posted
Are these F****G Eurasians lying…again? – Now it is STP carrying R1b!!
I told Capra that these Eurasian researchers were lying when they make shyte like the Islanders off the coast of Africa were uninhabited. Cape Verde. If we had our own labs and samples this would be resolved already. The pattern is consistent with R1b/R1b-V88 off the coast of Africa and on mainland Africa since the Holocene. We know R1b was present in the Canary Islands BEFORE the supposed Iberians colonized these Islands. Berbers can migrate across open waters but not their sibling further south?? Lies! Lies! and more lies! If they do a deep dive on the samples and analyzed the haplotypes we would know for sure. But they wouldn’t. Why? Understand the game.
--- Original Research Article Y-Chromosome Lineages in Sao Tome Prıncipe Islands - Evidence of European Influence - RITA Gonzales
Abstract The Y-chromosome haplogroup composition of the population of São Tomé e Príncipe (STP) archipelago was analyzed using 25 biallelic markers and compared with populations of different origins from Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Two main Y-chromosome haplogroups were found: E3a, very common among sub-Saharans accounts for 84.2% of the paternal lineages and R1b, typical of West Eurasia, represents 8.7% of the overall male population. Nevertheless, we detected in the population of STP a significant heterogeneous distribution of R1b among the two main ethnic groups of the archipelago: Forros (10.3%) and Angolares (6.6%). Together, haplogroups known to be prevalent in West Eurasia reach 12.5% of the chromosomes analyzed unequally distributed among the two groups: Forros present 17.7% while Angolares display only 8.2% of west Eurasian haplogroups. Our findings suggest that, despite its sub-Saharan genetic background, a relevant contribution of European paternal lineages is present in nowadays STP population. This influence has shown to be stronger in Forros than in Angolares, which could be explained by the social isolation that these have last experienced through their history.
Sao Tome´ e Prıncipe (STP) islands, located in the Gulf of Guinea, 300 km from the West coast of Africa, were **discovered uninhabited** by Portuguese sailors in 1470 (Peres, 1960). Xyyman comment: Yeah riiight! Uninhabited?
The majority of Sa˜o Tome´ population speaks Forros, a mixed dialect between Portuguese and Bantu languages used by liberated slaves, known as Forros, considered the most ancient African inhabitants of the archipelago (Henriques, 2000;
TheAngolares community that inhabits Sa˜o Tome´ Island has resisted to miscegenation and still maintains their one own Bantu language. The origin of the Angolares people remains unknown and popular belief tells they are descends of the survivors of a slave shipwreck in the middle of the 16th century roaming from the West coast of Africa (Henriques, 2000; Romana, 1997).
A study on b-globin haplotypes and eight autosomal markers (APOA1, AT3, FY, LPL, OCA2, RB1, Sb19.3, and GC) indicated that the peopling of Sa˜o Tome´ provided the combination of diverse African contributions and European admixture (10.7%)that emerged from the overseas population relocations promoted by the Atlantic slave trade (Tomas, 2002). A previous study on seven Y-chromosome STR loci detected haplotypes, most likely of European ancestry on Sa˜o Tome´ e Principe, showed statistically significant differences between Angolares and Forros (Trovoada et al., 2001).
The second most common haplogroup in Sa˜o Tome´ e Principe is R1b (8.7%), a typical haplogroup from Western Europe, most likely carried by Portuguese settlers suggesting their genetic contribution to this population. R1b is more predominant among Forros (10.3%) than Angolares (6.6%) ethnic groups. Clade R1 is the most frequent and
Haplogroup R1b was found to be the most dominant Y chromosomal lineage in Portugal, including the North Atlantic archipelagos of Azores and Madeira, covering more than half (55%) of the Y chromosomal lineages in each population (Gonc¸alves et al., 2005). More than 17% of Caboverdean Y-chromosomes are R1b, a West European influence in the archipelago settlement process (Gonc¸alves et al., 2003). Other haplogroups found in STP show only marginal frequencies (Fig. 1). Haplogroup I, also a characteristic clade for many different European populations, constitute 2% of STP population. Among Forros this percentage reaches 4.4%. Haplogroups P* and G, with a Eurasian origin, and F*, Middle East origin, were found in only one individual each in STP. Considering haplogroups of West Eurasian origin (R1b, F*, G, I, and P*) found in STP, Forros shows a higher frequency (17.6%) than Angolares (8.2%). Haplogroup A2, one of the basal clades in the Y-human phylogenetic tree, typical in sub- Saharan Africans at modest frequencies (Semino et al., 2002; Underhill et al., 2000, 2001; Y Chromosome Consortium, 2002), constitutes 1.3% of our samples.
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
Dissecting the genetic history of São Tomé e Príncipe: a new window from Y-chromosome biallelic markers. Trovoada MJ1, Tavares L, Gusmão L, Alves C, Abade A, Amorim A, Prata MJ. Author information Abstract Twenty biallelic Y chromosome markers were analyzed in Angolares, Forros and Tongas, three population groups from the African archipelago of São Tomé e Príncipe. While most male lineages belonged to sub-Saharan haplogroups, the component of European origin added up 23.9% in the archipelago. This contrasts with the reported absence of European mtDNA lineages, and the combined findings testify to a strong sex-biased admixture process during the long-lasting colonial period in São Tomé e Príncipe. Furthermore, the male mediated European component was clearly found to be ***out of proportion**** to the small demographic impact of the Portuguese on the islands, reflecting high variance in the reproductive success of the individuals that contributed to its peopling. The male portion of European ancestry was 33.3% in Forros, 27.3% in Tongas and approximately two-fold less, 14.5%, in Angolares. The Angolares also showed the lowest haplogroup diversity and the most reduced number of different haplogroups. The current results reinforce our previous evidence pointing to remarkable restrictions in gene flow between Angolares and other São Tomean inhabitants, in agreement with their considerable isolation and confinement to the south-eastern tip of São Tomé until recently.
Elmaestro Member # 22566
posted
What a shit study ...and an even more shit thread... please edit the thread title and provide some insight on to why you believe any of this is important.
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
Whaaat!? Why is ANY thread important? If you are not interested in the thread …simply don’t read it. I do that all the time in Deseret .
Anyways …why is it important ….You haven’t had your coffee today?
Quote “Furthermore, the male mediated European component was clearly found to be ***out of proportion**** to the small demographic impact of the Portuguese on the islands,”
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
So are they saying all this bs story about the islands being un-inhabited are all lies. Of course it is. These PEOPLE lie. They are liars!
Quote: “The remaining Sao Tomean chromosomes fall into haplogroups – C,F∗(xJK), E3b1, R1a1 and R1b – that are usually not present in sub-Saharan Africa, and contrarily are common throughout Europe, which means that they were **likely** introduced into Sao Tome Prıncipe by European males. As a whole they added up 23.9% of lineages in the archipelago, and this value represents the proportion of male-mediated admixture between Europeans and Africans that took place during the settlement process. For an archipelago considered to have had a population trajectory essentially directed towards “Africanization” (Henriques, 2000), the estimate obtained here for the European contribution indicates that this notion*** needs to be revised***.”
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
To those who are keeping score. “European” haplogroups in West Africa cannot be accounted for by colonization!!!!! Soa Tome Principe, Cape Verde, Canary Islands and the Azores carry a disproportionate amount of external haplogroups that cannot be accounted for by colonization or “slavery”.
In short these Islands were occupied BEFORE the Europeans arrived. The question is how did they pull off this big lie? Let us look at the “history” books…………………….
Elmaestro Member # 22566
posted
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Whaaat!? Why is ANY thread important? If you are not interested in the thread …simply don’t read it. I do that all the time in Deseret .
Anyways …why is it important ….You haven’t had your coffee today?
Quote “Furthermore, the male mediated European component was clearly found to be ***out of proportion**** to the small demographic impact of the Portuguese on the islands,”
All this hype for slight disproportion. ...In favor of European contribution? No unique haplogroups on the island predating colonialism or document european settlement? And you haven't pointed out the R1b lineages doc'ed. (probably not even available in this study smh)
...It's a no from me dawg.
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
No dawg...R1b-V88 was on the island BEFORE Europeans
xyyman Member # 13597
posted
Again another study that find’s “European” ancestry in West Africans that cannot be accounted for by colonization”. Lioness…what is that person's name you spoke about who states Africans migrated to the Americas long before Trans Atlantic Slavery. I was non-believer but….his story is starting to sound …IDK. We know the current line we are being fed do not add up.
So again what would it take to pull off such a massive feat?
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Just for the record.
Youthful Jews of the Portugueza Nação were directly expelled to São Tomé. The females were forcibly married to native males. The males were forcibly married to native females. The S&P Israelites weren't permitted endogamy.
posted 
