quote:Originally posted by osirion: Basically what you are saying was my original position.
How? Elaborate please, because I don't think so.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: However, it also means that the climate allowed for this gene to be expressed. If this allele was detrimental in the North African climate it certainly would not be represented in 62-100 percent of the population.
Who said the allele was detrimental? The skin color the allele causes is detrimental in this African environment, the allele doesn't discriminate and it gets passed on regardless, a European born in Africa is not going to automatically turn darkskinned because his/her skin color is not suited for the environment.
So again, you're wrong, and what it means is that sexual selection and genetic drift helped spread this allele in geographically proximate populations in northern Africa, has nothing at all to do with climate allowing for it to spread sorry kiddo.
If that were the case then the leucoderm phenotype associated with Europeans would have arose in situ Africa instead of being introduced genetically. If the climate would have allowed for this change instead of sexual selection and genetic drift we wouldn't see this; New data tells us more about cancer incidence in North Africa.
^^This wouldn't occur if north Africa's climate was advantageous to this lighter skin. What makes sense, is sexual selection and/or genetic drift which ultimately spread this allele regardless of the detrimental results the allele caused in the environment of north Africa.
If it was sufficiently detrimental it would be filtered out.
How so? And says who, you? LOL.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Period. Don't need a bunch of double talk for that.
So stop doing it.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: However, I have yet to see enough evidence for genetic admixture to explain the pale skin of Atlas Berbers.
Jeeeeeez, you can't be serious, are you really that much of a dullard?
So you're telling me the derived SLC24A5 111*A allele associated with lighterskin ranging from 62-100% in some of these geographically proximate populations in northern Africa is not sufficient enough to explain their lighterskin?
Did you ever graduate, from anywhere? LOL
The question is, how can it have such a high frequency in people that are 50% African. Is that not evidence of recessive genes?
That is my problem. The gene must have been rather advantagous to have reached that high of a concentration. So regardles of these peoples lineage they are predominantly non-African in terms of gene expression.
Just explain this: how can you be predominantly one thing but have genes that are predominantly another?
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Basically what you are saying was my original position.
How? Elaborate please, because I don't think so.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: However, it also means that the climate allowed for this gene to be expressed. If this allele was detrimental in the North African climate it certainly would not be represented in 62-100 percent of the population.
Who said the allele was detrimental? The skin color the allele causes is detrimental in this African environment, the allele doesn't discriminate and it gets passed on regardless, a European born in Africa is not going to automatically turn darkskinned because his/her skin color is not suited for the environment.
So again, you're wrong, and what it means is that sexual selection and genetic drift helped spread this allele in geographically proximate populations in northern Africa, has nothing at all to do with climate allowing for it to spread sorry kiddo.
If that were the case then the leucoderm phenotype associated with Europeans would have arose in situ Africa instead of being introduced genetically. If the climate would have allowed for this change instead of sexual selection and genetic drift we wouldn't see this; New data tells us more about cancer incidence in North Africa.
^^This wouldn't occur if north Africa's climate was advantageous to this lighter skin. What makes sense, is sexual selection and/or genetic drift which ultimately spread this allele regardless of the detrimental results the allele caused in the environment of north Africa.
If it was sufficiently detrimental it would be filtered out.
How so? And says who, you? LOL.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Period. Don't need a bunch of double talk for that.
So stop doing it.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: However, I have yet to see enough evidence for genetic admixture to explain the pale skin of Atlas Berbers.
Jeeeeeez, you can't be serious, are you really that much of a dullard?
So you're telling me the derived SLC24A5 111*A allele associated with lighterskin ranging from 62-100% in some of these geographically proximate populations in northern Africa is not sufficient enough to explain their lighterskin?
Did you ever graduate, from anywhere? LOL
The question is, how can it have such a high frequency in people that are 50% African. Is that not evidence of recessive genes?
First of all 50% African? Provide genetic data. Secondly as explained to you in several posts, genetic drift and sexual selection can help spread this allele throughout a population without any further admixture from the original source, which would be Europeans passing the derived SLC24A5 111*A allele associated with lighterskin, as we can also see in the middle east and Pakistan, which doesn't mean that the latter are more European either.
This allele is carried by both males and females, its not a uni-parental marker. Hence in northern coastal Africa, you have admixture as noted from uni-parentals on both sides maternally and paternally, just not so much paternally.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: That is my problem. The gene must have been rather advantagous to have reached that high of a concentration.
The problem seems to only be in your comprehensiveness or lack thereof in pertinence to this subject.
What this simply means is that the allele associated with lighterskin was passed on through admixture, this admixture is easily noted through analysis of their uni-parental markers, and genetic drift and sexual selection is what spread this allele to its high frequencies in northern Africa, the middle east and Pakistan as well.
So far You have failed to demonstrate how the north African environment would be advantageous to pale skin.
Like I already told you, if a European family moves to Africa and has kids in Africa, after a few generations and the kids still keep coming out white doesn't mean that the allele for pale skin is advantageous, it simply means genes are passed on from their predecessors regardless of where they're born. These northern Africans carry a derived allele for lighterskin through admixture from Europeans plain and simple.
There's nothing advantageous about pale skin in Africa, sorry Osirion.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: So regardles of these peoples lineage they are predominantly non-African in terms of gene expression.
Huh? You make no sense. How would a derived allele associated with skin color spread by genetic drift and/or sexual selection account for their "gene expression"? Who taught you this? Or are you just making things up again as you go along?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Just explain this: how can you be predominantly one thing but have genes that are predominantly another?
Earth to Osirion, they're not predominately one thing, and an allele is not "genes", as already explained to you genetic drift and/or sexual selection can help spread this allele without any further admixture from the source population. Jeez you're slow at catching on.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ No I don't get this and you are not helping.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There should be a formula that would help resolve this question.
From Tishkoff there is an impression that Berbers are 50% African. However, if SLC24A5 is at 62-100 percent, I don't see how they could be that African.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Osirion, what you seem to be doing is equating the admixture noted by uni-parentals with lighterskin when in fact that's just not how it works, what don't you get about that? This seems to be your problem. Understand, now, the SLC24A5 111*A allele which is not a maternal or paternal haplogroup, is what is associated with lighter skin and it's noted to range from 62-100% in geographically proximate places in north Africa, (which means not all of north Africa) the middle east and also Pakistan, are we to believe from your logic that these peoples gene expression is European as well when their uni-parentals say otherwise?
A man can carry an African Y chromosome and still carry this derived allele for lighterskin, one doesn't affect the other and vice versa with a female in Africa.
And, if you will show me how pale skin in Africa would be advantageous?
P.S. ;"Amazingh people and climate adaptation"
^^You have been shown that there was no climate adaptation and that these lighterskinned individuals in geographically proximate populations in northern Africa actually acquired this lightskin from Europeans. No counter evidence from you so far. So it's safe to say, case closed.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
One of the reasons why Moses was spared was because of his light skin. Light skinned Mothers purposely selecting light skin babies.
Not just sexual selection but evolution via an old form of birth control.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: *sigh*
Osirion, what you seem to be doing is equating the admixture noted by uni-parentals with lighterskin when in fact that's just not how it works, what don't you get about that? This seems to be your problem. Understand, now, the SLC24A5 111*A allele which is not a maternal or paternal haplogroup, is what is associated with lighter skin and it's noted to range from 62-100% in geographically proximate places in north Africa, (which means not all of north Africa) the middle east and also Pakistan, are we to believe from your logic that these peoples gene expression is European as well when their uni-parentals say otherwise?
A man can carry an African Y chromosome and still carry this derived allele for lighterskin, one doesn't affect the other and vice versa with a female in Africa.
And, if you will show me how pale skin in Africa would be advantageous?
P.S. ;"Amazingh people and climate adaptation"
^^You have been shown that there was no climate adaptation and that these lighterskinned individuals in geographically proximate populations in northern Africa actually acquired this lightskin from Europeans. No counter evidence from you so far. So it's safe to say, case closed.
Mind, you are a smart guy, a patient buy, but smart. Listen when I tell you that you are wasting your time here, Thi Orion character is under the impression that what he types out of his head is truth and the final say..It a waste man.
Posts: 8806 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: *sigh*
Osirion, what you seem to be doing is equating the admixture noted by uni-parentals with lighterskin when in fact that's just not how it works, what don't you get about that? This seems to be your problem. Understand, now, the SLC24A5 111*A allele which is not a maternal or paternal haplogroup, is what is associated with lighter skin and it's noted to range from 62-100% in geographically proximate places in north Africa, (which means not all of north Africa) the middle east and also Pakistan, are we to believe from your logic that these peoples gene expression is European as well when their uni-parentals say otherwise?
A man can carry an African Y chromosome and still carry this derived allele for lighterskin, one doesn't affect the other and vice versa with a female in Africa.
And, if you will show me how pale skin in Africa would be advantageous?
P.S. ;"Amazingh people and climate adaptation"
^^You have been shown that there was no climate adaptation and that these lighterskinned individuals in geographically proximate populations in northern Africa actually acquired this lightskin from Europeans. No counter evidence from you so far. So it's safe to say, case closed.
It is actually rather an astonishing amount of mixture. So incredibly remarkable. Its is recessive and yet expressed at such a high degree from people with a high amount of East African heritage.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Basically as I said the case is closed, and you have no evidence to counter the evidence provided by me, which informs us that the derived allele present in these geographically proximate populations as being the cause of their lighterskin. Another cased closed on osirion.
quote:Originally posted by osirion:
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: *sigh*
Osirion, what you seem to be doing is equating the admixture noted by uni-parentals with lighterskin when in fact that's just not how it works, what don't you get about that? This seems to be your problem. Understand, now, the SLC24A5 111*A allele which is not a maternal or paternal haplogroup, is what is associated with lighter skin and it's noted to range from 62-100% in geographically proximate places in north Africa, (which means not all of north Africa) the middle east and also Pakistan, are we to believe from your logic that these peoples gene expression is European as well when their uni-parentals say otherwise?
A man can carry an African Y chromosome and still carry this derived allele for lighterskin, one doesn't affect the other and vice versa with a female in Africa.
And, if you will show me how pale skin in Africa would be advantageous?
P.S. ;"Amazingh people and climate adaptation"
^^You have been shown that there was no climate adaptation and that these lighterskinned individuals in geographically proximate populations in northern Africa actually acquired this lightskin from Europeans. No counter evidence from you so far. So it's safe to say, case closed.
It is actually rather an astonishing amount of mixture.
How does an allele that can be widely spread through something as simple as sexual selection, without any further admixture from the source population, amount for an astonishing amount of admixture, when the uni-parentals, which are an undoubtebly better indication in the test for this admixture says otherwise?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: So incredibly remarkable. Its is recessive and yet expressed at such a high degree from people with a high amount of East African heritage.
And they don't have a high amount of non African admixture indicated by uni-parental markers?
Osirion, five years later and you still don't get it, just give it up already at this rate you'll never learn.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Well I actually said the very same thing about modern day Egyptians.
1, That culture and sexual selection are related.
2, If you adopt a culture then you also adopt a different concept of beauty.
3, Demic diffusion of culture can result in a phenotype change without admixture being the only source.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ Well I actually said the very same thing about modern day Egyptians.
1, That culture and sexual selection are related.
2, If you adopt a culture then you also adopt a different concept of beauty.
3, Demic diffusion of culture can result in a phenotype change without admixture being the only source.
To # 3: YES it CAN, but how long would it TAKE? What YOU are describing in #3 has already happened with the de-pigmentation in humans of certain climates. We already KNOW how long this takes. It it takes much longer than a few thousand years.
Amazigh peoples as a group have not been separated nor are they distinct as far as the age of the population for something like that to occur. We have some evidence to back this up too.
-Why is the most common and autochthonous male markers of this population: E-M81, E-M78(v65) so young?
-Also if the population is been there long enough to have phenotype change including skin color change which takes a VERY long time (and its not even advantageous in that area BTW) Why out of 14 distinct population clusters of Africa would they not have their own? Hmm......."Western Bantu" genetically distinct from "Eastern Bantu" who in turn are distinct from "Niger Kordifanian" who are distinct from Fulani?................And from all of this the poor North Africans who supposedly have been separated by 30,40,50, or 60 thousand years or whatever bullshit they what you to believe, had not a genetic cluster of their own?.........Yet the Bantu showed an ancestry distinction between East and West even though their expansion happened only 5000 years ago?
1 -It shows quite clear that the North African sample is "Mixed African." - You can compare it with the "Cape Mixed Ancestry" sample or even the "African American" samples.
2 -Looking at the AGES of NRY Chromosomes in North Africa shows they are "quite recent" from the Horn/Nile Valley Africans 1 + 2 = "Quite Recent" + "Mixed Africans"
Any Bones that they dig up in north Africa attempting to show continuity is just speculation until they start pulling Y-dna out of it, why?
quote: The trend in the literature so far has between towards younger age estimations for E-M81. Bosch et al. (2001) estimated 1.5-4.3 kya for E-M81, but later Luis et al. (2004) estimated 2 kya, while noting that the small amount of Egyptian E-M81 seemed older. Semino et al. (2004) estimated 8.6 kya. Arredi et al. (2004) estimated 4.2 kya. Cruciani et al. (2004) estimated 5.6 kya, but more recently in Cruciani et al. (2007), the authors show concerns at this calculation technique, implying that estimates be revised downwards to less than 5.6 kya. For E-V65 Cruciani et al. (2007) estimated approximately 4 kya.
Keep in mind the Mozabite sample was 80%E-M81 10% E(xE3b). I know that because Tishkoff didnt take the sample herself, she used an existing sample that is from a different study she referenced.
They seem to be doing everything possible to avoid the 2 key points regarding North African Ancestry: 1 - A recent population "expansion" or "replacement" from the East. Especially True of the male side.
2 - The Phylogenetic history of E-M81 being a SUB MUTATION of Another marker E-M35 that has an origin in Sub Saharan Africa. Notice they speak of E-M81 (and E-M78)as if it exists in a bubble separate from its parent marker E-M35....but we know better.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ evolution can be accerlerated based on punctual equilibruim ( bottlenecks ) and human intervention (genocide and infanticide).
If the light skinned population turned on the dark then it is possible for cultural changes to impact a population in a very short time.
Look at the state of indigenous Black North Africans are in. Look at what is happening in Sudan. Imagine Sudan without a world market/politics to be concerned with.
Simply a caste system that preferred Whites over Black could hastily bring about a population change in a short period of time. Especially if those with light skinned dominated sexually and militarily.
Based on what I have seen it would appear that culture and admixutre is the better explaination for the Amazigh rather than climate.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
The real question is, who were the Ibero-Marusian people? Were Whites in North Africa before the rise of the Capsian culture from Northern Kenya.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Please - Nobody respond to this foolishness any longer.
osirion - It's not working!!!
No matter how many times you try to introduce Whites to ancient Africa, you will always fail, just as you have before. I didn't happen, there is no way for you to fake it happening, so give it up!!
Damn, you are pathetic.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ do you think I would listen to a cult follower like you on this question. You are afraid of White people. Ahh - White North Africans - run and hide.
At least you can post something on the Ibero-Marusian people. I hear lately that they are most likely NE Africans themselves rather than Iberian refugees.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Northern Africa, especially West of Egypt, is a patch work of genetic types from all the neighboring areas ( Europe, West Asia, East Africa, Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa ). Unlike NE Africa where there is a bi-directional channel allowing for tropically adapted Africans to move Northward, NW Africa has a bottleneck preventing substantial numbers of tropically adapted Africans to emigrate. However, many of the berger speaking groups of Northern Africa are substantially indigenous Africans. There is no question about the female mediated gene flow from Europe and Western Asia, however, many berber speaking groups are nevertheless primarily African. Given this fact, what accounts for their striking difference in appearance from the founding East African groups that brought the Caspian culture into NW Africa along with the Afro-Asiatic language?
Besides the question of recessive genes which is well known in East African populations, there is also climate adaptation.
An example of climate adaptation that is helpful in illustrating how two groups can be closely related and yet look significantly different are the Ainu and the Andaman Island people.
Example of the Ainu:
Example of the Andman Island people:
As you can see, climate adaptation can make related groups of people appear to be quite different from each other. The same is true of the Bantu and the Berbers to some degree. Though Berber people have a significant non-African input.
What is not disputed is the origin of Berbers and that is with the rest of the Afro-Asiatic speaking groups - essentially the land of Punt.
The Kenya Capsian culture spread Northward up the Nile and then into NW Africa in the last 15K years. This group of East Africans replaced the Iberian culture that was present in NW Africa. The Iberian culture may have been a European group of people that had taken refuge in NW Africa during the last glacial maximum.
Interested in any additional information on the origin of the Caspian culture as well as the original Iberian peoples of NW Africa.
OMG I don't know whether to laugh or cry; the longer some people are here the less they absorb information I guess. The genetics of the Berbers has been dealt with over and over again on this forum. Am I missing something or is there something about human beings intermixing that Osirion and certain other "Africans" can not accept!
Please tell me he did not just claim Andaman Islanders and Ainu were "closely related" genetically.
Osirion - I'm trying not to be sarcastic so I will just add that this is the first time I've ever seen a posting here or for that matter on any blog in which everything stated in scientific fashion is demonstrably wrong!
Genetic testing of the Ainu people has shown them to belong mainly to Y-haplogroup D2.[22] Y-DNA haplogroup D2 is found frequently throughout the Japanese Archipelago including Okinawa. The only places outside of Japan in which Y-haplogroup D is common are Tibet and the Andaman Islands in the Indian Ocean.[23]
--------------
This makes them related.
We are all related Osirion. Please take a basic genetics course.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ I think I get it.
Infanticide. It reminds me of the Moses legend.
One of the reasons why Moses was spared was because of his light skin. Light skinned Mothers purposely selecting light skin babies.
Not just sexual selection but evolution via an old form of birth control.
You were right, Jari. There is no use. I tried to understand but now I can't tell if he is just trying to be funny or not.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The Ainu and the Adaman Islanders are in the same haplogroup. It is a sufficiently rare haplogroup showing that they are "CLOSELY" related to each other. However, they look nothing alike. Like the North African, the Ainu and Andaman Islanders do not have the same kind of mtDNA. In fact the Ainu are a good example of North African people compared to the Bantu.
North African people and the Bantu share the same yDNA - Haplogroup E (though the Ainu and Andaman Island people share the exact same haplogroup).
The difference between the NW Africans and the Bantu is on the mtDNA side. The same is true for the Ainu and the Andaman Islanders - different mtDNA.
Now it was my position that this was due to climate adaptation and not admixture. However, it would appear that in both cases we have admixture and climate adaptation to deal with.
In the case of the Ainu, they are actually lighter in skin color than the admixture group that is part of their genetic heritage. So admixture does not explain them. Climate adaptation and bottlenecks is a better explaination. This is not true for the Berbers. Admixture is a better explaination, however, certain phenotype genes haven't been sufficient vetted in terms of an explaination of why they are in such high frequency.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ The Ainu and the Adaman Islanders are in the same haplogroup. It is a sufficiently rare haplogroup showing that they are "CLOSELY" related to each other. However, they look nothing alike. Like the North African, the Ainu and Andaman Islanders do not have the same kind of mtDNA. In fact the Ainu are a good example of North African people compared to the Bantu.
North African people and the Bantu share the same yDNA - Haplogroup E (though the Ainu and Andaman Island people share the exact same haplogroup).
The difference between the NW Africans and the Bantu is on the mtDNA side. The same is true for the Ainu and the Andaman Islanders - different mtDNA.
Now it was my position that this was due to climate adaptation and not admixture. However, it would appear that in both cases we have admixture and climate adaptation to deal with.
In the case of the Ainu, they are actually lighter in skin color than the admixture group that is part of their genetic heritage. So admixture does not explain them. Climate adaptation and bottlenecks is a better explaination. This is not true for the Berbers. Admixture is a better explaination, however, certain phenotype genes haven't been sufficient vetted in terms of an explaination of why they are in such high frequency.
You would do better to quote directly from the sources like everybody else. You are misunderstanding what haplotypes are about, Osirion. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ Well I actually said the very same thing about modern day Egyptians.
1, That culture and sexual selection are related.
2, If you adopt a culture then you also adopt a different concept of beauty.
3, Demic diffusion of culture can result in a phenotype change without admixture being the only source.
To # 3: YES it CAN, but how long would it TAKE? What YOU are describing in #3 has already happened with the de-pigmentation in humans of certain climates. We already KNOW how long this takes. It it takes much longer than a few thousand years.
Amazigh peoples as a group have not been separated nor are they distinct as far as the age of the population for something like that to occur. We have some evidence to back this up too.
-Why is the most common and autochthonous male markers of this population: E-M81, E-M78(v65) so young?
-Also if the population is been there long enough to have phenotype change including skin color change which takes a VERY long time (and its not even advantageous in that area BTW) Why out of 14 distinct population clusters of Africa would they not have their own? Hmm......."Western Bantu" genetically distinct from "Eastern Bantu" who in turn are distinct from "Niger Kordifanian" who are distinct from Fulani?................And from all of this the poor North Africans who supposedly have been separated by 30,40,50, or 60 thousand years or whatever bullshit they what you to believe, had not a genetic cluster of their own?.........Yet the Bantu showed an ancestry distinction between East and West even though their expansion happened only 5000 years ago?
1 -It shows quite clear that the North African sample is "Mixed African." - You can compare it with the "Cape Mixed Ancestry" sample or even the "African American" samples.
2 -Looking at the AGES of NRY Chromosomes in North Africa shows they are "quite recent" from the Horn/Nile Valley Africans 1 + 2 = "Quite Recent" + "Mixed Africans"
Any Bones that they dig up in north Africa attempting to show continuity is just speculation until they start pulling Y-dna out of it, why?
quote: The trend in the literature so far has between towards younger age estimations for E-M81. Bosch et al. (2001) estimated 1.5-4.3 kya for E-M81, but later Luis et al. (2004) estimated 2 kya, while noting that the small amount of Egyptian E-M81 seemed older. Semino et al. (2004) estimated 8.6 kya. Arredi et al. (2004) estimated 4.2 kya. Cruciani et al. (2004) estimated 5.6 kya, but more recently in Cruciani et al. (2007), the authors show concerns at this calculation technique, implying that estimates be revised downwards to less than 5.6 kya. For E-V65 Cruciani et al. (2007) estimated approximately 4 kya.
Keep in mind the Mozabite sample was 80%E-M81 10% E(xE3b). I know that because Tishkoff didnt take the sample herself, she used an existing sample that is from a different study she referenced.
They seem to be doing everything possible to avoid the 2 key points regarding North African Ancestry: 1 - A recent population "expansion" or "replacement" from the East. Especially True of the male side.
2 - The Phylogenetic history of E-M81 being a SUB MUTATION of Another marker E-M35 that has an origin in Sub Saharan Africa. Notice they speak of E-M81 (and E-M78)as if it exists in a bubble separate from its parent marker E-M35....but we know better.
Excellent points all. What study did Tishkoff use to get the Mozabite sample?
It seems you are saying then that North Africans are a mixed, diverse lot, consisting of:
--Indigenous Africans in the north
--Eurasian migrants to the north
--Africans from further south of the Sahara
If the above is so, what are the approximate times to the settlement in North Africa of the three, in terms of the "lighter" skin color. Correct the dates as needed. ----------------------
--Indigenous Africans in the north (from early on as part of indigenous Africa 70-50 kya?
--Eurasian migrants to the north from Iberia and elsewhere (Neolithic appearance in North Africa?)
--Indigenous Africans from further south of the Sahara (Late Neolithic into historic times?)
----------------
How would you or someone else format the groupings or dates above? Is the above breakdown reasonable or are other groups and data missing?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: What study did Tishkoff use to get the Mozabite sample?
On page 78 of the Supplemental ther are 2 sources for the Mozabite sample:
Cann et al. 2002, Rosenberg et al. 2005
Later on I will go through and find the reports because there are several within that year. Right now Im loosing too much in the stock markert to do research lol.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic