is the
region that's at the absolute top of the list of
regions I have affinity with.
Xxyman is running away from addressing this and
playing games because he he knows what it says.
It says that Ramses III is a good match for the
SSA regions, but Ramses III is not in the top 10%
of best matches for any region, other than the
Horn of Africa region. There is a good gap there,
too. The epicentre is clearly in the eastern side
of the continent and the TribeScores then taper
off as one goes west to other African regions.
quote:More like distortion and disinformation.
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Thanks for the clarification.
Originally posted by Swenet:
They say it a little clumsy but what it boils down
to is that Ramses III's STR profile is in the top 7%
of the best matches for the Horn of African region,
while Ramses III's STR is in the top 16% best matches
for the Great Lakes region, and so on. It's a ranking
of how well Ramses III fits each respective region,
in the context of that region's known affinity to
all other regions. So, if Tropical West Africa region
has a TribeScore of 1 in my results, it is the
region that's at the absolute top of the list of
regions I have affinity with.
quote:Not surprising- the page has few credible sources.
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
I just bumped into this page, and I'm shocked to that I read.
I have no idea how they come to this conclusion.
quote:http://www.southern-africa.arroukatchee.fr/namibia/people/himba.htm
The Himba are, basically, from the Nile region in Egypt.
They are historically distant cousins of the Maasai. After a migration of several centuries, they arrived in Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia.
The Himba are an ethnic group, who, like all peoples Herero, belongs to the Bantu language group, a set of ethnic groups covering the entire southern part of Africa. The Bantu are, above all, farmers, sedentary and gained control of the iron.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
tic! toc!
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
I don't know what the figures you're citing even mean.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Mestizo 0.78, African Great Lakes 0.71.
48.23 vs 42.81, same magnitude. Big deal.
quote:
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
Horn Africans individuals composing the Horn
Africa populations from their sampled data are
70% from other genetic regions (they are "recent"
non-Horn African)
quote:
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
As both those royal families match Great Lakes,
Southern, West, Sahelian and Horn Africans in
that order the most which are all populations part
of the Sub-Saharan African cluster on the graph
above
quote:
Originally posted by beyoku:
When looking at other results EXPLAIN the circumstances where White Americans are more than twice as likely to have a profile in the Horn of Africa than Ancient Egyptian Mummies?
quote:The explanation is simple. It's because for the White American study they used 22-STR markers(location) while for the Ancient Egyptian mummy studies they used 8-STR markers (those made available in the JAMA and BMJ study). When you take more markers (with a value above one), they add up (as a product) to each others, making the MLI scores even higher. Within all probability, if they used more than 8-STR markers for the mummies, the MLI scores would be even higher.
Originally posted by beyoku:
[QB]
What about this - A white american:
http://www.dnatribes.com/sample-results/dnatribes-sample-us-caucasian.pdf
Horn of Africa / white American = 38.
horn of Africa / Egyptian mummy = Ethiopia = 14.79****!!!!!
So a White American has a genome that is twice as likely to be found in Ethiopia compared to an Egyptian mummmy?
quote:Based on what? What the hell are you basing this on?
Originally posted by Amun Ra the Anticlimax:
When you take more markers (with a value above one),
they add up (as a product) to each others, making
the MLI scores even higher.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Pooh Pooh? So I take it you buy the ONE hg-H presence in Magedelean(?) Sample. I do not. Why? It was NOT replicated. Plus it matches one of the tester in the lab. Coalescene age is imprecise. I have always said that.
The only definite method is systematic haplotype comparision. Not even frequency does it because of drift.
quote:.
Originally posted by beyoku:
@ Tukuler. I am not at a university and have no special access. We talked about the book on the FB group. I purchased the book and highlighted the pertinent article. If you have additional data please provide.
quote:Correction, I just graduated from UCSD and no longer attend there.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Unless I am
again mistaken, TC is at university and so is
Sundiata but I don't know if they can or will
do what I asked of you.
quote:Got this B.A. in Biological Anthropology too. In theory that would rank among the most pertinent fields for the topics we discuss here on a daily basis, but alas, my courses focused more on early human evolution than racial topics.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Wrong again, damn.
Anyway congratulations and much success in your career.
Time does fly, seems like Underpantsman was just yesterday.
quote:.
Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Got this B.A. in Biological Anthropology too. In theory that would rank among the most pertinent fields for the topics we discuss here on a daily basis, but alas, my courses focused more on early human evolution than racial topics.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Wrong again, damn.
Anyway congratulations and much success in your career.
Time does fly, seems like Underpantsman was just yesterday.
However, these days I'm studying art and graphic design at a community college.
code:9 8 7 6
21098765432109876543210987654321
................................
|----------| Near East (not Arabia)
|-----| Iberian Peninsula
|-----------| North Africa
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Let me know how that Fairy Tale ends.
From Arabia to Europe to Africa. No! No! Is it from the Near to Africa?
The Salient point from above (Kefi 2014!!!!!!!!) Ennafaa 2012???
Progress has been made. sic
===
Quote:
If you weren't practicing demogoguery you'd
admit I wrote H1 originated in Near East
and spread to southwest Europe and from
there to the Maghreb
===
Get the ..with that nonsense!!
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
6. Kefi new paper (2014abstract) implies that H is more diverse in the Tunisians area compared to other European regions.
quote:xyyman again you mislead
Phylogeny and genetic structure of Tunisians and their position within Mediterranean populations.
Kefi R1, Hsouna S, Ben Halim N, Lasram K, Romdhane L, Messai H, Abdelhak S.
Author information
Abstract
Abstract Tunisia is located at the crossroads of Europe, the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa. This position might lead to numerous waves of migrations, contributing to the current genetic landscape of Tunisians. In this study, we analyzed 815 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences from Tunisia in order to characterize the mitochondrial DNA genetic structure of this region, to construct the processes for its composition and to compare it to other Mediterranean populations. To that end, additional 4206 mtDNA sequences were compiled from previous studies performed in African (1237), Near Eastern (231) and European (2738) populations. Both phylogenetic and statistical analyses were performed. This study confirmed the mosaic genetic structure of the Tunisian population with the predominance of the Eurasian lineages, followed by the Sub-Saharan and North African lineages. Among Tunisians, the highest haplogroup and haplotype diversity were observed in particular in the Capital Tunis. No significant differentiation was observed between both geographical (Northern versus Southern Tunisia) and different ethnic groups in Tunisia. Our results highlight the presence of outliers and most frequent unique sequences in Tunisia (10.2%) compared to 45 Mediterranean populations. Phylogenetic analysis showed that the majority of Tunisian localities were closer to North Africans and Near Eastern populations than to Europeans. The exception was found for Berbers from Jerba which are clustered with Sardinians and Valencians.
quote:
Among Tunisians, the highest haplogroup and haplotype diversity were observed in particular in the Capital Tunis.
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Speaking about Neolithics...
In the vain of AEians affinity to South Africans.
The closest "living" relatives of the Neolithic farmers in the Levant are ...for those who learn through pictures.
Fernandez et al June2014(my bad with the name Dr Winters)
@ Dr Winters. I will.
These are the popualtion with cloest affinity to Neolithic Farmers.
See the correlation? Anyone?
Sub-Saharan admixture = Neolithic Farmers
quote:Can you provide a link to the Fernandez paper?
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman:
[qb] I hope Beyoku understand why I spent so much time on the Bediouns. They are the most significant/indigenous group in the Levant. That is why they are always included in these studies. They are the remnants of the original inhabitants of the Levant. Remnants of the Natufians.
Many of the ethnic groups that live there now are newcomers...Gonzalez et al June 2014
Get it? got it?!
Pat myself on the back. quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Speaking about Neolithics...
In the vain of AEians affinity to South Africans.
The closest "living" relatives of the Neolithic farmers in the Levant are ...for those who learn through pictures.
Gonzalez et al June2014
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Can you provide a link to the Gonzales paper?
quote:(two days later after being exposed by the lioness) >>
Originally posted by xyyman:
@ Dr Winters. I will.
quote:^^corrects red herring name "Gonzales" to actual author Fernandez (thinks all Spanish people are named Jose Gonzalez)
Originally posted by xyyman:
Fernandez et al June2014 (my bad with the name Dr Winters)
quote:3) In other words don't trust any xyyman info
Haplogroup R0 is especially prevalent in the Near East and North Africa with a mean frequency in both regions around 6%. The maximum frequencies of R0 were detected in South Arabian populations such as Bedouin, Oman and Saudi Arabia...
The remaining haplotypes had a very limited geographic distribution, being only documented in 1 individual from Bulgaria (16311C-K); 3 individuals from Turkey, Qatar and Yemen (16223T-L3); 4 Irani, Karakalpak, Turkish and Bedouin individuals (16256T-H) and 3 Druze from Israel (16224C 16311C 16366T-K).
quote:_______________________________________
Finally, the skeleton H8 belonged to the African L3 lineage, this being the most prevalent African haplogroup found in present-day Near Eastern populations...
The two biggest groups detected were Clusters 1 and 3, joining 43 of the 60 populations of the database. Cluster 1 mainly included European populations and it was distinguished by high frequencies of haplogroups H, U5, U4 and HV0 and by low frequencies of Asian and African types (Table 2).
Near Eastern and some Caucasian datasets were grouped in Cluster 3. They were separated from European populations mainly by high frequencies of haplogroups J and T and low frequencies of H, HV0 and U5. ....
Cluster 4 included populations from Africa or with a strong African component and it was defined by high frequencies of African haplogroups (L and U6) and low frequencies of haplogroup H. Western Asian populations were clearly separated from Near Eastern datasets in clusters 5 and 6. Both were distinguished by a high frequency of Asian haplogroups and a low frequency of European types.
quote:yeah try making your own thread here for once entitled
Originally posted by xyyman:
Do you want me to post who the Afro-Iranians are within Iran? I did a whole piece a few months back. I can dig it up.
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Don't care what you said.
Care what geneticists say.
They say H1's diversity is highest in Near East
as I told you months ago.
It's not me who wins this one.
It's the science of molecular biology that wins.
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008885;p=3#000134
Since you were too lazy to follow the link before I'll repost
- Frequency alone is a poor origin indicator.
Haplotype diversity is one better measure
and you noted L Twareg are extremely low in it.
Again, what we're missing is figures for
* nucleotide diversity
* paragroup H1* prescence
two better indicators of origin. Compare
them between Near East vs elsewhere. I'd
think whoever has them most is the likely
source.
You may doubt it but you have read Ennaffa's
2009 diversity figures that I posted earlier
* (87 ± 5) for the Near East
* (75 ± 3) Iberian Peninsula
* (67 ± 6) North Africa
taken from the results section of her report
</font></font></font></font></font>
quote:--Frigi et al., 2010
The dates for subhaplogroups H1 and H3 (13,000 and 10,000 years, respectively) in Iberian and North African populations allow for this possibility. Kefi et al.’s (2005) data on ancient DNA could be viewed as being in agreement with such a presence in North Africa in ancient times (about 15,000–6,000 years ago) and with the fact that the North African populations are considered by most scholars as having their closest relations with European and Asian populations (Cherni et al. 2008; Ennafaa et al. 2009; Kefi et al. 2005; Rando et al. 1998). However, considering the general understanding nowadays that human settlement of the rest of the world emerged from eastern northern Africa less than 50,000 years ago, a better explanation of these haplogroups might be that their frequencies reflect the original modern human population of these parts of Africa as much as or more than intrusions from outside the continent. The ways that gene frequencies may increase or decrease based on adaptive selection, gene flow, and/or social processes is under study and would benefit from the results of studies on autosomal and Y-chromosome markers.
quote:Have I responded to this before or not?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
TrollKillah, in your opinion, does haplogorup R originate in Africa?
quote:I forgot, please refresh my memory
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Have I responded to this before or not?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
TrollKillah, in your opinion, does haplogorup R originate in Africa?
quote:How many times it needs to be refreshed?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:I forgot, please refresh my memory
Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor:
quote:Have I responded to this before or not?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
TrollKillah, in your opinion, does haplogorup R originate in Africa?
quote:.
H3 is African while H1 is Near Eastern.. Don’t you understand that?
Make up your flip-flopping mind!!!!!!!!.
quote:you believe H originates in Africa right?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
TrollKillah, in your opinion, does haplogorup R originate in Africa?
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
So folks we have H3 being African..next up proving H1 is also African...
H1 is ALSO African. To be proven Why? hg-V diversity in Western Africa. Stay tuned.
We both agree BOTH (H1 and H3) are NOT European.
Quote:
long ago, a combo of
* frequency
* diversity
* presence of paragroup
hmmmmm!
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So Sage agrees. Neither H1 nor H3 is a European lineage?
One is African H3, and the other is Near eastern H1.
My apologies I was confused with the wondering nomadic hg-H women in your previous statement..
quote:.
Originally posted by xyyman:
So folks we have H3 being African..next up proving H1 is also African...
H1 is ALSO African. To be proven Why? hg-V diversity in Western Africa. Stay tuned.
We both agree BOTH (H1 and H3) are NOT European.
Quote:
long ago, a combo of
* frequency
* diversity
* presence of paragroup
hmmmmm!
quote:Here are older clades to the phylogenetic tree.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:you believe H originates in Africa right?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
TrollKillah, in your opinion, does haplogorup R originate in Africa?
You put up a chart showing how R is the ancestor of H
If you are scared to answer just say you're scared and we'll call it a wrap
At least xyyman states an opinion
You post quotes and imply something but too meek to take a stand on the issue in your own words
quote:From (Kemp, 2005, p.54) Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation
Moving to the opposite geographical extremity, the very small sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline of variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine.73 The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans. - Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation (Kemp, 2005, p.54)
quote:xyyman beliefs
Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] But you concede H3 is African?
BTW. I still contend H1 is also Arican. I am only responding to the Ennafaa data.
Why is H1 and H3 African? Presence of R0 and V in Africa.
quote:It's a bit ridiculous since the whole point of Y-DNA/MtDNA haplogroups is studying the relationship between populations and follow migration routes of people within and outside Africa up the the time of the Y-DNA and MtDNA "adam" and "eve". I don't know what kind of clown would read and talk about haplogroups just to distort their meaning days after days.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:xyyman beliefs
Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] But you concede H3 is African?
BTW. I still contend H1 is also Arican. I am only responding to the Ennafaa data.
Why is H1 and H3 African? Presence of R0 and V in Africa.
9) the presence of a haplogroup in Africa means it orignated there
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
.
Mike just created a really really fascinating thread on black people in Europe. Authencity is the only hurdle to me. But it is definitely interesting read. Don't you think?
quote:No it's not interesting it's stupid
Originally posted by Mike111:
BLACKS IN THE UNITED STATES ARE NOT, AND WILL NEVER BE, INTERESTED IN MOVING TO AFRICA.
THE REASON IS BECAUSE THEY ARE FOR THE MOST PART, NON-AFRICAN!!!!
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
.
Mike just created a really really fascinating thread on black people in Europe. Authencity is the only hurdle to me. But it is definitely interesting read. Don't you think?quote:No it's not interesting it's stupid
Originally posted by Mike111:
BLACKS IN THE UNITED STATES ARE NOT, AND WILL NEVER BE, INTERESTED IN MOVING TO AFRICA.
THE REASON IS BECAUSE THEY ARE FOR THE MOST PART, NON-AFRICAN!!!!
BTW, this thread is supposed to be about U6
but all I see is H worship
quote:His thread is called Black man, White Lies
Originally posted by xyyman:
I am talking about the excerpts he posted, not blacks in America..... eg Ispwhich man
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:True. But no one has ever shown any data/evidence of any back migration into Africa, yet other scholars will use this paper to make such a claim.
Originally posted by xyyman:
Sham…yes/maybe
We need not get caught up with headliners, as what Lioness just posted. That section Lioness posted is there to create controversy. As I said the author provided no proof or data showing U6 or U entered from the Levant. They only speculated that U/U6 MAY have entered from the Levant. That is ONLY their assumption. That is NOT what the paper is about. From that assumption they THEN went on to provided data/proof on the diversity and frequency of U6 and the subclades within and outside of Africa. The paper is really about U6 in Africa.
The paper has some important disclosure; don’t get caught up in the hype. The devil is in the details.
.
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
"I see Black people"
quote:Am J Phys Anthropol. 1996 Mar;99(3):413-28.
A multivariate analysis of four prehistoric and nine historic populations from the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands with large sample sizes (n > 30 individuals for the neurocranium and n > 15 for the facial skeleton) is presented, considering 874 male and 557 female skulls and using 20 craniometric measurements. Cluster analyses have been undertaken using the squared Euclidean distance as a measure of proximity and the average linkage between groups (UPGMA), and neighbor-joining algorithms as a branching method, and a bootstrap analysis was used to assess the robustness of the clustering topology. The study was complemented with a principal coordinate analysis and with the application of the Mantel test to measure the degree of correspondence between the information furnished by the female and the male samples. The analyses show that the main source of morphometric variability in the Iberian Peninsula is the Basque population. The second source of variation is provided by two populations (Muslims and Jews), different from the rest from an archaeological and cultural point of view, and can probably be attributed to influences from sub-Saharan Africa. The massive deportations of the Jews in 1492 and of the Moors between the 15th and 17th centuries may have erased this source of variability from the present population of the Iberian Peninsula. The remaining studied populations, including samples from Castile, Cantabria, Andalusia, Catalonia and Balearic Islands, are grouped together, showing a notable morphological homogeneity, despite their temporal and geographic heterogeneity. These results are in general agreement with those obtained in synthetic maps, by analyzing multiple genetic markers. In such studies, the Basque population is described as the main source of genetic variability, not only in the Iberian Peninsula, but also in Western Europe.
quote:Polimorfismos de DNA mitocondrial en poblaciones antiguas de la cuenca mediterránea.
The presence of almost 50% of sub-Saharan lineages L1b, L2 and L3 in Abauntz Chalcolithic deposits and Tres Montes, in Navarre, suggests the existence of an important gene flow from Africa to this geographic region.
The low frequency of these lineages in the current Spanish population indicates that it has gene produced a replacement from the Chalcolithic period.
The entry of African lineages could occur during the Paleolithic, during the Neolithic period, or during both periods.
The phylogenetically related sequences present in the Chalcolithic deposit Iberian Peninsula and Neolithic and Chalcolithic samples of the Middle East points to Neolithic as most likely time of entry into the peninsula of these lineages.
Description: SUMMARY OF DOCTORAL THESIS The origins of European populations have been addressed from different disciplines, highlighting the contribution of population genetics studies. Shuffle two moments in prehistory in which it has been possible to model the gene pool of populations in Europe: the spread of Neolithic and Palaeolithic period expansions. The ability to recover from bygone population genetics provides a unique opportunity to test the assumptions made in situ from other disciplines. We studied 197 samples from 115 dental and bone individuals 17 archaeological sites Sumerian Neolithic and Middle East, when Meroitic Nubia and Paleolithic era, post-Neolithic and Neolithic of the Iberian Peninsula. We obtained complete sequences of mitochondrial DNA of 244 bp of 35 different individuals, were compared with sequences from the same region of present individuals from 38 populations in Europe, Africa and Middle East. In phylogenetic reconstructions based on Reynolds distance groups of ancient samples are grouped together, separated from the rest of current populations. However, phylogenetic reconstructions made from the haplotypes of ancient and modern samples denote that although the majority of ancient mitochondrial variants are not present in current populations sampled, may relate more or less closely with them. The composition of haplotypes and haplogroups of ancient samples from the Near East and the Iberian Peninsula differs markedly from that found in the current populations of these geographical regions. In the ancient Middle East show highlights in particular the absence of mitochondrial haplogroup J, U3, W and X, associated with the Neolithic expansion into Europe. This may be due either to the sample obtained is not old chronologically or geographically-representative populations of the Middle East that spread during the Neolithic well that these variants were not introduced in Europe during the Neolithic. In the ancient sample of the Iberian Peninsula highlights the presence of 50% of sub-Saharan lines. These lines may have been introduced during the Solutrean, the Mesolithic or Neolithic. This work also delved into various technical aspects of obtaining authentic ancient DNA and the influence of several variables in the preservation of genetic material. ABSTRACT The origins of the European Populations Studied extensively from Have Been Different disciplines. It is Thought That ancient demic expansions, like occurred After the Late Those Glacial Maximum or DURING the Middle East from neolithic diffussion to Europe. The Possibility to recover DNA from past Populations offers an unique Opportunity to test in situ These hypothesis. 197 It Were Analyzed teeth and bones from 115 individuos Archaeological Sites and 17 Different from Middle East and the Iberian Peninsula. It WAS possible to recover mitochondrial DNA sequences 244pb-35 from Different Individuals. They Were 38 Compared to sequences from European, African and Middle Eastern Populations present-day. Phylogenetic Reconstructions from Reynolds genetic distance Showed That ancient samples clustered together, extant from Clearly Separated Populations. Howeve, based phylogenetic Reconstructions on ancient and modern mitochondrial haplotypes Showed That ancient haplotypes are related to extant ones. Haplotype frequencies and haplogroup in samples from the ancient Middle East and the Iberian Peninsula are Different from Those Clearly present in the Same Geographical Nowadays regions. Haplogroups related to J neolithic expansion to Europe, U3, W and X-are absent in ancient middle eastern sample. There are two possible Explanations to this fact. First, It Could Be That the ancient samples possible Analyzed wont be representative of the Middle Eastern Populations That expanded the neolithic. Second, It Could Be That Those haplogroups Also possible wont Have Been made to them in Europe associated with expansions to neolithic demic. At This work It Were Also Examined technical Several Aspects related to the obtention of genuine ancient DNA and the Influence of Different variables in DNA preservation.
