HLA antigens of the Somali population are not categorised as well as those of other international ethnic groups. We analysed the HLA antigens of 76 unrelated Somalis who lived in the west of England. HLA -A, -B, -C and DRB1 typing was performed by polymerase chain reaction using sequence-specific oligonucleotide probes (PCR-SSOP) at a low-intermediate resolution level. Phenotype frequency, gene frequency and haplotype frequency were used to study the relationship between Somalis and other relevant populations. The antigens with highest frequencies were HLA -A1, A2, and A30; B7, B51 and B39; Cw7, Cw16, Cw17, Cw15 and Cw18; DR 13, DR17, DR8 and DR1. HLA haplotypes with high significance and characteristics of the Somali population are B7-Cw7, B39-Cw12, B51-Cw16, B57-Cw18. The result of HLA class I and class II antigen frequencies show that the Somali population appear more similar to Arab or Caucasoid than to African populations. The results are consistent with hypothesis, supported by cultural and historical evidence, of common origin of the Somali population. This study will serve as a reference for further anthropological studies, as well as studies of associations between HLA and disease. --------------------------------------------------
Interesting. In light of the fact that majority of the Somalis belong to haplogroup E3b1 unlike Arabs who are J, how could they be more similar to "Arab or Caucasoid " as opposed to other Africans.
Regards.
Posts: 107 | From: USA | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know what they mean!! The classic West African "negro". Glider should jump on this.
As I said. If I were the Gliders and Eurocentrics. This where I would attack. Seperate the East Africans from the West Africans. The Nordic AE is such a stupid strategy.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: You know what they mean!! The classic West African "negro". Glider should jump on this.
As I said. If I were the Gliders and Eurocentrics. This where I would attack. Seperate the East Africans from the West Africans. The Nordic AE is such a stupid strategy.
Evergreen Writes:
Are East and West Africans more distinct from each other than Northern and Southern Europeans when appropriately modeled?
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The classic Southern European may be more different to the Northern European than the West and East Africans.
Dark eyes, dark hair, dark skin, curly/straight hair. Short? While the northern Europeans are the opposite.
But you probably missed my point.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: The classic Southern European may be more different to the Northern European than the West and East Africans.
Dark eyes, dark hair, dark skin, curly/straight hair. Short? While the northern Europeans are the opposite.
But you probably missed my point.
Evergreen Writes:
Yes, I missed the point. What is the point of this? I don't see any new information in this post.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Burhan: Interesting. In light of the fact that majority of the Somalis belong to haplogroup E3b1 unlike Arabs who are J, how could they be more similar to "Arab or Caucasoid " as opposed to other Africans.
Evergreen Writes:
What's interesting to me about the Horn of Africa populations and E3b1 is that the haplogroup E3b1 seems to have derived first among populations in Late Paleolithic Southern Egypt (Jebel Sahaba, etc.) that were of the broad, West African trend instead of the elongated, East African trend.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
On that note there is no correlation between general phenotype and lineages: Fulani and Tutsi carry essentially E3a haplgroups and are linked genetically to West and Central Africans...And if I remember the underived E3b*-M35 is highest among Nilo-Saharan Datoga: History of Click-Speaking Populations of Africa Inferred from mtDNA and Y Chromosome Genetic Variation Sarah A. Tishkoff* et al.
The Datog population from Tanzania carries exceptionally high frequencies of E3b1-M35 (54–63%) They also tend to be broad faced: Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lets anyone get it twisted the "broad trend" isn't necessarily the modal phenotype for West Africans.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Burhan, Many Somalis in England are usually from Northern Somalia that was colonized by the British, so you will find a lot of Issaq and Darods, who are more mixed with Yemeni compare to Central and Southern Somalis like the Hawiye, Digil and Rahawiin and some other clans...But I don't know any study done on specific clans...so I can't draw any conclusion....
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: On that note there is no correlation between general phenotype and lineages...
Evergreen Writes:
I doubt this. There is a likely correlation between phenotype and lineage. What is missing are the neccessary inputs to develop an appropriate correlation model.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
As you put it there is not enough information to derive correlations...so far no correlations between lineages and phenotype..
Posts: 461 | From: Kilimanjaro | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: Burhan, Many Somalis in England are usually from Northern Somalia that was colonized by the British, so you will find a lot of Issaq and Darods, who are more mixed with Yemeni compare to Central and Southern Somalis like the Hawiye, Digil and Rahawiin and some other clans...But I don't know any study done on specific clans...so I can't draw any conclusion....
What is your proof that these groups are mixed with yemenis. Any studies.
The study used subjects from What is now called Somaliland.
Regards.
Mowlid
Posts: 107 | From: USA | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ What "other Africans" are they compared to?
This is a very good question. They did not mention it, which may lead to some sort of bias.
Knowing how they define "African" would have given us a glimpse of their thinking.
I would suspect other Africans in the same region would cluster just as closely and perhaps even closer to each other than the "Arabs or caucations" they mention.
Regards.
Posts: 107 | From: USA | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: On that note there is no correlation between general phenotype and lineages...
Evergreen Writes:
I doubt this. There is a likely correlation between phenotype and lineage. What is missing are the neccessary inputs to develop an appropriate correlation model.
To what lineages do you correlate the elongated morphology?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Burhan: I would suspect other Africans in the same region would cluster just as closely and perhaps even closer to each other than the "Arabs or caucations" they mention.
Regards.
As would I.
Sun Tzu: Warefare is a psychological contest, where the battle is won/or lost before the 'fighting' begins.
I once witnessed a debate over whether Ancient Egyptian were more likened to African or European.
For evidence of African affinity the Eurocentrist specified 'sub-sahara'.
For evidence of European affinity the Eurocentrist proceded to show 'eurasia'.
The Africanist attempted to 'counter' by meeting the Eurocentrist requirement of proof of sub-saharan affinity.
He'd already lost this debate.
Africa is all of Africa.
Europe is not *EurAsia.*
On terms where Africa is constricted to 1/2 it's size, and Europe is monumentally 'bloated' to 10 times its geography, then the outcome is a foregone conclusion.
You must force a fair debate, and DISALLOW a biased one -> win the War *before* the fighting begins.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ What "other Africans" are they compared to?
This is a very good question. They did not mention it, which may lead to some sort of bias.
Knowing how they define "African" would have given us a glimpse of their thinking.
I would suspect other Africans in the same region would cluster just as closely and perhaps even closer to each other than the "Arabs or caucations" they mention.
Regards.
On the other hand, The subjects may all be of K2 derivation. But still, I would imagine they will cluster closely with their neighbors vis-a-vis across the sea.
Regards.
Posts: 107 | From: USA | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: On that note there is no correlation between general phenotype and lineages...
Evergreen Writes:
I doubt this. There is a likely correlation between phenotype and lineage. What is missing are the neccessary inputs to develop an appropriate correlation model.
To what lineages do you correlate the elongated morphology?
Evergreen Writes:
I correlate no lineages to the elongated morphology because I have not done a correlation analysis. This does not mean it can't be done. In addition the drill down would have to be to the sub-lineage level. But certainly morphology can be correlated with environment and environment can be correlated with gene pool.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: Burhan, Many Somalis in England are usually from Northern Somalia that was colonized by the British, so you will find a lot of Issaq and Darods, who are more mixed with Yemeni compare to Central and Southern Somalis like the Hawiye, Digil and Rahawiin and some other clans...But I don't know any study done on specific clans...so I can't draw any conclusion....
Acually only 2,5% of all Somalis have arab lineages. The rest are not mixed with Arabs.
Posts: 75 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ What "other Africans" are they compared to?
This is a very good question. They did not mention it, which may lead to some sort of bias.
Knowing how they define "African" would have given us a glimpse of their thinking.
I would suspect other Africans in the same region would cluster just as closely and perhaps even closer to each other than the "Arabs or caucations" they mention.
Regards.
-------------------------------------------------
Rasol,
In response to our earlier exchanges in which I raised the possibility of bias in the study due to the fact that all of the samples were in essence “African” despite their differentiation into Somali versus other Africans. I have attempted to investigate the above-cited study further by contacting the Authors of the study through email correspondence.
They have denied any bias in their study and their contention was that they have compared Somali samples to other “African” samples pooled from studies conducted on “Africans” from throughout Africa as well as some “African Americans”.
In summary: They claim that they conducted an “Allelic distributions and interlocus linkage disequilibria comparison” of the above mentioned populations. They claim that the “Africans” and “African American “ samples exhibited the characteristics alleles of “Africans” as characterized by (A-66, 74, 8001), (B-1510, 35, 42), (DRB1-0302, 0804, 1202, 1304, 1503), (DPB1-0101, 1701, 1801, 3901)as opposed to the Somalis.......refer to the Somali alleles above. Also the diversity seen in A, B and DRB1 were so significant to indicate the “African” origin of the alleles versus Somalis.
Regards
Posts: 107 | From: USA | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ What "other Africans" are they compared to?
This is a very good question. They did not mention it, which may lead to some sort of bias.
Knowing how they define "African" would have given us a glimpse of their thinking.
I would suspect other Africans in the same region would cluster just as closely and perhaps even closer to each other than the "Arabs or caucations" they mention.
Regards.
Evergreen Writes:
It should be noted that this is not a peer-reviewed study, but a short presentation given at a symposium.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never implied that the authors were biased.
I merely asked what other African populations were sampled besides Somali.
This question was not really answered.
Without the answer to this question it is impossible for the reader [or the authors] to imply much of anything.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I never implied that the authors were biased.
Did I say that?
In fact what I said was that I raised the possibility of bias myself.
quote:I merely asked what other African populations were sampled besides Somali.
This question was not really answered.
I think they did answer it by claiming that they compared Somalis with “Africans” from across Africa. They have gone further to include Afro-Americans. But this is besides the point.
The point is the very fact that they compare Somalis to “Africans” as though Somalis are not Africans. The fact of the matter is that Africans vary in skin color (from North to south) and race-as evidenced by the various haplogroups.
The underlying point they wanted to get across was basically that Somalis are not black. This is the point, in my view, that merits discussion.
Regards
Posts: 107 | From: USA | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:The underlying point they wanted to get across was basically that Somalis are not black.
Uh, no. This is you putting your words in their mouths, which is precisely why I want as much distance as possible between anything I said, and your contrived agenda. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Of course, I am weary of any study that uses the terms 'Arab' to describe populations let alone 'caucasoid'!
But yes, it seems to be the usual b.s. these so-called experts pull with the Egyptians in that they compare them with what they call 'Africans' yet never specify the exact populations they used since there are many African populations! The fact that they don't match 'Africans' is no doubt due to the fact they didn't use neighboring or closely related African groups since Egyptians and definitely Somalis are also Africans!
And no doubt by 'Arab' or even 'caucasoid' they mean populations of southern Arabia and especially Yemen, even though such regions have recieved gene flow from Africa in the past millennia.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Burhan don't worry about rasol. He's still smarting from two of the all time greatest beatdowns in the history of Egyptsearch from DougM and Yonis respectively.
I will post links to those epic psychologically sound thrashings later. hahahahahahaha
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Speaking of 'psychologically sound' or in your case lack thereof, what's your excuse? Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Of course, I am weary of any study that uses the terms 'Arab' to describe populations let alone 'caucasoid'!
But yes, it seems to be the usual b.s. these so-called experts pull with the Egyptians in that they compare them with what they call 'Africans' yet never specify the exact populations they used since there are many African populations! The fact that they don't match 'Africans' is no doubt due to the fact they didn't use neighboring or closely related African groups since Egyptians and definitely Somalis are also Africans!
And no doubt by 'Arab' or even 'caucasoid' they mean populations of southern Arabia and especially Yemen, even though such regions have recieved gene flow from Africa in the past millennia.
^ That's why, since it is not a peer review study and devoid of specifics for population, it is a mistake to overreact to it. Especially based on assumptions never verified, and so easily denied.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habari: On that note there is no correlation between general phenotype and lineages: Fulani and Tutsi carry essentially E3a haplgroups and are linked genetically to West and Central Africans...And if I remember the underived E3b*-M35 is highest among Nilo-Saharan Datoga: History of Click-Speaking Populations of Africa Inferred from mtDNA and Y Chromosome Genetic Variation Sarah A. Tishkoff* et al.
The Datog population from Tanzania carries exceptionally high frequencies of E3b1-M35 (54–63%) They also tend to be broad faced:
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ What "other Africans" are they compared to?
Indeed, this is a crucial question as well as which Arabs were they compared to as we all know the populations of Arabia are diverse. We know southern Arabia, especially Yemen carry lineages from East Africa.
This is why whenever studies citing affinities between East Africans and Southwest Asians especially a generalized group like 'Arabs' should be called into question.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic