posted                      

quote:

---

DNA of some modern Egyptians found a genetic
ancestral heritage to East Africa:
"The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diversity of 58
individuals from Upper Egypt, more than half (34
individuals) from Gurna, whose population has an
ancient cultural history, were studied by sequencing
the control-region and screening diagnostic RFLP
markers. This sedentary population presented
similarities to the Ethiopian population by the L1 and
L2 macrohaplogroup frequency (20.6%), by the
West Eurasian component (defined by haplogroups H
to K and T to X) and particularly by a high frequency
(17.6%) of haplogroup M1. We statistically and
phylogenetically analysed and compared the Gurna
population with other Egyptian, Near East and
sub-Saharan Africa populations; AMOVA and
Minimum Spanning Network analysis showed that
the Gurna population was not isolated from
neighbouring populations. Our results suggest that
the Gurna population has conserved the trace of an
ancestral genetic structure from an ancestral East
African population, characterized by a high M1
haplogroup frequency. The current structure of the
Egyptian population may be the result of further
influence of neighbouring populations on this
ancestral population."
(Stevanovitch A, Gilles A, Bouzaid E, et al. (2004)
Mitochondrial DNA sequence diversity in a sedentary
population from Egypt.Ann Hum Genet. 68(Pt
1):23-39.)

---

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by claus3600:
Is there a really, really easy to read book/article that explains what haplogroups are and geographic distribution/origin? I find the discussions of haplogroups on ES impenetrable.

---

Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by claus3600:
Is there a really, really easy to read book/article that explains what haplogroups are and geographic distribution/origin? I find the discussions of haplogroups on ES impenetrable.

---

GEt a basic up-to-date book on DNA and human evolution from your
local library and go from there. But be aware of the
"Eurasian labeling game" being played by many in the
academy and elsewhere. Always keep in mind that the
pattern is to attempt to downplay or distort the
diversity of the African peoples- to de-Africanize
their bio-cultural history, especially in NE Africa.
The game is labeling things "Eurasian", "Middle Eastern"
or whatever- and to identify or split off parts of
Africa into some other framework- such as "Eurasian",
particularly where NE Africa is concerned. That's the game.
This is not simply my opinion. Such concerns appear
explicitly in the scientific literature. See below..

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FROM ANOTHER THREAD...

The spin is in place to deAfricanize as much of
NE Africa as possible, and lump in under a "Eurasian"
or "Middle Eastern" label. But see below, where several scholars
hold that M1 is primarily based in Africa, and
indeed differentiation of haplogroups BEGAN INSIDE Africa
BEFORE significant migration out of the continent.
IN other words, Thus when the OOA migrants moved out
they did not cease being African and suddenly become
"Asian" or "Middle Eastern" simply because they
stepped off the Sinai Penisula. If you follow the logic
of some who use the Eurocentric labeling game,
then a white guy who steps across the border into
Mexico, suddenly becomes "Hispanic race." This is
the bogus model they are trying to push on African diversity-
De-Africanize anything where African civilization
and development in NE Africa can be shown.



BUt they STILL fail on another count. Even so-called "backflow"
migrants resemble tropical Africans more than their beloved
"Eurasians" or "Middle Easterners." SO they fail
on 2 counts:

(1) Differentiation of the haplogroups began INSIDE
Africa BEFORE significant OOA migrations. In other words
the variability groundwork was already laid inside
Africa. Further differentiation would of course occur
outside Africa over the millennia as populations spread,
as all know. But Africans did not suddenly become "Eurasian"
by walking into Arabia, or crossing a few miles
of water into Yemen.

(2) Any incoming "back-flowees" would ALREADY resemble
tropical Africans. People in Yemen for example
crossing back over into Ethiopia, circa 40,000 BC
would resemble today's tropical Africans as shown below.
Do not fall for the slick "Eurasian" labeling game.
This is not merely my opinion. See heavyweight mainstream
scholars quoted below that take issue with the "Eurasian"
game being played in the academy and elsewhere.




Note the two points above explicitly Claus and keep
them in mind as you read up on the subject. Ask
questions like these..

(a) are they downplaying or distorting the bio-history
of African peoples?

(b) WHy are they using a "EUrasian" label?

(c) Is the "sub-Saharan" "true negro" model being used stereotypically?
WHy for instance are they making "comparisons" to
"African" samples 2000 miles distant, when there
are Africans 300 miles away that are being ignored?

(d) WHy are they sampling the way they do? How come
for example they are excluding the Sudan or Chad
from "North African" sampling?

(e) WHat kind of labeling game is being played with African diversity?




and so on...

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Gene divergence predates population divergence: several scholars hold that Haplogroup M began initial differentiation in Africa before major development elsewhere outside. QUOTES:

"In Africa, the three most ancient mtDNA haplogroups (L0, L1, and L2), which make up macrohaplogroup L, are specific for sub-Saharan Africa. African macrohaplogroup L radiated to form the Africa-specific haplogroup L3 as well as the Eurasian macrohaplogroups M and N. M and N arose in northeastern Africa and individuals bearing M and N mtDNAs subsequently left Africa to colonize Europe and Asia."
----Dan Mishmar, et al 2003. Natural selection shaped regional mtDNA variation in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(1): 171-176.

"All non-Africans have inherited a subset of African mtDNA haplogroup L3 lineages, differentiated into haplogroups M and N. The lack of other L3 lineages among all non-African mitochondria suggests that the earliest migration(s) of AMH already carried those two mtDNA ancestors or that they have replaced previously extant lineages. Haplogroup M is present in Ethiopia, but the rest of M is densely distributed throughout South and East Asia and is absent in the Near East and Europe. "
--Phillip Endicott, et al, Reply to Cordaux and Stoneking. Am J Hum Genet. 2003 June; 72(6): 1590-1593.

"The observed timing discrepancies between genetic and archeological estimates are simply explained by the fact that the divergence of genes predates that of populations.."
--Cordaux et al (2003) South Asia, the Andamanese and the genetic evidence.. Am J Hum Genet 72:

"the lack of L3 lineages other than M and N in India and among non-African mitochondria in general suggests that the earliest migration(s) of modern humans already carried these two mtDNA ancestors, via a departure route over the Horn of Africa."
-- Kivisild et al., Metspalu et al. (2003). "The Genetic Heritage of the Earliest Settlers Persists Both in Indian Tribal and Caste Populations". Amr Jr Hum Genet 72 (2):

In Africa, only one autochthonous basal branch of M, named M1, has been detected.. M1 is particularly abundant in Ethiopia (20%).. In Arabia, M lineages account for 7% of the total and half of them belong to the M1 African clade.. As the majority of M1 haplotypes in Arabia belong to the East African M1a sub-clade, it seems that, likewise L lineages, the M1 presence in the Arabian peninsula signals a predominant East African influence since the Neolithic onwards."
-- Petraglia, M and Rose, J (2010). The Evolution of Human Populations in Arabia:.. Springer. p. 90


Misleading "Eurasian" label for ancient mtDNA flagged by some scholars - QUOTE:
"The historical linguistic data reported earlier would apply in the case of maternal lineages as well.. it is not likely that the "northern" genetic profile is simply due to "Eurasians" having colonized supra-Saharan regions from external African sources. It might be likely that the greater percentage of haplotypes called "Eurasian" are predominantly, although not solely, of indigenous African origin. As a term "Eurasian" is likely misleading, since it suggests a single locale of geographical origins. This is because it can be postulated that differentiation of the L3* haplogroup began before the emigration out of Africa, and that there would be indigenous supra-Saharan/Saharan or Horn-supra-Saharan haplotypes. More work and careful analysis of mtDNA and the archeological data and likely probabilities is needed. Early hunting and gathering paleolithic populations can be modeled as having roamed between northern Africa and Eurasia, leaving an asymmetrical distribution of various derivative variants over a wide region, giving the appearance of Eurasian incursion."
--Keita, A, Boyce, A. (2005) Genetics, Egypt, and History... History in Africa, 32, 221-246

Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

Stevanovitch is not saying that. Right off the
bat, look at the quote from Stevanovich:

"The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diversity of 58
individuals from Upper Egypt, more than half (34
individuals) from Gurna, whose population has an
ancient cultural history, were studied by sequencing
the control-region and screening diagnostic RFLP
markers. This sedentary population presented
similarities to the Ethiopian population by the L1 and
L2 macrohaplogroup frequency (20.6%), by the
West Eurasian component (defined by haplogroups H
to K and T to X) and particularly by a high frequency
(17.6%) of haplogroup M1. We statistically and
phylogenetically analysed and compared the Gurna
population with other Egyptian, Near East and
sub-Saharan Africa populations; AMOVA and
Minimum Spanning Network analysis showed that
the Gurna population was not isolated from
neighbouring populations. Our results suggest that
the Gurna population has conserved the trace of an
ancestral genetic structure from an ancestral East
African population, characterized by a high M1
haplogroup frequency. The current structure of the
Egyptian population may be the result of further
influence of neighbouring populations on this
ancestral population."
(Stevanovitch A, Gilles A, Bouzaid E, et al. (2004)
Mitochondrial DNA sequence diversity in a sedentary
population from Egypt.Ann Hum Genet. 68(Pt
1):23-39.)

Stevanovich et al emphasize the linkage with neighboring
African populations, particularly M1. The wiki moles
are distorting and slanting the actual study which
to the contrary does NOT hold that the modern Egyptian
population is "Eurasian." Let's re-quote:
***"Our results suggest that the Gurna population
has conserved the trace of an ancestral genetic
structure from an ancestral East African population,
characterized by a high M1 haplogroup frequency.
The current structure of the Egyptian population
may be the result of further influence of neighbouring
populations on this ancestral population."***

Note- the ANCESTRAL population, the ORIGINALS,
show clear links with East Africa. In the modern era
late-coming Persians, Assyrians, Hyskos, GReeks, Romans and
Arabs were to influence this ANCESTRAL population.
So sure there is "Eurasian" influence in modern
Egypt- hell the Arabs dominate the country now. What
else is new? BUt the crucial point is not the
present day Arab/Middle East mixes, but the ORIGINALS,
the ANCESTRAL population. That is the key point
to consider re Stevanovich.

The Stevanovich breakdown is shown below. Note that
rather than the touted "60% Eurasian" over half or at
least half DNA clusters on the African side, even
though large Arab influence is in the mix.



Note also the Salas breakdown below. Most of the weight
is with L haplogroups and M1.

---

Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

Stevanovitch is not saying that. Right off the
bat, look at the quote from Stevanovich:

"The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diversity of 58
individuals from Upper Egypt, more than half (34
individuals) from Gurna, whose population has an
ancient cultural history, were studied by sequencing
the control-region and screening diagnostic RFLP
markers. This sedentary population presented
similarities to the Ethiopian population by the L1 and
L2 macrohaplogroup frequency (20.6%), by the
West Eurasian component (defined by haplogroups H
to K and T to X) and particularly by a high frequency
(17.6%) of haplogroup M1. We statistically and
phylogenetically analysed and compared the Gurna
population with other Egyptian, Near East and
sub-Saharan Africa populations; AMOVA and
Minimum Spanning Network analysis showed that
the Gurna population was not isolated from
neighbouring populations. Our results suggest that
the Gurna population has conserved the trace of an
ancestral genetic structure from an ancestral East
African population, characterized by a high M1
haplogroup frequency. The current structure of the
Egyptian population may be the result of further
influence of neighbouring populations on this
ancestral population."
(Stevanovitch A, Gilles A, Bouzaid E, et al. (2004)
Mitochondrial DNA sequence diversity in a sedentary
population from Egypt.Ann Hum Genet. 68(Pt
1):23-39.)

Stevanovich et al emphasize the linkage with neighboring
African populations, particularly M1. The wiki moles
are distorting and slanting the actual study which
to the contrary does NOT hold that the modern Egyptian
population is "Eurasian." Let's re-quote:
***"Our results suggest that the Gurna population
has conserved the trace of an ancestral genetic
structure from an ancestral East African population,
characterized by a high M1 haplogroup frequency.
The current structure of the Egyptian population
may be the result of further influence of neighbouring
populations on this ancestral population."***

Note- the ANCESTRAL population, the ORIGINALS,
show clear links with East Africa. In the modern era
late-coming Persians, Assyrians, Hyskos, GReeks, Romans and
Arabs were to influence this ANCESTRAL population.
So sure there is "Eurasian" influence in modern
Egypt- hell the Arabs dominate the country now. What
else is new? BUt the crucial point is not the
present day Arab/Middle East mixes, but the ORIGINALS,
the ANCESTRAL population. That is the key point
to consider re Stevanovich.

The Stevanovich breakdown is shown below. Note that
rather than the touted "60% Eurasian" over half or at
least half DNA clusters on the African side, even
though large Arab influence is in the mix.



Note also the Salas breakdown below. Most of the weight
is with L haplogroups and M1.

---

---

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged |