Divorcing the Late Upper Palaeolithic demographic histories of mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6 in Africa Erwan Pennarun, Toomas Kivisild, Ene Metspalu, Mait Metspalu, Tuuli Reisberg, Doron M Behar, Sacha C Jones and Richard Villems
BMC Evolutionary Biology 2012, 12:234
Abstract (provisional)
Background A Southwest Asian origin and dispersal to North Africa in the Early Upper Palaeolithic era has been inferred in previous studies for mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6. Both haplogroups have been proposed to show similar geographic patterns and shared demographic histories. Results We report here 24 M1 and 33 U6 new complete mtDNA sequences that allow us to refine the existing phylogeny of these haplogroups. The resulting phylogenetic information was used to genotype a further 131 M1 and 91 U6 samples to determine the geographic spread of their sub-clades. 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. The Bayesian Skyline Plots testify to non- overlapping phases of expansion, and the haplogroups' phylogenies suggest that there are U6 sub-clades that expanded earlier than those in M1. Some M1 and U6 sub-clades could be linked with certain events. For example, U6a1 and M1b, with their coalescent ages of ~20,000-22,000 years ago and earliest inferred expansion in northwest Africa, could coincide with the flourishing of the Iberomaurusian industry, whilst U6b and M1b1 appeared at the time of the Capsian culture.
Conclusions Our high-resolution phylogenetic dissection of both haplogroups and coalescent time assessments suggest that the extant main branching pattern of both haplogroups arose and diversified in the mid-later Upper Palaeolithic, with some sub-clades concomitantly with the expansion of the Iberomaurusian industry. Carriers of these maternal lineages have been later absorbed into and diversified further during the spread of Afro- Asiatic languages in North and East Africa.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Already read it. Good sh!t. I especially like the fact that they know their stuff (in disciplines other than genetics), e.g., taking into account Ibero-Maurusians and Capsians rather than sloppily assuming Berber speakers were in the region back then. Led me to a lot of new leads and finds. Especially in regards to the Dabban culture.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ Correction: Maurusian period! No 'Ibero'. It's evidence like this that supports African origins for these clades even more and I suspect these source populations are the ones who passed on the 'archaic' features displayed among certain groups and some individuals among contemporary Mabhrebians today.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
I've never gotten the name sensitivities, at least not when it comes to populations with unknown provenance. If you have issues with 'Ibero', you might as well have issues with 'Maurusian', as the culture and population have no apparent prior roots in the Maghreb. They can't have prior roots in the Maghreb due to the incompatibility with the coalescence ages of the lineages and their Aterian predecessors. They're not likely to come from sub-Saharan Africa either, due to their cranio-facial (mandible) incongruence with LSA, MSA and modern Africans, and much closer ties to European AMHs. They couldn't have been off-shoots of Nilotic populations for the exact same reasons, and Ibero-Maurusians certainly weren't more similar, osteologically speaking, to late Palaeolithic Egypto-Nubians than to Eurasian AMHs. The gates are closing in on them, and they're not likely to be African.
Also, what do you mean, that ''evidence like this supports the African origin of these clades''? How? Where the African/Asian origin of the clades is concerned, nothing has changed, nor is it likely going to any time soon, as the authors themselves state. Did you even read the paper? If anything, the dates confirm what most scholars have maintained after the revision of the original assumption that M1 was just as old as basal South Asian M, and that all were pre-OOA lineages.
Posted by KingMichael777 (Member # 20401) on :
Interesting stuff.
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Correction: Maurusian period! No 'Ibero'. It's evidence like this that supports African origins for these clades even more and I suspect these source populations are the ones who passed on the 'archaic' features displayed among certain groups and some individuals among contemporary Mabhrebians today.
They say in the article that an Asian origin for U6 and M1 remains speculative. It is a viable origin hypothesis they say, but they found no clear evidence in support.
"A Southwest Asian origin has been proposed for U6 and M1 [27-29]. Yet, this claim remains speculative unless some novel “earlier” Southwest Asian-specific clades, distinct from the known haplogroups, are found in which the described so far M1 and U6 lineages are nested. Claims for basal mutations shared with M1 have recently been made in the case of haplogroup M51 and M20 (both East Asian-specific clades [40,41]): They share a root mutation (C14110T) with M1. However, one should be cautious with phylogenetic inferences drawn from these findings because this mutation is not unique in the phylogeny of mtDNA: it also occurs in the background of non-M haplogroups and therefore identity by descent within haplogroup M remains uncertain. Unfortunately, the sampling of extant populations of Africa and West Asia may not solve the question of their origin...
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]
[i]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."
ASSORTED IBERO/MECHTA AFALOU TEXT DUMP FROM WYSINGER LINK
"The Caspian population, as known from skeletal remains from the burials in middens are less robust, and more gracile than the Mechta-Afalou peoples though they are undoubtedly descended from the.. Not a litte body mutilation is to he seen. This takes the form of incisor tooth extraction (also a feature of the Iberomaurusian), skulls that were modified after death by sawing, cutting and drilling, in one instance to form a kind of mask or 'trophy skull';" --History of humanity, Volume 6 By Sigfried J. de Laet, 1994
and
"Almost the entire region may have been depopulated as a result of extreme aridity. The first sign of people returning dates to around 18,000 t0 20,000 years ago, Mode 5 Epiplaeolithic industries that continue into the Holocene without any abrupt change. In relation to the origins of behavioral modernity and the symbolism question, there is not a lot of direct evidence. If there was a sudden change in behavior toward the end of the Middle Palaeolithic, it corresponds with the complete disappearance of people. On the other hand, the technological norms associated with the Aterian undoubtedly point to the emergence of an ethnic identity that could be expressed in material culture. It was the first true North African "culture" in the full range of its anthropological definition." --P. Willoughby. 2006. The evolution of modern humans in Africa
"Some researchers such as Debenath (1994) argue that the Aterian extends along the coast if Algeria and Morocco with sites decreasing in density farther inland. But Kleindienst suggests that this might be a product of the fact that most research has been done in the Maghreb. for her, there could be a link between the Aterian and the Lupemban industry of central and West Africa, where bifaces and occasional tanged pieces are present in other wise Middle Stone Age contests (Kleindienst 2001:6.9 Hawkins and Kleindienst 2002)." --P. Willoughby. 2006. The evolution of modern humans in Africa
"The Aterian appeares to be a facies of the North African Middle Paleolithic and is characterized by tanged points and oter tools; bifacial points are known from some Aterian sites, notably in the eastern and southern areas, such as Bir Tarfawi in Egypt and Adrar Bous in Niger." -- Encyclopedia of human evolution and prehistory. 1999. Eric Delson, Ian Tattersall, John A. Van Couvering. "The African Epipaleolithic (Mesolithic) sample, comprising material from Nubia (Jebel Sahaba-sites 117 and 8905 and Wadi Haifa) and the Magreb (Afalou-bou-Rhummel and Taforalt), is quite homogenous both morphologically and metrically. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. Volume 96. Issue 3, 1995
Ancient "Asselar Man" from 'North Africa' - Mali, shows some resemblances to nearby Africans
"The bones are those of a man of late middle age, tall (1.70 metres or about 5 ft. 7 in.), distinctly Homo sapiens but not of 'Mediterranean' type. From the shape of the nasal and long bones it is clear that Asselar Man was some sort of negroid. The skull is dolichocephalic and has a high vault, whereas the rather short face is broad. There is marked alveolar-dental prognathism, ansd the mental eminence is well marked. The teeth are large and the third molar well developed. There was avulsion (i.e. 'knocking out') of the upper incisors, an ancient practice. The nearest living type to Asselar Man would seen to be that of the southern African Bantu-speaking peoples." -- Alan Houghton Brodrick. Man and his ancestors (1971)
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
Maurusian is a suggested replacement not meant to be an apple of discord to throw up in peoples' faces. There's a separate thread to develop the concept.
It's strictly geographic in nature. Maurusian takes after Mauretania just as Ibero is after Iberia.
Afro-Asian languages are in Africa and "Asia." Indo-European tongues are in India and Europe. Afro-Americans are people of mostly African origin in America.
Can anyone name Iberian sites of Maurusian industry?
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
Iberomaurusian gives the false impression of Iberian relationship to African industry. We find Magdelenian in Iberia but no Maurusian. Iberia contributed nothing to Maurusian culture/industry or so I've never heard.
Remember Maurusian is an LSA African industry, not a population. The Maurusian populations were Mechta-Afalou and Mechtoids.
Granted, Kefi found Iberian associated mtDNA Hgs at Taforalt but some geneticists suggest H1 and H3 in coastal NW Africa by then were already local not invasive nor imported.
quote: ... most of the older hypotheses about North African population settlement used to suppose an Iberian or an eastern origin. 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).
Above we see Cherni, a member of Frigi's all North African team, who co-authored Frigi's report revise his earlier 2008 view.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Divorcing the Late Upper Palaeolithic demographic histories of mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6 in Africa Erwan Pennarun, Toomas Kivisild, Ene Metspalu, Mait Metspalu, Tuuli Reisberg, Doron M Behar, Sacha C Jones and Richard Villems
BMC Evolutionary Biology 2012, 12:234
Abstract (provisional)
Background A Southwest Asian origin and dispersal to North Africa in the Early Upper Palaeolithic era has been inferred in previous studies for mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6. Both haplogroups have been proposed to show similar geographic patterns and shared demographic histories. Results We report here 24 M1 and 33 U6 new complete mtDNA sequences that allow us to refine the existing phylogeny of these haplogroups. The resulting phylogenetic information was used to genotype a further 131 M1 and 91 U6 samples to determine the geographic spread of their sub-clades. 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. The Bayesian Skyline Plots testify to non- overlapping phases of expansion, and the haplogroups' phylogenies suggest that there are U6 sub-clades that expanded earlier than those in M1. Some M1 and U6 sub-clades could be linked with certain events. For example, U6a1 and M1b, with their coalescent ages of ~20,000-22,000 years ago and earliest inferred expansion in northwest Africa, could coincide with the flourishing of the Iberomaurusian industry, whilst U6b and M1b1 appeared at the time of the Capsian culture.
Conclusions Our high-resolution phylogenetic dissection of both haplogroups and coalescent time assessments suggest that the extant main branching pattern of both haplogroups arose and diversified in the mid-later Upper Palaeolithic, with some sub-clades concomitantly with the expansion of the Iberomaurusian industry. Carriers of these maternal lineages have been later absorbed into and diversified further during the spread of Afro- Asiatic languages in North and East Africa.
As many, I did assume so. Good to see this confirmation.
For more, I refer to this thread, so I don't have to c / p all of it.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Iberomaurusian gives the false impression of Iberian relationship to African industry. We find Magdelenian in Iberia but no Maurusian. Iberia contributed nothing to Maurusian culture/industry or so I've never heard.
Remember Maurusian is an LSA African industry, not a population. The Maurusian populations were Mechta-Afalou and Mechtoids.
Granted, Kefi found Iberian associated mtDNA Hgs at Taforalt but some geneticists suggest H1 and H3 in coastal NW Africa by then were already local not invasive nor imported.
quote: ... most of the older hypotheses about North African population settlement used to suppose an Iberian or an eastern origin. 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).
Above we see Cherni, a member of Frigi's all North African team, who co-authored Frigi's report revise his earlier 2008 view.
What I take that excerpt to mean is that its dubious to speak of Ibero-Maurusians as wholly foreign people to Africa, considering that mtDNA V and H bearers would be back immigrants of the original North Africans who left Africa. not that those lineages are not unequivocally indicative of Iberian gene-flow.