quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

One clade that comes to mind is mtDNA hg M. We know original M* and many of its descendants have a South Asian (Indian) center of dispersal. But then we have M1 in East Africa and M* itself is derived from L3 which is African. This is why there is an ongoing debate as to whether M1 originated in Africa or is the result of back-migration to Africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:
This thread is for posters who can present their
views and realize other views can be just as
valid provided that the sources informing all
views be current >2008 and acceptable to the
academic community at large and the poster
can discuss their views with others of a
different point of view without deciding
that people who don't agree with them are
fill in the blank choice personal insult.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

One clade that comes to mind is mtDNA hg M. We know original M* and many of its descendants have a South Asian (Indian) center of dispersal. But then we have M1 in East Africa and M* itself is derived from L3 which is African. This is why there is an ongoing debate as to whether M1 originated in Africa or is the result of back-migration to Africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

What is this M* clade, that is supposedly from South Asia? I am aware of sub-clades of M concentrated in this part of the world, but nothing comes to mind about just "M*".

---

quote:

---

Though many research papers from the "west" tend to take it for granted that such clades as M and N are "non-African", there is truly no such clarity that points to a non-African origin for either sub-clades of L3. As an example, one paper notes:

It is plausible that the ‘M and F’ lineage could have originated in East Africa and migrated to India through the southern route, but the alternative of a back migration to Africa cannot be ruled out at this point. The HpaI/HincII loss at np-12406 (characteristic of ‘F’) could have arisen from a mutation in any of the four nucleotides, which can lead to multiple origins of ‘F’.

Thus the African haplotypes AF21 and AF10 (Figure 2) could have arisen from an independent mutation (‘F’) in a ‘+DdeI 10394, –AluI 10397’ African lineage. These haplotypes have a ‘T’ at nucleotide 16223, whereas the Indian and East Asian ‘N and F’ have a ‘C’ at this position.

If the Asian haplotype originated from the one in Africa by the loss of the variable DdeI 10394 site, then the 16223T → C transition could have taken place either in Africa or India, as seen in Figure 2, or the Asian ‘N and F’ lineage could have arisen on an African ‘N’ background.

‘F’ is found at a higher frequency in East Asia, where it is well differentiated; its origin in this region would involve yet another independent event. - Barnabas et al. 2005

Though this paper is about 8 years old, the pressing matters above are still very much alive, notwithstanding some papers or the others purporting to have a firm grounding on the origins of these so-called "non-African" clades. The notes above open up the possibility of an African origin for these clades, just as a few other studies have. Still, many others treat these clades as though the authors have firm answers on their origins; this is cause for readers and observers to pause and take caution: origins of many of these "non-African" clades is still far from certain, notwithstanding what some research papers may be implicitly or explicitly suggesting otherwise.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

One clade that comes to mind is mtDNA hg M. We know original M* and many of its descendants have a South Asian (Indian) center of dispersal. But then we have M1 in East Africa and M* itself is derived from L3 which is African. This is why there is an ongoing debate as to whether M1 originated in Africa or is the result of back-migration to Africa.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

^ I was under the impression that a paragroup hg M* existed in India. According to Explorer this isn't the case though I wait for a clarifying response.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought underived M* was found in some substantial frequency in India. Unless the nomenclature has changed and/or SNP motif further elucidated. Other than that, I am well aware that the majority of M subclades are indeed found in India which is why I thought M* was found there as well.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Though many research papers from the "west" tend to take it for granted that such clades as M and N are "non-African", there is truly no such clarity that points to a non-African origin for either sub-clades of L3. As an example, one paper notes:

It is plausible that the ‘M and F’ lineage could have originated in East Africa and migrated to India through the southern route, but the alternative of a back migration to Africa cannot be ruled out at this point. The HpaI/HincII loss at np-12406 (characteristic of ‘F’) could have arisen from a mutation in any of the four nucleotides, which can lead to multiple origins of ‘F’.

Thus the African haplotypes AF21 and AF10 (Figure 2) could have arisen from an independent mutation (‘F’) in a ‘+DdeI 10394, –AluI 10397’ African lineage. These haplotypes have a ‘T’ at nucleotide 16223, whereas the Indian and East Asian ‘N and F’ have a ‘C’ at this position.

If the Asian haplotype originated from the one in Africa by the loss of the variable DdeI 10394 site, then the 16223T → C transition could have taken place either in Africa or India, as seen in Figure 2, or the Asian ‘N and F’ lineage could have arisen on an African ‘N’ background.

‘F’ is found at a higher frequency in East Asia, where it is well differentiated; its origin in this region would involve yet another independent event. - Barnabas et al. 2005
[qb]
Though this paper is about 8 years old, the pressing matters above are still very much alive, notwithstanding some papers or the others purporting to have a firm grounding on the origins of these so-called "non-African" clades. The notes above open up the possibility of an African origin for these clades, just as a few other studies have. Still, many others treat these clades as though the authors have firm answers on their origins; this is cause for readers and observers to pause and take caution: origins of many of these "non-African" clades is still far from certain, notwithstanding what some research papers may be implicitly or explicitly suggesting otherwise.

---

Very interesting. I am aware of the probable African provenance of both M and N considering their derivation from MN which is a subclade of African L3, but I didn't know that F could be African as well. I believe F is derived from a subclade of R.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Barnabas 2005 looks at many haplotypes falling
under M but doesn't resolve them any further.
There are more current reports more useful than
Barnabas who ignores Chen's African Hg assignments
making those samples either M, N, F or the bogus
M/F, N/F, and +- clusters.

---

quote:

---

Baranabas' erroneous assignments of the African
haplotype samples and bogus clusters

---

quote:

---

Hg M itself has an African specific clade M1 that's
regional specific to NE Africa and periphery. Afaik
Hg F is not found in Africa and definitely not in
Chen's Senegalese samples used by Barnabas.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

^ By M*, I meant all hgs/clades carrying the M motif that don't fit into any known M derived hgs. That's what I meant by paragroup. I remember some years back we had a debate about M1 in Africa in contrast to M* in India, particularly in regards to Clyde's claims of 'Dravidian Africans'. That said, if there is any update or elucidation on these M* types in India that I don't know about please someone (Explorer or whoever) inform me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

The debate about M is very interesting one. I strongly support an Asian origins and a back migration into Africa. But it doesn't matter because even if M1 is due to back migration, M1 is no longer Eurasian.

---

code:

---

M coalescence estimates

       Soares  Behar
       2009    2012

M      60.6    49.5 
M33    44.9    42.3
M5     39.6    37.0 
M2     37.6    36.3
M36    36.5    32.0
M37    34.7    29.3
M40    33.5    31.5
M39    32.3    26.6
M34    29.8    26.8

M1     25.4    23.7

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

Barnabas 2005 looks at many haplotypes falling
under M but doesn't resolve them any further.
There are more current reports more useful than
Barnabas who ignores Chen's African Hg assignments
making those samples either M, N, F or the bogus
M/F, N/F, and +- clusters.

Baranabas' erroneous assignments of the African
haplotype samples and bogus clusters

---

How do you deem the clusters "bogus"? I mean, a shared feature is required for clustering to take effect, is it not? If so, did the authors not identify such feature, and by extension, would that not make the accompanying clustering appropriate?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

The debate about M is very interesting one. I strongly support an Asian origins and a back migration into Africa. But it doesn't matter because even if M1 is due to back migration, M1 is no longer Eurasian.

---

Apparently you have a personal opinion here, but other than to yourself, it holds little actual currency. You can change that however, by telling me, i.e. beyond just catering to your personal wishes, what set of hard substance makes you see an "Asian origin" for M.

M1 is in fact found in "Eurasia", but it is mainly there as a telltale sign of movements from the African continent.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

That's because you have been thoroughly conditioned to take it for granted that M and N sub-clades are entirely "non-African", which was the very thing that my post was trying to debunk to begin with. The piece explains why its very plausible that not only the F clade could have very well emerged on the African continent, but that there is also that possibility that it may have emerged more than once in history!

---

quote:

---

Yeah, I have a clearer idea of what context you are using M*. Still, finding M clades in India that do not fall into any of the well-established clades, if it/they exist(s), does not mean that such clades are in fact ancestral to the African clades, or even preexisting Asian clades, although they could indeed be more basic than other examples. I find it hard to imagine that any such clade(s), if indeed found in India, will prove to be more basic than examples found in African samples. But let me first see what you've got, from a nucleotide sequencing standpoint.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

And, to add to that, the oldest M1 is in Northern Africa (not Ethiopia), yet, there simply is no indigenous Northern African culture M1 can be correlated with. There is the Aterian, which stops 40kya and seems to die out due to the increasing aridity of the Sahara. Then, there seems to be a population hiatus in Northern Africa which seems to end with the appearance of the Ibero-Maurusians in the coastal Maghreb 20kya. They're the only archaeological candidates for M1 and U6, and to the dismay of butt-hurt ideologues, they cluster morphometrically with Eurasian AMHs before doing so with African ones.

Then there is also the fact that the proto-Eurasian populations lived in Eastern Africa before OOA, certainly not in Northern Africa. Paul Mellars et al. 2013 demonstrated that by correlating East African MSA technologies (that have affinity with Southern African technologies [Howiesons Poort]) with the earliest OOA cultures in South Asia and reconfirming the Southern Dispersal Route theory. There is no way that the dubious notion of M1 representing some magical wandering Middle Palaeolithic African leftover ancestry can be upheld without clear evidence of a population movement from East Africa to the Maghreb ~30kya, that can explain what the hell the oldest M1 is doing in Northern Africa, rather than Ethiopia. Oops, my bad; there are no archaeological cultures attested in the Maghreb during that time period.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

And, to add to that, the oldest M1 is in Northern Africa (not Ethiopia), yet, there simply is no indigenous Northern African culture M1 can be correlated with. There is the Aterian, which stops 40kya and seems to die out due to the increasing aridity of the Sahara. Then, there seems to be a population hiatus in Northern Africa which seems to end with the appearance of the Ibero-Maurusians in the coastal Maghreb 20kya. They're the only archaeological candidates for M1 and U6, and to the dismay of butt-hurt ideologues, they cluster morphometrically with Eurasian AMHs before doing so with African ones.

Then there is also the fact that the proto-Eurasian populations lived in Eastern Africa before OOA, certainly not in Northern Africa. Paul Mellars et al. 2013 demonstrated that by correlating East African MSA technologies (that have affinity with Southern African technologies [Howiesons Poort]) with the earliest OOA cultures in South Asia and reconfirming the Southern Dispersal Route theory. There is no way that the dubious notion of M1 representing some magical wandering Middle Palaeolithic African leftover ancestry can be upheld without clear evidence of a population movement from East Africa to the Maghreb ~30kya, that can explain what the hell the oldest M1 is doing in Northern Africa, rather than Ethiopia. Oops, my bad; there are no archaeological cultures attested in the Maghreb during that time period.

---

Interesting theory. So how do you think these Eurasian ancestors of the Oranians (Ibero-Marusians) entered Africa? Also, what of Nazlet Khater which dates ~ 30kya??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

And, to add to that, the oldest M1 is in Northern Africa (not Ethiopia), yet, there simply is no indigenous Northern African culture M1 can be correlated with. There is the Aterian, which stops 40kya and seems to die out due to the increasing aridity of the Sahara. Then, there seems to be a population hiatus in Northern Africa which seems to end with the appearance of the Ibero-Maurusians in the coastal Maghreb 20kya. They're the only archaeological candidates for M1 and U6, and to the dismay of butt-hurt ideologues, they cluster morphometrically with Eurasian AMHs before doing so with African ones.

Then there is also the fact that the proto-Eurasian populations lived in Eastern Africa before OOA, certainly not in Northern Africa. Paul Mellars et al. 2013 demonstrated that by correlating East African MSA technologies (that have affinity with Southern African technologies [Howiesons Poort]) with the earliest OOA cultures in South Asia and reconfirming the Southern Dispersal Route theory. There is no way that the dubious notion of M1 representing some magical wandering Middle Palaeolithic African leftover ancestry can be upheld without clear evidence of a population movement from East Africa to the Maghreb ~30kya, that can explain what the hell the oldest M1 is doing in Northern Africa, rather than Ethiopia. Oops, my bad; there are no archaeological cultures attested in the Maghreb during that time period.

---

Interesting theory. So how do you think these Eurasian ancestors of the Oranians (Ibero-Marusians) entered Africa? Also, what of Nazlet Khater which dates ~ 30kya??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

M1 is NE Africa and peripheries specific. M1 is
found in Eurasia.

---

quote:

---

Eurasian M1 in fact came from
Africa. This is not the same as M1 originating
other Eurasian M.

---

quote:

---

Comparative coalescence indicates M1 entered Africa
from Afroasia or Eurasia after expansion events there.

---

quote:

---

code:

---

M coalescence estimates

       Soares  Behar
       2009    2012

M      60.6    49.5 
M33    44.9    42.3
M5     39.6    37.0 
M2     37.6    36.3
M36    36.5    32.0
M37    34.7    29.3
M40    33.5    31.5
M39    32.3    26.6
M34    29.8    26.8

M1     25.4    23.7

---

.

---

quote:

---

Main factors disallowing M Hg origins in Africa
- diversity
- age
- frequency.
These are what usually determine an Hg's origins.

---

quote:

---

The pros say they can't find the OoA signature
M in Africa nor the OoA signature L3 in Afroasia.
That leaves an impossibility, the waters of the
Red Sea as point of origin.

---

quote:

---

Obviously something is off about the pros' M and
L3 remnant assessment. My guess is maybe these
Hgs died off on both shores opposite their current
provenances within a few thousand years of OoA?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

I reread that and wanted to replace bogus with
private. The field recognizes no such thing as
mtDNA F in Senegal nor an "'M and F' cluster".

---

quote:

---

Barnabas uses cluster and haplogroup synonymously.

---

quote:

---

To join M and F by descent the parent common mutation would be deep in L3 and thus permit all M and N as shared features.

---

quote:

---

Since the Senegal samples are not F and Barnabas
uses them as the basis of her private "M and F"
cluster then there is no such cluster.

---

I see you repeating things; what's is clear however, is that you have not answered the question with regards to the nucleotide features which prompted Barnabas et al. to make a case for an African origin of F.

Ps: And you keep referring to some Senegalese sample; I gather you got that from references somewhere or another, as Barnabas et al. do not actually go into ethnic-assignments of the African samples. Still, it would be nice to have the answer to that pressing matter above.
 

---

Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

There is a nothing 'personal' about this. Haplogroup M is in Africa because of back migrations.

---

quote:

---

Africans don't carry the deepest rooted Haplogroup M lineages, Asians do. Not only that, but M1 lineages in East Africa are much younger in lineages then Haplogroup M lineages in Asia.

---

quote:

---

Asian origins for Haplogroup M is supported by coalescence ages and diversities, M1 is younger than other Asiatic M lineages. That is enough to tell us that M is of Asian origins and M1 in Africa is due to back migration...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

Actually, I have NOT been "conditioned" to anything at all in these matters of population genetic origins either one way or another-- whether African origins or Eurasian origins. I tend to keep an open mind and go by what the evidence says.

---

quote:

---

As I understand it the jury is still out. I mean the only thing we know for sure is that L3 is definitely African while its derivatives M and N appear to be Eurasian.

---

quote:

---

There is also the matter of MN ancestral to both M and N and direct daughter of L3 which has yet to be discovered.

---

quote:

---

Don't think that just because I'm Asian, I'm favoring Eurasian origins for M and N, though it seems you yourself are favoring the African origin.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

it seems you yourself are favoring the African origin.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

Not to overstay my welcome, as I'm not exactly posting in line with the OP parameters, but Nazlet Khater seems to correlate with L3k, which moved from the Ethiopian region to North East Africa 30-40kya, per Soares et al 2011. Whatever its affinity, its mandible strongly clusters with MSA Sub-Saharan Africans per Pinhasi's analysis.

---

quote:

---

What do you mean with how did they enter Africa? Are you referring to the aridity of the Sahara? The Ibero-Maurusian sites were found in coastal Maghreb, as well as the other sites (e.g., Dabban). The North African coastal regions weren't affected by the aridity of the Sahara to the point of becoming uninhabitable; they remained a traversable corridor.

---

quote:

---

Someone should make another thread if they want to discuss this further.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
The west has nothing to do with it. Using
the west is an irrational emotional appeal.

---

quote:

---

Here's an Indian report dated the same year
as Barnabas and likewise outdated in part.

Revathi Rajkumar 2005
Phylogeny of the M superhaplogroup inferred from complete mitochondrial genome sequence of Indian specific lineages.

See what it has to say about M in India and Ethiopia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
I am reposting what I asked of posters to this
thread because it's gone off kilter focusing
on an outdated report of 2005 itself based on
material dated 2000 and 1995.

---

quote:

---

I ask further
discussion on Barnabas 2005 go to a thread
of its own, please. Please respect my thread
parameters as you would your own blog, thank you.

---

quote:

---

I will gladly present my analysis and critique
of Barnabas' outdated low resolution and down
level methodology there but not here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ I couldn't agree more. I don't know what it is with Explorer but he seems to be the one acting emotional here judging by his over-defensive posturing.

---

quote:

---

For one thing he makes a lot of presumptions about people such as myself. He presumes that I'm not open-minded and don't consider the substance over personal feelings even though as I said I have NO personal feelings one way or the other (unlike him) which is why I haven't decided one way or another but await for more evidence! He then says I am swayed by Western experts and talks about the West.

---

quote:

---

Sorry if you hadn't noticed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

There is a nothing 'personal' about this. Haplogroup M is in Africa because of back migrations.

---

I'd say that drawing up a conclusion because it is what feels good to someone, as opposed to relying squarely on substance, is "personal". For instance, your claim about M being in Africa "because of back migrations" sounds quite personal, since you don't back it up with substance, other than just opining away.

quote:

---

Africans don't carry the deepest rooted Haplogroup M lineages, Asians do. Not only that, but M1 lineages in East Africa are much younger in lineages then Haplogroup M lineages in Asia.

---

As noted above, the phylogeny of M1 speaks either to a relatively lower expansion bio-history and/or relatively late offshoot from the ancestral source. Saying "Asians" have the "deepest rooted M lineages" is of little consequence, when you understand this.

quote:

---

Asian origins for Haplogroup M is supported by coalescence ages and diversities, M1 is younger than other Asiatic M lineages. That is enough to tell us that M is of Asian origins and M1 in Africa is due to back migration...

---

Tell me you are kidding here?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Can you explain why M lineages in Africa are younger than those in Asia? Again no one is taking this personal, I go by reality and facts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

There goes the thread???

When bias fails and data prevails
always the resort to emotional wreckage.

---

quote:

---

But it doesn't obscure the facts

---

quote:

---

Please continue with relevant posting
and just ignore responding to troller
emotional provocation.

---

quote:

---

Don't let the thread go from the topic
to personal spat chat.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

No I am certainly not kidding.

---

quote:

---

Can you explain why M lineages in Africa are younger than those in Asia?

---

quote:

---

Again no one is taking this personal, I go by reality and facts.

---

Which makes it odd that you would offer the kinds of reasons you did, as proof of an Asian origin of M.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
Checkout this video on the presence of M1 in India.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeKj-toC3Uc

.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Just for clarity, I will direct this to the Son of Ra and the forum in general:

--Contrary to the lie posted above, mtDNA M1's younger coalescence age is 1) not under discussion nor equivocal in the academic world (that's a big fat ass lie), 2) it’s not due to lower expansion rates nor is it due to a late divergence from the ancestral clade (whatever the hell that means). It has a younger coalescence age, because that's exactly what M1 is; younger. Notice that such silly objections (e.g., lower expansion rates) also apply to many Middle Palaeolithic clades, that have no problem registering as very ancient.

--It means nothing that African M1 doesn't descend from (Eur)asian M clades; many haplogroups are today found in region A, aren't downstream mutations from haplogroups in region B, without it jeopardizing the fact that that haplogroup would still have come from region B or regions adjacent to region B. For instance, South Asian M clades aren't descendants of Near eastern M clades, but that doesn't contradict that South Asian M clades travelled through South west Asia to get to South Asia. The general lack of basal M in the Near east, independent of South Asian M, has no implications whatsoever for this scenario. Turning the discussion back to mtDNA M1, one would naturally have to suppose that its nearest modern haplotypes in Eurasia will be either rare or non-existent, given the relatively old age of M1 (~30kya) and the fact that M in general is very low in the Near East anyway (mostly comprising African derived M1, and some M from Central and South Asia). Neither the Southern Dispersal Route OOA mtDNA M clades, nor the M clades that returned to the Near east from South Asia thereafter, survived well in the modern Near East. This makes a poor case for the idea that the absence of M1 in the Near East today is meaningful for whether or not it originated there in the Upper Palaeolithic.

--Contrary to the shabby uneducated claim above, the relatively young age of M1 is indeed relevant. More than relevant in fact, because the oldest M1 resides in Northwestern Africa (rather than Ethiopia), where there is no archaeological support for an indigenous origin of the clade, or any other contemporary clade for that matter (e.g., U6), as the region seems to have been depopulated after the Aterian.



Stone-Age Prehistory: Studies in Memory of Charles McBurney, p175 – Angela E close
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

Not to overstay my welcome, as I'm not exactly posting in line with the OP parameters, ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

So how do you think these Eurasian ancestors of the Oranians (Ibero-Marusians) entered Africa? Also, what of Nazlet Khater which dates ~ 30kya??

---

DJ What I make of that is also within topic.

If ancestral M1 entered via Levant and Sinai
then are the expansion and archaeology dates
in line and does another African culture fit
the bill or only the Maurusian?

This brings cause to consider concepts of
what M1 as real people were doing in a region
spanning land from the pre-Sahara to the Jordan
Rift ending at the Mediterranean's south and
east shores. Also how landscape and climate
may have marked this as a contiguous region
at the time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

The debate about M is very interesting one. I strongly support an Asian origins and a back migration into Africa. But it doesn't matter because even if M1 is due to back migration, M1 is no longer Eurasian.

There is a nothing 'personal' about this. Haplogroup M is in Africa because of back migrations. Africans don't carry the deepest rooted Haplogroup M lineages, Asians do. Not only that, but M1 lineages in East Africa are much younger in lineages then Haplogroup M lineages in Asia. Asian origins for Haplogroup M is supported by coalescence ages and diversities, M1 is younger than other Asiatic M lineages. That is enough to tell us that M is of Asian origins and M1 in Africa is due to back migration...

---

Yes there's no extant M of any meaningful
frequency in Africa except M1. Coudray 2008
found M in Siwa at 1.3% with no further comment
on which M, haplogroup or paragroup. Low freqs
of M1 in Afroasia and central Asia and low diversity
outside of Africa adds to the fact of M1 being an
African specific marker. Based on Olivieri 2006 and
Rosa 2011 I called M1 NE Africa & peripheries specific.



Though oldest in NW Africa M1's frequency
is more concentrated in NE Africa nowadays.

Standards to determine haplogroup origin
- diversity
- age
- frequency
favor Asian location of the parent of
all derived M clades. The age of M1
compared to M is strong evidence M1
didn't arise from any OoA M remnant
that stayed in Africa.

code:

---

M coalescence estimates

       Soares  Behar
       2009    2012

M      60.6    49.5 
M33    44.9    42.3
M5     39.6    37.0 
M2     37.6    36.3
M36    36.5    32.0
M37    34.7    29.3
M40    33.5    31.5
M39    32.3    26.6
M34    29.8    26.8

M1     25.4    23.7

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

--It means nothing that African M1 doesn't descend from (Eur)asian M clades; ...

---

quote:

---

... the region seems to have been depopulated after the Aterian.



Stone-Age Prehistory: Studies in Memory of Charles McBurney, p175 – Angela E close

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

By the way, Tukuler what exactly do you mean by "Afroasia"? Do you mean the Levant & Arabia?

---

quote:

---

Abstract
Conclusion: Although there is evidence of Neolithic and more recent expansions in the Arabian
Peninsula, mainly detected by (preHV)1 and J1b lineages, the lack of primitive autochthonous M and
N sequences, suggests that this area has been more a receptor of human migrations, including
historic ones, from Africa, India, Indonesia and even Australia, than a demographic expansion
center along the proposed southern coastal route.


Background
. . . .
It could be that unfavorable climatic conditions forced a fast migration through Arabia without
leaving a permanent track, but it is also possible that sample sizes have been insufficient to
detect ancient residual lineages in the present day Arab populations.

---

quote:

---

These lineages, which include
- N1a2,
- N1f, and possibly also
- N1c,
- N1d, and
- N1e,
date to 15–55 ka ago and coalesce to the most ancient
non-African mtDNA lineage ~60 ka ago. Thus, they are
most likely relicts from the first modern-human
settlement in Arabia during the earliest stage of the
southern coastal dispersal from the Horn of Africa to
the rest of the world.

. . .

these minor haplogroups have a relict distribution that
suggests an ancient ancestry within the Arabian Peninsula,
and they most likely spread from the Gulf Oasis region
toward the Near East and Europe during the pluvial period
55–24 ka ago. This pattern suggests that Arabia was indeed
the first staging post in the spread of modern humans
around the world.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

--Contrary to the lie posted above, mtDNA M1's younger coalescence age is 1) not under discussion nor equivocal in the academic world (that's a big fat ass lie)

---

quote:

---

2) it’s not due to lower expansion rates nor is it due to a late divergence from the ancestral clade (whatever the hell that means).

---

quote:

---

It has a younger coalescence age, because that's exactly what M1 is; younger.

---

quote:

---

It means nothing that African M1 doesn't descend from (Eur)asian M clades; many haplogroups are today found in region A, aren't downstream mutations from haplogroups in region B, without it jeopardizing the fact that that haplogroup would still have come from region B or regions adjacent to region B.

---

quote:

---

Neither the Southern Dispersal Route OOA mtDNA M clades, nor the M clades that returned to the Near east from South Asia thereafter, survived well in the modern Near East. This makes a poor case for the idea that the absence of M1 in the Near East today is meaningful for whether or not it originated there in the Upper Palaeolithic.

---

quote:

---

--Contrary to the shabby uneducated claim above, the relatively young age of M1 is indeed relevant.

---

quote:

---

More than relevant in fact, because the oldest M1 resides in Northwestern Africa (rather than Ethiopia), where there is no archaeological support for an indigenous origin of the clade

---

quote:

---

or any other contemporary clade for that matter (e.g., U6), as the region seems to have been depopulated after the Aterian.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:


Distinguishing Nazlet Khater between M1 and
L3k is value add.

---

quote:

---

Same with M1 not being a time
lagged remnant of some undocumented (afaik)
African Hg M or M* taking 10s of 1000s of
years to only expand in M1 and derive no
other African M clades.

---

quote:

---

Except for M1 all
other M clades are Asian, no?

---

quote:

---

Yes there's no extant M of any meaningful
frequency in Africa except M1. Coudray 2008
found M in Siwa at 1.3% with no further comment
on which M, haplogroup or paragroup.

---

quote:

---

Low freqs
of M1 in Afroasia and central Asia and low diversity
outside of Africa adds to the fact of M1 being an
African specific marker. Based on Olivieri 2006 and
Rosa 2011 I called M1 NE Africa & peripheries specific.

---

quote:

---

Standards to determine haplogroup origin
- diversity
- age
- frequency
favor Asian location of the parent of
all derived M clades.

---

quote:

---

The age of M1
compared to M is strong evidence M1
didn't arise from any OoA M remnant
that stayed in Africa.

---

quote:

---

Only biased ethnocentric special pleading for Africa ignores these facts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
^You're not refuting anything I've said.

---

quote:

---

Just asking questions and demanding answers, as you know you'd get the sense thrashed out of you if you'd even attempted to refute what I said. Proof in the pudding: in the bottom section of your post you invoke the Dabban even though its existence was both taken into account by me (re: said ''Northwest Africa'') and the author (re: ''most of North Africa'').

---

quote:

---

I'm sure readers will pick up on the fact that you're just ranting at the points I made, rather understanding them, much less refuting them.

---

quote:

---

Try again, troll!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

--It means nothing that African M1 doesn't descend from (Eur)asian M clades; ...

---

M1 derives from M via M1'20'51 defined by the T14110C mutation.
M1'20'51's motif is L3 + (T489C C10400T T14783C G15043A T14110C)
Mutations in accordance with RSRS 2012 not the Eurocentric rCRS 1999 or CRS 1981

M1 descends from the parent it has in common
with SE Asian M20 and M51. The implication is
that M1'20'51 is an Asian M clade like the other
basal M clades.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
... the region seems to have been depopulated after the Aterian.



Stone-Age Prehistory: Studies in Memory of Charles McBurney, p175 – Angela E close

---

1986? Surely there's 21st century support for this?

It's a good practice to give the date of source
material. Me, I have to rely on up to date as
most current as possible. My money's on the
sorrel colt not the old grey mare.

This is why I requested post-2007 reports and
phylogenies (pro or con) except when the only
relevant info available is older than 2008.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] Abu-Amero 2008 has it OoA signature M and N
aren't found in the Arabian Peninsula because
the AP was never an expansion center just a
migration hub.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
M17 is just one of the many M clades in South Asia. Read: The Dazzling Array of Basal Branches in the mtDNA Macrohaplogroup M from India as Inferred from Complete Genomes

---

• T489C,
• C10400T
• T14783C
• G15043A

• T195C
• G6446A
• T6680C
• C12403T
• A12950c
• G16129A
• T16189C
• T16249C
• T16311C

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
M17 is just one of the many M clades in South Asia. Read: The Dazzling Array of Basal Branches in the mtDNA Macrohaplogroup M from India as Inferred from Complete Genomes

---

Yeah, I agree. And it's a fact that Asia I.e. India has the most diverse set of M* series.

But M1 is in East Africa. M1 is not in Asia, India. From what I know. Nor does it show in the tree.


http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/3/683/F1.large.jpg


(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.


http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/3/757.long


The mutations for M are:

• T489C,
• C10400T
• T14783C
• G15043A

The mutations for M1 are:

• T195C
• G6446A
• T6680C
• C12403T
• A12950c
• G16129A
• T16189C
• T16249C
• T16311C

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
But M1 is in East Africa. M1 is not in Asia, India. From what I know. Nor does it show in the tree.

---

quote:

---

We calculated a second set of Fst estimates using cluster-based allele frequencies from ADMIXTURE among the Maghrebi, European and Near Eastern ancestries, when we considered higher order k = 5:8 ancestral clusters. As indicated in Figure 3, population divergence between the Maghrebi and the European and Near Eastern populations occurred between 18,000–38,000 ya. The bounds here represent variation in ancestral k estimates and assumptions regarding Ne, as Near Eastern populations have a greater estimated Ne than European. Although these divergence time estimates may not be precise, as they do not adequately model ancient migration, they do suggest that the population divergence between the ancestral Maghrebi population and neighboring Mediterranean populations occurred at least 12,000 ya and indeed more likely predated even the Last Glacial Maximum.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

--It means nothing that African M1 doesn't descend from (Eur)asian M clades; ...

---

M1 derives from M via M1'20'51 defined by the T14110C mutation.
M1'20'51's motif is L3 + (T489C C10400T T14783C G15043A T14110C)
Mutations in accordance with RSRS 2012 not the Eurocentric rCRS 1999 or CRS 1981

M1 descends from the parent it has in common
with SE Asian M20 and M51. The implication is
that M1'20'51 is an Asian M clade like the other
basal M clades.

---

Yes, Pennarun et al 2012 discuss the C14110T mutation, but interestingly, they aren't particularly impressed with the argument that it has phylogenetic significance. What do you make of their caveat?

---

quote:

---

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.

---

code:

---

Hg   BasalClade   BasalSubClade   Lineage

M    M1'20'51
M    M23'75       M75
U    U4'9         U4              U4a1c
L    L1           L1b             L1b1a6
L    L3           L3h             L3h1a1
U    U5           U5a             U5a1db2b

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

In his book The Real Eve, archaeologist Stephen Oppenheimer, says, “South Asia is logically the ultimate origin of M17 and his ancestors; and sure enough we find the highest rates and greatest diversity of the M17 line in Pakistan, India, and eastern Iran, and low rates in the Caucasus. M17 is not only more diverse in South Asia than in Central Asia, but diversity characterises its presence in isolated tribal groups in the south, thus undermining any theory of M17 as a marker of a ‘
male
Aryan invasion’ of India. One average estimate for the origin of this line in India is as much as 51,000 years. All this suggests M17 could have found his way initially from India or Pakistan, through Kashmir, then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally coming into Europe.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:
Can you explain why M lineages in Africa are younger than those in Asia? Again no one is taking this personal, I go by reality and facts.

---

Researchers say they are.

LOL. None of the dates for these haplogroups are based on ancient DNA, they are all the result of statistical analysis.

This makes the date given for the origin of these genes guessestimates.

LOL. None of the dates for M haplogroups are supported by either archaeology, linguistics or craniometrics.

Dravidian archaeology and linguistics dates back to the C-Group in Africa. The Dravidians are the carriers of M clades.


See the following papers:

http://www.svabhinava.org/aitvsoit/Sergent-AfroDravidian-frame.php


http://www.academia.edu/340821/Are_Dravidians_of_African_Origin


http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/IJHG/IJHG-08-0-000-000-2008-Web/IJHG-08-4-317-368-2008-Abst-PDF/IJHG-08-4-325-08-362-Winder-C/IJHG-08-4-325-08-362-Winder-C-Tt.pdf

.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

^What are the specific mutation of M, which have been found in India?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

No I am certainly not kidding.

---

I was hoping you would say that you were, since your opinion about your stated reasons being "enough" couldn't be any further from truth.

quote:

---

Can you explain why M lineages in Africa are younger than those in Asia?

---

Already did. Recall that I said M1's seemingly lower coalescence age estimates may be attributable to its bio-historically relatively lower expansion rate and/or late divergence from the ancestral clade.

M1 clade does not descend from the Asian M clades or vice versa; so, to turn to the reportedly older ages estimated for several Asian M clades has little relevance to the origin of M. If M1 were an Asian clade, the same peculiarity of its seemingly lower expansion ages compared to some other M clades would not be any more or less anomalous. Do you understand better now?

quote:

---

Again no one is taking this personal, I go by reality and facts.

---

Which makes it odd that you would offer the kinds of reasons you did, as proof of an Asian origin of M.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

But M1 is in East Africa. M1 is not in Asia, India. From what I know. Nor does it show in the tree.
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/3/683/F1.large.jpg

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
M is the single most common mtDNA haplogroup in Asia, and peaks in Bangladesh where it represents two thirds of the maternal lineages, and is ubiquitous in India where it has 60% frequency

Haplogroup M2 - found in South Asia, with highest concentrations in SE India and Bangladesh; oldest haplogroup M lineage on the Indian sub-continent.
M2a - most common in Bangladesh
M2b - most common in SE India
Haplogroup M3 - found mainly in South Asia, with highest concentrations in west and NW India[
M4"45
Haplogroup M4 - found mainly in South Asia but some sequences in Eastern Saudi Arabia
Haplogroup M4a - found in Gujarat, India
Haplogroup M30 - mainly in India, found in Middle East and North Africa.
Haplogroup M37
Haplogroup M37a - found in Gujarat, India[
Haplogroup M33a - found in Gujarat, India
Haplogroup M34a - found in Karnataka, India
Haplogroup M5a - found in Orissa, India
Haplogroup M6 - found mainly in South Asia, with highest concentrations in mid-eastern India and Kashmir
Haplogroup M6b - found in Kerala, India
Haplogroup M41b - found in Andhra Pradesh, India
Haplogroup M41c - found in Andrah Pradesh, India

Haplogroup R-M17, sometimes referred to as R-M198, is a Y DNA haplogroup defining one of the most common human male lines found in modern Eurasia. It is defined by the SNP mutation M17, and is particularly common in a large region extending from South Asia and Southern Siberia to Central Europe and Scandinavia (Underhill 2009).

Several recent studies as mentioned by archaeologist Stephen Oppenheimerhave found R-M17 has its oldest origins in South Asia and consequently propose that South Asia is the most likely region of origin of R-M17. However, other researchers continue to see modern Indian R-M420 as being largely due to immigration from the Central Eurasian steppes or Southwestern Asia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

But M1 is in East Africa. M1 is not in Asia, India. From what I know. Nor does it show in the tree.
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/3/683/F1.large.jpg

---

My thanks for the tree and in the future can you
please fully cite sources of supporting visuals?

Also it'd save me time following a blind link if
you could at least give the author & year if not
the title. I may be offline and unable to click
the link but have the report in my database.

Thanks for being helpful about this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

^What are the specific mutation of M, which have been found in India?

---

There are 80 different M clades, far to many
to list here with their full motifs. All M clades
by definition have the mutations defining Hg M.

I guess I really don't understand what you're
asking? Can you clarify? In the meantime you
can look up any M mutation motif in van Oven's
PhyloTree. PhyloTree's introductory report was
written in 2008. You can get it's latest build
by clicking the link "M1'20'51 defined by the
T14110C mutation" three posts up.

---

What I mean is, if M and M1 are found in India, what are the correlating mutations.


http://www.familytreedna.com/mtDNA-Haplogroup-Mutations.aspx
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
Researchers have noted that the nucleotides shared by East African M1 and Indian M haplogroups include HG M4 at 16311, HG M5 at 16,129, and HG M34 at 16249;[3] other researchers have identified a number of transitions for Indian M1 at 16,311, 16,129, and 16,189, that correspond to Ethiopian M1.[1] Other Indian nodes that agree with East African M1, observed by Kivisild et al. , include: HG M5a 16,311; HG M5 16,189; and HG M2a 16,189.[1]



.
Sun et al. report that the Eastern African M1 nt in the Indian M haplogroups include M2 16,3111 and 16,189; M2a 16,311; M5 16,129; M4 16,129, 16,311, 16,249; M5 16,129; M′30 16,249, 16,129; M34 16,249; M35a 16,311, 16,189; M37 16,189; and M40 16,129.[6] The researchers maintain that even though Indian M haplogroups bear variant M1 nucleotides in the control region, the reconstructed ancestral motif of all the Indian M haplogroups were devoid of M1 variations 6446,6680,12403 and 14110.[6]
For further discussion of this issue see:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168144/


.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

^What are the specific mutation of M, which have been found in India?

---

There are 80 different M clades, far to many
to list here with their full motifs. All M clades
by definition have the mutations defining Hg M.

I guess I really don't understand what you're
asking? Can you clarify? In the meantime you
can look up any M mutation motif in van Oven's
PhyloTree. PhyloTree's introductory report was
written in 2008. You can get it's latest build
by clicking the link "M1'20'51 defined by the
T14110C mutation" three posts up.

---

What I mean is, if M and M1 are found in India, what are the correlating mutations.


http://www.familytreedna.com/mtDNA-Haplogroup-Mutations.aspx

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol:

^What are the specific mutation of M, which have been found in India?

---

There are 80 different M clades, far to many
to list here with their full motifs. All M clades
by definition have the mutations defining Hg M.

I guess I really don't understand what you're
asking? Can you clarify? In the meantime you
can look up any M mutation motif in van Oven's
PhyloTree. PhyloTree's introductory report was
written in 2008. You can get it's latest build
by clicking the link "M1'20'51 defined by the
T14110C mutation" three posts up.

---

What I mean is, if M and M1 are found in India, what are the correlating mutations.


http://www.familytreedna.com/mtDNA-Haplogroup-Mutations.aspx

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yes T14110C is also in some non-M lineages.
M1'20'51 is basal. But in all other instances
T14110C appears further down than the basal
clade level or even basal sub-clade level,
showing up in lineages of sub-clades
(especially in non-M).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
So what are we to make of the other M clades in Africa Explorer pointed out besides M1?? Do you think it possible that the M clades in Africa could be the result of parallel mutation via convergent evolution of L3 branches?? I ask this because of the M-like haplogroups in Senegal Explorer brought up. This is why I still remain undecided in terms of hg clade origins. Many Eurasiocentrics quickly point to back-migrations, when that may not be the only scenario.

---

What about them? You're bringing them up, so why not explain how they justify your reservations while you're at it?

How do they contradict the molecular signs that are indicative of back migration in haplogroups like M1 and U6?

I doubt you've read the arguments laid out here. The other non-Asian M clades in Africa, whatever their ultimate origins, are pertinent to those who deny that M could have originated in the continent (which I don't think anyone in this thread is necessarily doing). The mere occurrence of non-Asian M clades other than M1 in Africa have no implications for whether or M1 is African.
 

---

Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
 
Just wanted to tag this more recent 2008 illustration as a complement to my earlier post. Note the hiatus period in the Maghreb timeline in between 35k and 20kya:



The Cambridge History of Africa, Volume 1, p316 - J. Desmond Clark 2008

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:
Just for clarity, I will direct this to the Son of Ra and the forum in general:

--Contrary to the lie posted above, mtDNA M1's younger coalescence age is 1) not under discussion nor equivocal in the academic world (that's a big fat ass lie), 2) it’s not due to lower expansion rates nor is it due to a late divergence from the ancestral clade (whatever the hell that means). It has a younger coalescence age, because that's exactly what M1 is; younger. Notice that such silly objections (e.g., lower expansion rates) also apply to many Middle Palaeolithic clades, that have no problem registering as very ancient.

--It means nothing that African M1 doesn't descend from (Eur)asian M clades; many haplogroups are today found in region A, aren't downstream mutations from haplogroups in region B, without it jeopardizing the fact that that haplogroup would still have come from region B or regions adjacent to region B. For instance, South Asian M clades aren't descendants of Near eastern M clades, but that doesn't contradict that South Asian M clades travelled through South west Asia to get to South Asia. The general lack of basal M in the Near east, independent of South Asian M, has no implications whatsoever for this scenario. Turning the discussion back to mtDNA M1, one would naturally have to suppose that its nearest modern haplotypes in Eurasia will be either rare or non-existent, given the relatively old age of M1 (~30kya) and the fact that M in general is very low in the Near East anyway (mostly comprising African derived M1, and some M from Central and South Asia). Neither the Southern Dispersal Route OOA mtDNA M clades, nor the M clades that returned to the Near east from South Asia thereafter, survived well in the modern Near East. This makes a poor case for the idea that the absence of M1 in the Near East today is meaningful for whether or not it originated there in the Upper Palaeolithic.

--Contrary to the shabby uneducated claim above, the relatively young age of M1 is indeed relevant. More than relevant in fact, because the oldest M1 resides in Northwestern Africa (rather than Ethiopia), where there is no archaeological support for an indigenous origin of the clade, or any other contemporary clade for that matter (e.g., U6), as the region seems to have been depopulated after the Aterian.



Stone-Age Prehistory: Studies in Memory of Charles McBurney, p175 – Angela E close

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yes T14110C is also in some non-M lineages.
M1'20'51 is basal. But in all other instances
T14110C appears further down than the basal
clade level or even basal sub-clade level,
showing up in lineages of sub-clades
(especially in non-M).

---

Thanks for clarifying your views. Another, related point that your comments reminded me of, is that Pennarun et al's caveat may not be worth much without also showing how common it is statistically for a mutation to occur in the same position mimicking descent without indicating descent. Scientifically a lot of far-fetched things are 'possible' but that doesn't mean that all 'possible' scenarios carry the same statistical credibility. Low probability scenarios should not get in the way of or be entertained on the same level as 'more likely scenario' readings of the situation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

So what are we to make of the other M clades in Africa Explorer pointed out besides M1?? Do you think it possible that the M clades in Africa could be the result of parallel mutation via convergent evolution of L3 branches?? I ask this because of the M-like haplogroups in Senegal Explorer brought up. This is why I still remain undecided in terms of hg clade origins. Many Eurasiocentrics quickly point to back-migrations, when that may not be the only scenario.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:


The Cambridge History of Africa, Volume 1, p316 - J. Desmond Clark 2008

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

So what are we to make of the other M clades in Africa Explorer pointed out besides M1?? Do you think it possible that the M clades in Africa could be the result of parallel mutation via convergent evolution of L3 branches?? I ask this because of the M-like haplogroups in Senegal Explorer brought up. This is why I still remain undecided in terms of hg clade origins. Many Eurasiocentrics quickly point to back-migrations, when that may not be the only scenario.

---

What particular non-M1 clades were listed
in Africa from which studies or reports?

The non-M1 in Siwa I posted is M33.

M1 is Africa specific. My take is non-M1 in
Africa is due to gene flow from Asian people
in Africa. What is the coalescence of non-M1
M haplogroups in Africa if they ever went on
to expansion there?

I have no idea what an M-like haplogroup is.
M1 itself is in Senegal. I think Senegalese
M1's haplotype is shared in Valencia and
Jordan.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yes T14110C is also in some non-M lineages.
M1'20'51 is basal. But in all other instances
T14110C appears further down than the basal
clade level or even basal sub-clade level,
showing up in lineages of sub-clades
(especially in non-M).

---

Thanks for clarifying your views. Another, related point that your comments reminded me of, is that Pennarun et al's caveat may not be worth much without also showing how common it is statistically for a mutation to occur in the same position mimicking descent without indicating descent. Scientifically a lot of far-fetched things are 'possible' but that doesn't mean that all 'possible' scenarios carry the same statistical credibility. Low probability scenarios should not get in the way of or be entertained on the same level as 'more likely scenario' readings of the situation.

---

Apparently after noticing T14110C firstly in
Hg M51 van Oven seeing T14110C was already
seen in M1 constructed M1'51 via statistic.
Then T14110C was found in M20 and M1'20'51
replaced M1'51.

T14110C appears in no molecular study or
report except as commentary on van Oven.

Van Oven wrote me: "Note that the three haplogroups
M1, M20 and M51 do not necessarily share the 14110
mutation by common descent. They might also have
acquired this mutation independently from each other.
However, joining M1, M20 and M51 currently represents
the most parsimonious solution.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

I know M1 is not Asian but African.

---

quote:

---

Have you ever heard of 'mutations'?

---

quote:

---

U6 is no longer Eurasian

---

quote:

---

E-V13 is no longer Africa because its mutation happened in the near east and then it spread into Europe.

---

quote:

---

The same exact thing happened to M1.

---

quote:

---

Just because M1 does not descend from Asian M clades doesn't mean anything.

---

quote:

---

Asian M clades are still more diverse and older.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:
Do you think it possible that the M clades in Africa could be the result of parallel mutation via convergent evolution of L3 branches??

---

quote:

---

I ask this because of the M-like haplogroups in Senegal Explorer brought up. This is why I still remain undecided in terms of hg clade origins.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:
M clade has an African origin, to be followed by founder effect event(s) OOA. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:
As for the location; well, where is Asian M clades most frequent and diverse? [/QB]

---

the highest M diversity in the world is in India, the highest frequency in Bangladesh

xyyman says highest diversity and frequency in combination are suggestive of origin


 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:


xyyman says highest diversity and frequency in combination are suggestive of origin

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Supercar (aka you know who) have said as much.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:




Originally posted by xyyman:
1. Tunisian Berbers are 100% pure indigenous. Minor “recent” near east input in other groups.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
These Tunisians are not "Pure". They are an isolated inbred group skewing the results of the entire analysis. When Calculated by hand or rerun without the Tunisian related individuals the Saharawi are usually the most "Berber" with Moderate Sub Saharan and absence of European.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

...frequency can be increased by isolation/founder effect
Indeed Djerba, off the coast of Tunisia is an island

... certain Tunisians have the highest frequencies of the "berber marker" E-M81
by contrast Siwis little if any

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

xyyman says highest diversity and frequency in combination are suggestive of origin

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

I add age (coalescence) onto that but age is
often determined through diversity. Not only
Xyyman and myself but Cruciani and even
Supercar (aka you know who) have said as much.

---

quote:

---

For him they work when pro-Africa but when
it eliminates Africa he denies their applicability.

That's what I call special pleading.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
- diversity
- age
- frequency.
These are what usually determine an Hg's origins.

---

These are very flimsy reasons.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Standards to determine haplogroup origin
- diversity
- age
- frequency

---

Those are your standards and your personal opinion, albeit parroting after those of other people. Nothing more.

---

quote:

---

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001422

Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland for haplogroup E3b, that is, it had :

1. the highest number of different E3b clades,
2. a high frequency
   of this haplogroup and a
   high microsatellite diversity,
   and, finally,
3. the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup.

---

quote:

---

http://thenile.phpbb-host.com/sutra869.php

What is important to take home, is this:

"...Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland for haplogroup E3b - that is, it had

(1) the highest number of different E3b clades (table 1),
(2) a high frequency of this haplogroup and a high microsatellite diversity, and, finally,

(3) the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup."

References: Genetic studies contents are courtesy of Cruciani et al.


Although
- frequency
may be correlated with
- diversity,
both are not the same thing, as some might view them. Both are useful in determining the possible age and origins of haplogroups.

---

quote:

---

http://thenile.phpbb-host.com/ntopic2257.php

K-M9 happens to be one of those direct descendants of F-M89, a lineage representing an ancestor who could well have been African- who knows, pending specifics to that end? In many cases, origins for downstream lineages are inferred from things like:

*The frequency of haplotypes and the diversity of these haplotypes of a superhaplogroup in a region.

*The micro satellite diversity of haplotypes, i.e. their clusters.

*The frequency and distribution pattern of undifferentiated paraphyletic haplogroup of a designated superhaplogroup.

---

quote:

---

Arredi 2004
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1216069/

The M35 lineage (see the phylogeny in fig. 1A for marker locations) is thought to have arisen in East Africa, on the basis of its
* high frequency and
* diversity
there (Cruciani et al.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yeah, after Supercar was banned the aliases began.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by argyle104:
Note, that "The Explorer/Ausarian/Supercar/MysterySolver/Trollshredder" are the same person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yeah, after Supercar was banned the aliases began.

---

quote:

---

Wake up Ex its time for your phantasy to end

---

quote:

---

Of course you'll deny this with some
who u gonna believe me or your lyin eyez
spin

---

quote:

---

and you'll also deny u evah said they were not
relevant twice right here in this thread like

---

quote:

---

So is it that or this?
.
.

quote:

---

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001422

Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland for haplogroup E3b, that is, it had :

1. the highest number of different E3b clades,
2. a high frequency
   of this haplogroup and a
   high microsatellite diversity,
   and, finally,
3. the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup.

---

quote:

---

http://thenile.phpbb-host.com/sutra869.php

What is important to take home, is this:

"...Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland for haplogroup E3b - that is, it had

(1) the highest number of different E3b clades (table 1),
(2) a high frequency of this haplogroup and a high microsatellite diversity, and, finally,

(3) the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup."

References: Genetic studies contents are courtesy of Cruciani et al.


Although
- frequency
may be correlated with
- diversity,
both are not the same thing, as some might view them. Both are useful in determining the possible age and origins of haplogroups.

---

quote:

---

http://thenile.phpbb-host.com/ntopic2257.php

K-M9 happens to be one of those direct descendants of F-M89, a lineage representing an ancestor who could well have been African- who knows, pending specifics to that end? In many cases, origins for downstream lineages are inferred from things like:

*The frequency of haplotypes and the diversity of these haplotypes of a superhaplogroup in a region.

*The micro satellite diversity of haplotypes, i.e. their clusters.

*The frequency and distribution pattern of undifferentiated paraphyletic haplogroup of a designated superhaplogroup.

---

Hypocrisy like this

---

quote:

---

and lack of supported and
sensible contributions

---

quote:

---

is why I ignore you
and leave others to go back and forth trading
insults with you which is all you're good for anymore.
N E X T !

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Explorer:
.......

Blah..blah..baaaa...

Or maybe you just felt the need to say that I'm "banned", i.e. censorship, to make some more emotional points; I dunno for sure what's wrong with you, but clearly something is not working right in that head.

---

You should be put on a permanent ban and sent back to that worthless blog of yours that noone ever visits...
 

---

Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yepper, dizzy spin, just as predicted, all fluff, no filler.

N E X T !

---

This is the sort of eloquence expected from someone who applies emotionalism as a crutch for steering clear from rational thinking. Try using sentences next time you reply; you'll make some emotional point better than the gibberish put above.

PS: I am tickled at the prospect of a previously banned paper-lion championing censorship of some other. As for the blog, it's settled then: stay away. Knowing that you are among the "nobodies"--who seem to know what goes on in there--who ever visit it, cannot possibly be a bad thing.
 

---

Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
 
^not censorship but good riddance!

If your blog were selling, you would not be here.

Nobaddy wants it!
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
N E X T !
 

---

Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
 
The paper-lion, who thinks Haile Selassie is his creator, is obviously inanimately stupid enough to have unnoticed that I've been posting here much longer than I've had a blog. Being in possession of a blog has zero bearing on my presence here.

Nature has a way of weeding out people whose stupidity (i.e. your people) will be the cause of human extinction sooner rather than later; you are selectively excluded from the breeding section of humanity. That's what I call good riddance.
 

---

Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
 
^LOL!

You have a phucked up blog, period! No traffick no attention, no profit.

Truth maybe an offense, but it is not a crime - Rasta proverbs

LMBAO!
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
an interesting Nat Geo map discussed before




showing first route out of Africa into Yemen

Then southern route to India

Then from India, two main branches stemming for the population the resto oif the world,

Western Eurasisa branch- Near East, Europe

Eastern Eurasia branch - East Asia, South Asia. Oceania


According to this map India was populated before the Levant

_________________________________________

A variant scenario that is not that far of a departure from this map is that after entering Yemen there was another branch at the same time as the one leading to India and this branch went directly North through Arabia into the Near East




comparitvely this map, a little different also at a OOA Yemen entry point

This map places a major branching in Central Asia at which people who would go North to populate Europe did not necessarily go to India first. Indians are shown as a separate branch form this point.
 

---

Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
 
Phucked up blog

Phucked up blogger

LMBAO!
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
A bit off topic but beats the spat chat.
How old are these maps and who made them?
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
green map Nat geo link in previous post "map"
2011

I think the blue map is from Spencer Wells' book Journey of Man, 2003. The nice thing about it is that the different branches are labeled with Ys and dated
 

---

Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
 

 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Spencer Wells? Like I said. Know their politics. Spencer Wells spin is R-M269 orginated from Central Asia. NG Video Journey of Man. On the other hand- The females, H1/H3 originated from Iberia. Makes sense?

BTW- Just saw this thread. Really entertaining.

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

I think the blue map is from Spencer Wells' book Journey of Man, 2003.

---

 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Not sure about Major sub-clades of M in Europe.

But Kivilsd(sp) provided the most recent and comprehensive study on U6 and M1 concluding both are undenialibly African.

Geography also provides proof. Maybe someone can do a nice chart on a map. Overlay the HGs so we can see the layout.

Any questions?? Bottom line. M=Africa/Asia while N(subclades) = Africa/Europe. Common sense ie logical conclusion is...Africa is the common theme. Fughk the BS "back-migration" nonsense.


 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
This divide to conquer shyte has been played out....ie M and N.

Maybe someone can do a cleaner map.


 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
I am fed-up with the "fairy tale" of Europeans and Asian "back-migrating" into Africa.

How many times can they spin the same BS story whenever they see or want something in Africa they wish to claim as theirs.

THIEVES AND LIARS!!!!

M back-migrating into Africa.
N/H/U back migrating into Africa.
What's next L3?
 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Was that an emotional outburst!? He! He! Sorry Sage. You got your thread back. my 2 cents.

And please don't ask the point of the map..

Lioness will explain. He is good like that.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Well at least Wells recognizes the Levant/Arabian
Peninsula/"Mesopotamia" was just an extension of
Africa back in the day.
 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Not sure if that was tongue in cheek or not but, at a glance I think I stumbled onto something.

Anyone has a study of the mtDNA makeup of Levant/Arabia? Something recent. ie Haplogroups not SNPs. Got that from DNATribes already. We know that the male line is PN2(African) and J.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 



.

quote:

---

The N lineage is believed to have entered Eurasia via the continental route out of Africa [1]. This hypothesis has been disputed by some researchers [2] because hg N is found in India [3] and Australia [4-5]. This has led to some researchers assuming that there was a single migration of hgs M and N out of Africa [4-8].
Haplogroup N originated in Africa.

There was a serial expansion of haplogroup N across Africa into Eurasia [28]. This haplogroup probably originated in East Africa near the great Lakes region around 93.4kya [28]. From Tanzania, Khoisan speaking people probably spread the haplogroup into Ethiopia 80kya and into West Africa 80kya [28]. Sometime before 40kya carriers of haplogroup N from Cameroon and possibly the Senegambia migrated across the Straits of Gibraltar into Iberia [28]. The Khoisan speakers probably spread the Aurignacian culture throughout Europe [14].

As a result, of the early demic diffusion of haplogroup N across Africa before the first anatomically modern humans (AMH) exited Africa 60kya [28], N haplogroups are found throughout Africa. Haplogroups N,N*, N1 and N1a are found within Sub-Saharan groups including Senegambians [9], Tanzanians [10] and modern Ethiopians [11]. Carriers of haplogroup N in Africa speak various languages including Khoisan, Cushitic, Niger-Congo, Afrasian and Nilo-Saharan. In East Africa, we find that 85.5% of the Sub-Saharan African population carry N1 clades, while 14.5% carry one the N subhaplogroup in West Africa. In Egypt 8.8 percent of the Gurma carry hg N1b [12].
The Great Lakes region of East Africa was the center for the spread of haplogroup N across Africa [28]. As a result, it is not surprising to find that African N1a mtDNA haplotypes (minus 16000) include 147G-172-223-248-355 in Tanzania and Ethiopia [1a]. These mtDNA haplotypes are also found in Saudi Arabia, Greece, Russia and Yemen [1a]. The South Indian mtDNA N1a haplotypes (minus 16000) include 147G-172-223-248-295-355 and 147G-172-209-203-248-355 [1a].

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Not sure if that was tongue in cheek or not but, at a glance I think I stumbled onto something.

Anyone has a study of the mtDNA makeup of Levant/Arabia? Something recent. ie Haplogroups not SNPs. Got that from DNATribes already. We know that the male line is PN2(African) and J.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Not sure if that was tongue in cheek or not but, at a glance I think I stumbled onto something.

Anyone has a study of the mtDNA makeup of Levant/Arabia? Something recent. ie Haplogroups not SNPs. Got that from DNATribes already. We know that the male line is PN2(African) and J.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:

Kivilsd(sp) provided the most recent and comprehensive study on U6 and M1 concluding both are undenialibly African.

---

quote:

---

A specificity marker's lineage or genesis in terms
of its clade's major haplogroup and that haplogroup's
basal expansions may not be the same as its origin.

---

quote:

---

U6 and M1 both share the feature of being African-specific subclades
of haplogroups otherwise spread only in non-African populations. Indeed,
whilst most U clades are found in North Africa and in Eurasia, as far as
the Ganges Basin, U6 is virtually restricted to North (West) Africa. For
macro-haplogroup M, this African connection is even more puzzling, as
haplogroups belonging to M are mostly found only in South, Central and
East Asia, the Americas and Oceania, where no M1 has yet been reported.

---

quote:

---

A thorough study by Olivieri and co-authors [29] proposed that both
M1 and U6 were involved in an early dispersal, 40–45KYA, from Southwest
Asia to North Africa in association with the first arrival of anatomically
modern humans in the Mediterranean region. Considering this time frame,
it was suggested, furthermore, that the spread of Aurignacian culture in
Europe and the Dabban industry in North Africa derived from the same
source. This interpretation was questioned by Forster and Romano who,
referring to the geographic correlates, questioned this evidence and
proposed that, alternatively, the spread of these haplogroups could be
potentially be explained by more recent events, perhaps contemporary to
the dispersal of populations speaking Afro-Asiatic (AA) languages [32].

---

quote:

---

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.

---

quote:

---

... U6 and M1 ... are likely derived from a non-African ancestral clade
at a similar time depth and both are largely confined to North and East
Africa and the Middle East in their present-day geographic distribution.

---

quote:

---

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.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Not sure if that was tongue in cheek or not but, at a glance I think I stumbled onto something.

Anyone has a study of the mtDNA makeup of Levant/Arabia? Something recent. ie Haplogroups not SNPs. Got that from DNATribes already. We know that the male line is PN2(African) and J.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
I am fed-up with the "fairy tale" of Europeans and Asian "back-migrating" into Africa.

How many times can they spin the same BS story whenever they see or want something in Africa they wish to claim as theirs.

THIEVES AND LIARS!!!!

M back-migrating into Africa.
N/H/U back migrating into Africa.
What's next L3?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Are you guys kidding me?!!! come on! Look at what the table/data is telling us.

Twice as many Nigerians(2%) carry mtDNA hg-N than Ethiopians(1%).

In addition 10% of Tanzanians (Turu) carry HG-N.

Not sure who these people are but. . .hg-N seems to be found throughout the continent.. . .and where you least expect it.


I assume these Scientist did due deligence and sampled correctly varifying the authenticity people they were sampling.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Well at least Wells recognizes the Levant/Arabian
Peninsula/"Mesopotamia" was just an extension of
Africa back in the day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Well at least Wells recognizes the Levant/Arabian
Peninsula/"Mesopotamia" was just an extension of
Africa back in the day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

Well at least Wells recognizes the Levant/Arabian
Peninsula/"Mesopotamia" was just an extension of
Africa back in the day.

---

Very limited archeological basis for that. It seems the water and the Sinai desert was always a barrier to large scale migration until much later in history. It would be interesting to have archeological basis (aka archeological sites) for your affirmation predating 3500 BC. Anybody is welcome top post them as I already started a thread about it a few months back with almost no response.

What seems to be the reality thus far is that that region was too much arid (since the late Pleistocene) to favor migration in that direction. It takes many generations to cross large expanse of (desert) land like that, with people settling along the way, and this wasn't done in the far past. That's what the lack of significant archeological sites tell us.

---

.

How can you say there was never a south (coastal
North Africa) to southeast (Levant) Mediterranean
corridor before 3500 BCE? Did you check climatology
there for the entire timespan before 3500 BCE?






Where is this months old thread you're talking about?
If it "died" without much response It must've been serious.
The less academic threads without serious scholarly support
as usually the ones that soar on page after page.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
"back in the day" when?
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
"back in the day" when?

---

"the Middle East has always been an extension of north-eastern Africa"


 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 
What is very limited is the archeological sites (aka human settlements) in the Sinai desert between Africa and the Levant between the Late Pleistocene (about 11 000BC) and the birth of Ancient Egypt (about 3500BC). Even sites in the Delta are pretty rare in that time period. People can post about them if they want to.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Yeah, they can post about 'em in YOUR thread.

Bump your stuff up please, thanx.

This is MY population genetics thread and I
hope it doesn't get too far afield chasing
peripherals.

A little is OK but not enough to divert the theme.
 

---

Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yeah, they can post about 'em in YOUR thread.

Bump your stuff up please, thanx.

This is MY population genetics thread and I
hope it doesn't get too far afield chasing
peripherals.

A little is OK but not enough to divert the theme.

---

Sorry Tukuler, I didn't mean to hijack the thread with side discussions.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
[qb] "back in the day" when?

---

"the Middle East has always been an extension of north-eastern Africa"

---

Do you think that based on that statement one could say modern Middle Easterners (and modern Egyptians therfore even more so)
are primarily African genetically?

" Near Easterners are mainly associated with lineages HV, R0, J, N2, M, and N1." - C. Coudray 2008

Largest Middle Eastern Cities
according to wikipedia:
: Istanbul, Cairo, Tehran, Baghdad, Riyadh, Jeddah, Ankara
 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Nice lead Dr. Winters. As you can see M is found throughout Africa.

This is the first paper I have seen showing such high frequency and diversity in West Africa.



 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
Seems like MtDNA M originated in Central Africa. Right between Ethiopia and Senegal.
 

---

Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
 
Originally posted by xyyman:
I am fed-up with the "fairy tale" of Europeans and Asian "back-migrating" into Africa.

^^Ultimately their spin makes little difference for
the "backflowees" resembled the dreaded "blacks"..
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
NOPE!

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
[qb] "back in the day" when?

---

"the Middle East has always been an extension of north-eastern Africa"

---

Do you think that based on that statement one could say modern Middle Easterners (and modern Egyptians therfore even more so)
are primarily African genetically?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Originally posted by xyyman:
I am fed-up with the "fairy tale" of Europeans and Asian "back-migrating" into Africa.

^^Ultimately their spin makes little difference for
the "backflowees" resembled the dreaded "blacks"..

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yeah, they can post about 'em in YOUR thread.

Bump your stuff up please, thanx.

This is MY population genetics thread and I
hope it doesn't get too far afield chasing
peripherals.

A little is OK but not enough to divert the theme.

---

Sorry Tukuler, I didn't mean to hijack the thread with side discussions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

And, to add to that, the oldest M1 is in Northern Africa (not Ethiopia), yet, there simply is no indigenous Northern African culture M1 can be correlated with. There is the Aterian, which stops 40kya and seems to die out due to the increasing aridity of the Sahara. Then, there seems to be a population hiatus in Northern Africa which seems to end with the appearance of the Ibero-Maurusians in the coastal Maghreb 20kya. They're the only archaeological candidates for M1 and U6, and to the dismay of butt-hurt ideologues, they cluster morphometrically with Eurasian AMHs before doing so with African ones.

Then there is also the fact that the proto-Eurasian populations lived in Eastern Africa before OOA, certainly not in Northern Africa. Paul Mellars et al. 2013 demonstrated that by correlating East African MSA technologies (that have affinity with Southern African technologies [Howiesons Poort]) with the earliest OOA cultures in South Asia and reconfirming the Southern Dispersal Route theory.

There is no way that the dubious notion of M1 representing some magical wandering Middle Palaeolithic African leftover ancestry can be upheld without clear evidence of a population movement from East Africa to the Maghreb ~30kya,

that can explain what the hell the oldest M1 is doing in Northern Africa, rather than Ethiopia. Oops, my bad; there are no archaeological cultures attested in the Maghreb during that time period.

---

Interesting theory. So how do you think these Eurasian ancestors of the Oranians (Ibero-Marusians) entered Africa? Also, what of Nazlet Khater which dates ~ 30kya??

---

Not to overstay my welcome, as I'm not exactly posting in line with the OP parameters, but Nazlet Khater seems to correlate with L3k, which moved from the Ethiopian region to North East Africa 30-40kya, per Soares et al 2011. Whatever its affinity, its mandible strongly clusters with MSA Sub-Saharan Africans per Pinhasi's analysis.

What do you mean with how did they enter Africa? Are you referring to the aridity of the Sahara? The Ibero-Maurusian sites were found in coastal Maghreb, as well as the other sites (e.g., Dabban). The North African coastal regions weren't affected by the aridity of the Sahara to the point of becoming uninhabitable; they remained a traversable corridor.

Someone should make another thread if they want to discuss this further.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

Not to overstay my welcome, as I'm not exactly posting in line with the OP parameters, ...

---

Wouldn't worry about that. Multidisciplinary
evidence is always welcome. Threads normally
have topic related filler. Just as long as
it doesn't overshadow the thread title.

Distinguishing Nazlet Khater between M1 and
L3k is value add. So is Maurusian physical
anthropology. It helps put a "face" on dry
statistics. Same with M1 not being a time
lagged remnant of some undocumented (afaik)
African Hg M or M* taking 10s of 1000s of
years to only expand in M1 and derive no
other African M clades. Except for M1 all
other M clades are Asian, no?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

So how do you think these Eurasian ancestors of the Oranians (Ibero-Marusians) entered Africa? Also, what of Nazlet Khater which dates ~ 30kya??

---

DJ What I make of that is also within topic.

If ancestral M1 entered via Levant and Sinai
then are the expansion and archaeology dates
in line and does another African culture fit
the bill or only the Maurusian?

This brings cause to consider concepts of
what M1 as real people were doing in a region
spanning land from the pre-Sahara to the Jordan
Rift ending at the Mediterranean's south and
east shores. Also how landscape and climate
may have marked this as a contiguous region
at the time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Son of Ra:

The debate about M is very interesting one. I strongly support an Asian origins and a back migration into Africa. But it doesn't matter because even if M1 is due to back migration, M1 is no longer Eurasian.

There is a nothing 'personal' about this. Haplogroup M is in Africa because of back migrations. Africans don't carry the deepest rooted Haplogroup M lineages, Asians do. Not only that, but M1 lineages in East Africa are much younger in lineages then Haplogroup M lineages in Asia. Asian origins for Haplogroup M is supported by coalescence ages and diversities, M1 is younger than other Asiatic M lineages. That is enough to tell us that M is of Asian origins and M1 in Africa is due to back migration...

---

Yes there's no extant M of any meaningful
frequency in Africa except M1. Coudray 2008
found M in Siwa at 1.3% with no further comment
on which M, haplogroup or paragroup. Low freqs
of M1 in Afroasia and central Asia and low diversity
outside of Africa adds to the fact of M1 being an
African specific marker. Based on Olivieri 2006 and
Rosa 2011 I called M1 NE Africa & peripheries specific.



Though oldest in NW Africa M1's frequency
is more concentrated in NE Africa nowadays.

Standards to determine haplogroup origin
- diversity
- age
- frequency
favor Asian location of the parent of
all derived M clades. The age of M1
compared to M is strong evidence M1
didn't arise from any OoA M remnant
that stayed in Africa.

code:

---

M coalescence estimates

       Soares  Behar
       2009    2012

M      60.6    49.5 
M33    44.9    42.3
M5     39.6    37.0 
M2     37.6    36.3
M36    36.5    32.0
M37    34.7    29.3
M40    33.5    31.5
M39    32.3    26.6
M34    29.8    26.8

M1     25.4    23.7

---

Only biased ethnocentric special pleading for Africa ignores these facts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swenet:

--It means nothing that African M1 doesn't descend from (Eur)asian M clades; ...

---

M1 derives from M via M1'20'51 defined by the T14110C mutation.
M1'20'51's motif is L3 + (T489C C10400T T14783C G15043A T14110C)
Mutations in accordance with RSRS 2012 not the Eurocentric rCRS 1999 or CRS 1981

M1 descends from the parent it has in common
with SE Asian M20 and M51. The implication is
that M1'20'51 is an Asian M clade like the other
basal M clades.

---

Yes, Pennarun et al 2012 discuss the C14110T mutation, but interestingly, they aren't particularly impressed with the argument that it has phylogenetic significance. What do you make of their caveat?

---

quote:

---

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.

---

The bolded can be said for most mtDNA mutations.
According to Soares 2009 Table S3 the following
Hg M motif mutations occur as many times as below:

5x - 489
1x - 10400
2x - 14783
9x - 15043;

10400 is the only unique Hg M mutation yet
489 10400 14783 15043 are recognized parts
of Hg M's signature motif.

Yes T14110C is also in some non-M lineages.
M1'20'51 is basal. But in all other instances
T14110C appears further down than the basal
clade level or even basal sub-clade level,
showing up in lineages of sub-clades
(especially in non-M).

code:

---

Hg   BasalClade   BasalSubClade   Lineage

M    M1'20'51
M    M23'75       M75
U    U4'9         U4              U4a1c
L    L1           L1b             L1b1a6
L    L3           L3h             L3h1a1
U    U5           U5a             U5a1db2b

---

Mutation by state instead of descent runs rampant
throughout mtDNA Hg motifs. Behar 2007 comments
on homoplasy and back mutations in coding-region
SNPs.


How many known lineages are currently assigned
to a Hg because of multiple occurring mutations
by state instead of by descent? I don't know.

Pennarun's notice is apt and perhaps the field
should hi-lite mutations occurring only once as
defining mutations of a Hg, clade, or lineage.

---