Quote(s): “The information about the origin and ethnic association of haplogroups on this website should not be read as hard facts, but, as is often the case in science, as a model in constant evolution based on the present knowledge and understanding (of the author). Whenever the advancement of genetics couldn't provide irrefutable answers, we have attempted to provide the most likely and logical hypothesis based on archeological, historical and linguistic evidence. This page is being updated regularly to keep up with recent studies giving additional insights or rectifying possibly erroneous theories. Feel free to add comments or share your opinion on the forum.
DNA Facts Nucleobases are the alphabet of DNA. There are four of them : adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G) and cytosine (C). They always go by pairs, A with T, and G with C. Such pairs are called "base pairs". The 46 chromosomes of human DNA are composed of a total of 3,000 million base pairs. The Y chromosome possess 60 million nucleobases, against 153 million for the X chromosome. Mitochondrial DNA is found outside the cell's nucleus, and therefore outside of the chromosomes. It consists only of 16,569 bases. A SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) is a mutation in a single base pair. At present, only a few hundreds SNP's define all the human haplogroups for mtDNA or Y-DNA. “
“Firstly, the Y chromosome is a sequence of 60 million "characters" (nucleobases), against only 16,569 for mtDNA. The Y chromosome therefore offers a much greater resolution as mutations are more common, and indeed happen pretty much every generation. In contrast, mtDNA mutations happen much more infrequently. Since the time of the Mitochondrial Eve, approximately 200,000 years ago, modern humans have acquired in average 20 mtDNA mutations in each lineage - about one every ten thousand years. Even though the number of mutations has accelerated with the soaring of human population over the last 10,000 years, the dating of lineages based on mtDNA alone remains very approximate, and practically useless for historical times. By sequencing the full Y chromosome, it is theoretically possible to map the entire patrilineal genealogy of humanity (or any other species) within a few generations (in some cases even within one generation).”
“This included I*, pre-I1, I1, I2*, I2a*, I2a2, but the most widespread appears to have been I2a1, which was found in most parts of Europe. Northeast Europeans would have belonged mostly to haplogroup R1a. Other minor male lineages were certainly also present in parts of Europe, notably haplogroup A1a, C-V20, H2 (P96, formerly F3) and possibly even Q1a and R1b1* (P25).
“The maternal lineages of Mesolithic Europeans appears to have been predominantly U4 and U5, but also included several H subclades (H1, H3, H17), T, U2 and V.”
“There seem to have been several Palaeolithic and/or Mesolithic migrations from Northwest Africa to Iberia. The oldest might have brought West African haplogroup A1a to Western and Northern Europe during the Palaeolithic. A1a has been found in modern populations as far north as Ireland, Scotland, Scandinavia and Finland. The presence of African maternal lineages (L2, L3 and possibly L1b1) has been attested in Neolithic Iberia. Northwest Africans would also have brought U6 and possibly HV0/V lineages to Europe.
A small percentage of sub-Saharan African admixture has been identified in Late Mesolithic Swedes from the Pitted Ware culture (2800-2000 BCE), which would imply that A1a was already present in northern Europe at the time. Another Mesolithic sample from Loschbour in Luxembourg had dark hair and ****considerably**** darker skin than modern Europeans. “ “Agriculture first developed in the Levant, then spread to Anatolia, Greece, the Balkans, Italy, Central and Eastern Europe. These Neolithic farmers were confirmed to have belonged primarily to Y-DNA haplogroups G2a, but also included minorities of C1a2, E1b1b, H2 (formerly F3), J1, J2 and T1a lineages, who could have been assimilated in Anatolia before entering Europe. As they advanced across Europe Neolithic farmers also increasingly assimilated European lineages, notably E-M78 and I2a1 in Southeast Europe, I1 and I2a1 in Central Europe, I2a1 and I2a2a in Western Europe, and E-M78, I2a1 and I2a2a in Southwest Europe.”
“Hundreds of Neolithic samples from all over Europe (but especially Central Europe and Iberia) have been tested. The new lineages brought by these Near Eastern immigrants included mt-haplogroups HV, J1, J2, K1, K2, N*, N1, T1a, T2b, T2c, T2e, T2f, U3, W, X1, X2, and many subclades of H (including H2, H5, H7, H13 and H20). H4, H8 and H9 seem to have originated in the Near East as well, although ****no Neolithic sample has been identified in Europe ***yet.”
“Haplogroup V has never been found in prehistoric sites in Northeast Europe, nor in any Indo-European burial in the Eurasian steppe or Central Asia. It is nevertheless present in every part of Europe nowadays. Its frequency is higher than the European average in north-western Russia (> 5%), and peaks among the Sami (> 30%). Haplogroup V has also been found in most Uralic and Altaic populations across North Asia, and at trace frequencies as far as Korea and Japan. More intriguingly, ****haplogroup V is one of the four Eurasian haplogroups found among the Fulani people of Central Africa, who have high percentages of haplogroup R1b-V88.**** It is therefore likely that V was one of the original haplogroups of R1b people, and perhaps of the Paleolithic mammoth hunters from whom R1b is descended. Some V lineages could have been absorbed by the expansion of Ural-Altaic populations (Y-haplogroup N) in North Asia, which would explain its high frequency among the Finns and Sami. “ “Haplogroup A (Y-DNA)
A is the oldest of all Y-DNA haplogroups. It originated in sub-Saharan Africa over 140,000 years ago, and possibly as much as 340,000 years ago if we include haplogroup A00. Modern populations with the highest percentages of haplogroup A are the Khoisan (such as the Bushmen) and the southern Sudanese.
There are only rare and isolated cases of European men belonging to haplogroup A. Commercial tests have identified a few Scottish and Irish families (surnames Boyd, Logan and Taylor) all belonging to the same A1b1b2 (M13) subclade. This subclade is normally found in East Africa (Ethiopia, Sudan), but has also been found in Egypt, the Arabian peninsula, Palestine, Jordan, Turkey, Sicily, Sardinia and Algeria. It was certainly brought to Europe by Levantine people, be it during the Neolithic or later (Phoenicians, Jews, immigration within the Roman Empire).
Haplogroup A1a* (M31) has been found in Finland, Norway and eastern England. This subclade is normally found along the west coast of Africa (Guinea-Bissau, Cape Verde, Mali, Morocco) and could have come*** to Europe during the Paleolithic.*** Indeed a few percent of sub-Saharan admixture was found among ancient DNA samples from Mesolithic Scandinavia tested by Skoglund et al. (2012).“
Haplogroup H & V (mtDNA)
Haplogroup H is by far the most common all over Europe, amounting to about 40% of the European population. It is also found (though in lower frequencies) in North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, Northern Asia, as well as along the East coast of Africa as far as Madagascar.
Origins: mtDNA N => 75,000 years ago (arose in North-East Africa) R => 70,000 years ago (in South-West Asia) U => 60,000 years ago (in North-East Africa or South-West Asia)
yDNA R1b-L21 => 4,000 years ago (in Central or Eastern Europe) R1b-S28 => 3,500 years ago (around the Alps) R1b-S21 => 3,000 years ago (in Frisia or Central Europe
Berber mtDNA
The Berbers are the indigenous populationof north-west Africa. Although their Y-DNA is almost perfectly homogenous, belonging to haplogroup E-M81, Berber maternal lineages show a much greater diversity, as well as regional disparity. At least half (and up to 90% in some regions) of the Berbers belong to some Eurasian lineages, such as H, HV, R0, J, T, U, K, N1, N2, and X2, mostly of Middle or Near Eastern origin. 5 to 45% of the Berbers will have sub-Saharan mtDNA (L0, L1, L2, L3, L4, L5). There are only three native North African lineages, U6, X1 and M1, representing 0 to 35% of the people depending on the region.
Haplogroup U6 has been observed from the Iberia and the Canary Islands to Senegal in the West, and from Syria to Ethiopia and Kenya in the East. It is also found at low density in Europe, though mostly limited to Iberia. Approximately 10% of all North Africans belong to this lineage.
Haplogroup X (mtDNA)
Haplogroup X is a very old and scattered haplogroup found all over Eurasia, North Africa as well as among Native North Americans. It frequency rarely exceeds 5% of the population in any ethnic group, and is more often restricted to 1 or 2%. X1 is found almost exclusively in North Africa, while X2a is the only lineage present among Amerindians. X2d, X2e, X2n and X4 are found in Europe and Central Asia, and could therefore have been spread at least partially by the Proto-Indo-Europeans.
The strong presence of X2 around the Caucasus, progressively fading towards the Near East and Mediterranean , hints that it could be related to the spread of Y-DNA haplogroup G2a. R1b1b and G2a both having origins around the Caucasus it is unsurprising to find X2 alongside these two Y-DNA haplogroups
-----------------------------------
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Here is what I noted from this write-up by Europeans.
1. They are still delusional. E-81 is “Euroepan”? really? 2. Won’t give up trying to place E1b1b outside of Africa to the “middle East” 3. They had no choice but to acknowledge a Paleolithic presence of SSA in Europe. Even Northern Europe 4. Through ADMIXTURE Analysis(not yDNA haplogroups) they have confirmed the presence of Sub-Saharan African linage in ancient Scandinavians. Black Northern Europeans? Lol! 5. There is confirmed migration via North Africa to Iberia 6. They are still insisting that the Neolithic came from the “near east’ but have no genetic evidence to confirm that. The mtDNA-H discovered do NOT belong to the near mtDNA-H sub-cldes. Lol! They are relying on archeology to make that claim. Lol! 7. MtDNA X1 is African maybe also X2. Native Americans are exclusively X2a. 8. R1b-L21 is ONLY 4000years old 9. There is definitely an ancient connection between Saami and Fulani(not Berbers lol!0. See my thread. 10. So they acknowledge that Loschbour was black!!
So All what I have being saying over the last several years is being proven correct!!!!
-------------------- 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 |
posted
This above writeup(OP) seems like it was written by me..xyyman. But it wasn't. eg Paleolithic presence of Sub-saharan Africans in Northern Europe. Europeans being black up to about 4000bc etc. Kefi et al 2014 and 2016 papers along with Neolithic aDNA testing has proven mtDNA-H has a North African origin. The last piece of the puzzle was identifying the origins of R1b-M269. There were clues it(M-269) also had a African origin but the pre-colonization aDNA of the Canary Islanders has confirmed it is also African. So what went down was "white" Africans migrating into Europe replacing a black European population! Reads like science fiction?! But it is true.
Part of the last puzzle, for M-269, is ....why? Why, and how did R-M69 become so dominant IN Western Europe because as far as we can tell it is a young haplogroup(5000yo) and was no way close to dominance during the Neolithic up to the medieval age in Europe. So what happened?
My Theory is the society was structured different. Clearly it is NOT "natural" otherwise E1b1b* and its sub-clades would be dominant and not make up a paltry 10-15% in Europe today. So why? My theory was a female dominant society. The same goes for SSA, E-M2 is also young about 7000yo. Therefore which mtDNA is the mate of E-M2? Did there exist a female dominant society in SSA or the Sahara during the Neolithic up to the metal ages? . Is a male dominant society in pre-history a mis-conception in our (male) imagination. Are we delusional? The evidence emerging through archeology and aDNA is women were of extremely high importance in society up to the medieval age. Many women buried with "riches" and had high status.
Thoughts?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would think the resident "transgenderress" would have some ideas or opinion? After all he wants to be female.
-------------------- 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 |
posted
Interesting, I've only heard this in a YouTube lecture by john Hendrick Clarke but the descent in African society was maternal,I'm not sure if its by design but slave status was through the mother and black woman are better educated than black men.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not especially familiar about haplogroup data but wikipedia overwhelmingly references data that suggests U came from the near east or is indicative of near easterners. What data places U with Africans? Especially U5 and U4.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Several!!. Many Africans carry the main mtDNA U group. Iirc Fulanis carry ancestral form of U5 found in Scandinavians. U9 ancestral form found in East Africa . Also found in Makrani iirc. Senegal and other southern west Africans carry their own versions of U6 not found in North Africa. Stop using wiki😊😆😕
-------------------- 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 |
-------------------- 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 |
posted
You need to understand how fanatical white people think. Stop using wiki as your source. Here is another example. I frequent the Davidski blog because he scurries the web for new research papers. Saves me the time(wink). I do the same with Dienekess. But he caught on and don't post new stuff anymore. I have dismantled and debunked all his EuroCentric pseudoscience. I did the same with FTDNA, that site is now dead. When I poached Davidski site I got this paper. I did not read it right away but when I read some of the comments I knew something big had happened. Those Euronuts were fuming in anger about this paper. Eg comment quote(s):
Quotes ------------- 1. On Figure 1, they denoted Adygei as Indo-Europeans, lol. 2. Probably just a graphical error, but I wouldn't be surprised if they really thought that Adygei were Indo-Europeans. 3. we conclude that Brahui are an example of cultural (linguistic) retention following a major population replacement. 4. The Brahui are the only Dravidian-speaking population in Pakistan, where they are surrounded by Indo-European speakers, and are well separated from all other extant Dravidian-speaking populations who currently reside in southern India and parts of Sri-Lanka. (p.269 5. The hypothesis of the article that the Brahui have 3000 years old Dravidian roots in Pakistan is not supported by any of the available evidence. 6. In addition, the Brahui do display a genetic resemblance to some of the less African-admixed people of Iran's southeastern provinces. 7. Hopefully, they are not concluding that the Brahui are an Adygei/Yoruba or Adygei/Austo-Asiatic mix just based on some f3s, which even show other W Asian groups 8. Blogger Davidski said...yeah, I was too kind when I said this paper was "far from definitive". These authors have a lot to answer for when it comes to their work on South Asia 9. Also, a suggestion of a Yoruba-Adygei mix from 8000 years ago to form Brahui is not very sound... ------------------
so....why were they so angry?
-------------------- 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 |
posted
So please tell us xyman, if Indo-European languages were exact racial markers and why exactly there are Indo-European speaking peoples in Pakistan in the first place, encapsulating and drowning out all the previous Dravidian speaking populations and other such older languages....
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: You need to understand how fanatical white people think. Stop using wiki as your source. Here is another example. I frequent the Davidski blog because he scurries the web for new research papers. Saves me the time(wink). I do the same with Dienekess. But he caught on and don't post new stuff anymore. I have dismantled and debunked all his EuroCentric pseudoscience. I did the same with FTDNA, that site is now dead. When I poached Davidski site I got this paper. I did not read it right away but when I read some of the comments I knew something big had happened. Those Euronuts were fuming in anger about this paper. Eg comment quote(s):
Quotes ------------- 1. On Figure 1, they denoted Adygei as Indo-Europeans, lol. 2. Probably just a graphical error, but I wouldn't be surprised if they really thought that Adygei were Indo-Europeans. 3. we conclude that Brahui are an example of cultural (linguistic) retention following a major population replacement. 4. The Brahui are the only Dravidian-speaking population in Pakistan, where they are surrounded by Indo-European speakers, and are well separated from all other extant Dravidian-speaking populations who currently reside in southern India and parts of Sri-Lanka. (p.269 5. The hypothesis of the article that the Brahui have 3000 years old Dravidian roots in Pakistan is not supported by any of the available evidence. 6. In addition, the Brahui do display a genetic resemblance to some of the less African-admixed people of Iran's southeastern provinces. 7. Hopefully, they are not concluding that the Brahui are an Adygei/Yoruba or Adygei/Austo-Asiatic mix just based on some f3s, which even show other W Asian groups 8. Blogger Davidski said...yeah, I was too kind when I said this paper was "far from definitive". These authors have a lot to answer for when it comes to their work on South Asia 9. Also, a suggestion of a Yoruba-Adygei mix from 8000 years ago to form Brahui is not very sound... ------------------
so....why were they so angry?
Part of the reason I'm asking the questions I am is because of my general skepticism of wiki. Also...what paper are we talking about from Daviski???
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
MOM. I am not sure what you are on about. IE is a marker for race? Says who? My post is based purely on hard science. Not fantasy nonsense. If the fs3 is correct the Brahui is an admixture of Adygei and Yoruban. There is nothing further to discuss....at least on the paper.
Now, if your debate is on the ORIGIN of the IE language then that is another discussion. From what little I read and understood about linguistics the oldest branch of IE in NOT in the Asian Steppes but Greece....an Island nation" labeled" as Europe but very close to ......Africa. It all goes back to EurAFRICANS(Sergi)!!!
-------------------- 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 |
posted
asim Ayub and Luca Pagani - An ethnolinguistic and genetic perspective on the origins of the Dravidian-speaking Brahui in Pakistan, Man In India, 97
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: You need to understand how fanatical white people think. Stop using wiki as your source. Here is another example. I frequent the Davidski blog because he scurries the web for new research papers. Saves me the time(wink). I do the same with Dienekess. But he caught on and don't post new stuff anymore. I have dismantled and debunked all his EuroCentric pseudoscience. I did the same with FTDNA, that site is now dead. When I poached Davidski site I got this paper. I did not read it right away but when I read some of the comments I knew something big had happened. Those Euronuts were fuming in anger about this paper. Eg comment quote(s):
Quotes ------------- 1. On Figure 1, they denoted Adygei as Indo-Europeans, lol. 2. Probably just a graphical error, but I wouldn't be surprised if they really thought that Adygei were Indo-Europeans. 3. we conclude that Brahui are an example of cultural (linguistic) retention following a major population replacement. 4. The Brahui are the only Dravidian-speaking population in Pakistan, where they are surrounded by Indo-European speakers, and are well separated from all other extant Dravidian-speaking populations who currently reside in southern India and parts of Sri-Lanka. (p.269 5. The hypothesis of the article that the Brahui have 3000 years old Dravidian roots in Pakistan is not supported by any of the available evidence. 6. In addition, the Brahui do display a genetic resemblance to some of the less African-admixed people of Iran's southeastern provinces. 7. Hopefully, they are not concluding that the Brahui are an Adygei/Yoruba or Adygei/Austo-Asiatic mix just based on some f3s, which even show other W Asian groups 8. Blogger Davidski said...yeah, I was too kind when I said this paper was "far from definitive". These authors have a lot to answer for when it comes to their work on South Asia 9. Also, a suggestion of a Yoruba-Adygei mix from 8000 years ago to form Brahui is not very sound... ------------------
so....why were they so angry?
Part of the reason I'm asking the questions I am is because of my general skepticism of wiki. Also...what paper are we talking about from Daviski???
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Responding to this comment here because it seems like a more apropriate place to..
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: So the pre-historic pattern are being confirmed over and over and over again. The "meta-population" that FIRST left Africa, >40,000ya, radiated from Africa to the East Asia, North East and even Northern and Western Europe. Aesthetics(visuals) aside these were populations heavily related to modern Asians like Onge, Dravidians, East Asians, Native Americans. Keeping in mind KOS14 was closest related to Makrani. The second major wave occurred about 8-10,000ya. Also commencing from Africa. But they only conquered population in Western and Southern Europe. Further North and East they had less of an effect. That is why Finns and other North Europeans carry MORE ANE and East Asians carry less Basal Eurasians DNA. That is why East Asian also carry MORE Neanderthal and Denisovan "genes?". Keep in mind this has absolutely nothing to do with race or blue eyes and pale skin. The science of it is this "metapopulation" had black skin and black hair, some carried blue eyes. The skin phenotype entered Europe within these new migrating SSA Africans(Shriver et al etc). There are still some unanswered questions, like, what are the genes that made East Asians light skinned. Are they the same as modern Europeans. My guess is an emphatic ...no! my money is on ASIP. Similar to the Khoi-San. The African population with closest affinity to East Asians
This question has been answered already (Norton et. al 2007), They (E.Asians & Europeans including Near-middle easterners) do not share the same genes for hipopigmentation, which is part of the enigma in solving the mechanism behind pigment diffusion in different populations. Though not directly said to be responsible for the wide spread lightening of E.Asian populations by scholarship, I'd guess that the fact that over 80% of E.Asian sharing Han genes might be the leading contributor for East Asian lightening,along with well documented cases sexual selection in preference for fairer skin relatively recently.
The MC1r coding region (melanogenenic regulator) thought to have been the leading reason behind pigmentation variation has notable differences between Asians and other non Africans as gathered by Rana et al 1999. To strengthen your case that the Basal European wave of Africans didn't mix with east Asians, it is found that Asians have a more Diverse Mc1r coding region (second only to SSA) and have low levels of polymorphisms in that region as well (second only to africans). sidenote: Despite the fact that Africans generally have higher degrees pf polymorphism/variation, the respectively low MC1r indexes suggest positive SELECTION for this particular mechanism btw, which transferred over to the asians...
Which brings me to your postulation that it is in the ASIP... No, silly its different mutations within the OCA2 loci that separates Asians form Europeans, The Koisan share this "variation" with both groups, however along with the East Asians, lack polymorphisms in other genes regulating skin tone such as Tyr & MATp (Norton 2007) also from the same study
quote:further supporting the importance of OCA2 in regulating normal variation in pigmentation. The widespread distribution of the derived allele in the CEPH-Diversity Panel suggests that it is not necessarily a new mutation, nor has it been restricted to a specific geographic area. Interestingly, derived allele frequencies at this locus are quite different between Native American (15%) and East Asian populations (45%), suggesting that perhaps the derived allele at this locus did not reach very high frequencies in East Asians until after the colonization of the Americas.
10.1093/molbev/msl203
ASIP while it does share a role in melanogenesis, It isn't responsible for differences in pigment dilution... Reason why I know this...Tropically adapted Melanesian populations score the highest in polymorphism @ ASIP... EastAsians score the lowest among OOAs.
posted
@ theReal Excellent break down!! Finally someone who has an above average analytical ability. I don’t recall much from the Rana et al paper. Been awhile. I posted on it in ESR in my early days when I got started. In fact that and the Rees paper first gave me the clue that light skin came from sub-saharan Africa. I forgot the exact quote but to paraphrase the paper suggested that SSA carried “non-homologous” version of the alleles for light skin and that light skin seems to be the “natural” condition of human skin and the UV FORCED the African skin to be black and once the constraint was removed Moved out of Africa)the natural state was light skin.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ ElMaestro Excellent break down!! Finally someone who has an above average analytical ability. I don’t recall much from the Rana eta al paper. Been awhile. O posted on it in ESR in my early days when I got started. In fact that and the Rees paper first gave me the clue that light skin came from sub-saharan Africa. I forgot the exact quote but to paraphrase the paper suggested that SSA carried “non-homologous” version of the alleles for light skin and that light skin seems to be the “natural” condition of human skin and the UV FORCED the African skin to be black and once the constraint was removed Moved out of Africa)the natural state was light skin.
Iirc, Rana or Rees or Mekova inferred /interpreted the pattern as “removal of constraint”. I will have to go back to my early postings on ESR. I believe I created a thread on it several years ago. Because of that statement I remember I challenged Swenet/Kalonji on pigmentation of Native Americans entering North America from Asia. Did they enter as dark or light skin? Why is that important and the significance? And why I don’t believe it is “slection” for light skin? Because Native American show the same pigmentation pattern as Africans. Darkest closest to the equator and lightest further away from the equator. It has absolutely nothing to do with sexual preference or selection. It is the NATURAL order of things. So the follow-up question ..WHY? Why are Central Americans dark, if 1000 individuals of the same tribe(of the same pigmentation color – whichever) crossed into Alaska and migrated south. Did the native American women told the light skin men to stay behind. Lol! “Only blacks allowed” in Central America? Lol! You see how ridiculous this sexual preference theory is? Quote: **found that Asians have a more Diverse Mc1r coding region (second only to SSA) and have low levels of polymorphisms in that region as well (second only to africans). sidenote: Despite the fact that Africans generally have higher degrees pf polymorphism/variation, the respectively low MC1r indexes suggest positive SELECTION for this particular mechanism btw, which transferred over to the asians...**
-------------------- 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 |
posted
@ ElMaestro Excellent break down!! Finally someone who has an above average analytical ability. I don’t recall much from the Rana eta al paper. Been awhile. O posted on it in ESR in my early days when I got started. In fact that and the Rees paper first gave me the clue that light skin came from sub-saharan Africa. I forgot the exact quote but to paraphrase the paper suggested that SSA carried “non-homologous” version of the alleles for light skin and that light skin seems to be the “natural” condition of human skin and the UV FORCED the African skin to be black and once the constraint was removed Moved out of Africa)the natural state was light skin.
Iirc, Rana or Rees or Mekova inferred /interpreted the pattern as “removal of constraint”. I will have to go back to my early postings on ESR. I believe I created a thread on it several years ago. Because of that statement I remember I challenged Swenet/Kalonji on pigmentation of Native Americans entering North America from Asia. Did they enter as dark or light skin? Why is that important and the significance? And why I don’t believe it is “slection” for light skin? Because Native American show the same pigmentation pattern as Africans. Darkest closest to the equator and lightest further away from the equator. It has absolutely nothing to do with sexual preference or selection. It is the NATURAL order of things. So the follow-up question ..WHY? Why are Central Americans dark, if 1000 individuals of the same tribe(of the same pigmentation color – whichever) crossed into Alaska and migrated south. Did the native American women told the light skin men to stay behind. Lol! “Only blacks allowed” in Central America? Lol! You see how ridiculous this sexual preference theory is? Quote: **found that Asians have a more Diverse Mc1r coding region (second only to SSA) and have low levels of polymorphisms in that region as well (second only to africans). sidenote: Despite the fact that Africans generally have higher degrees pf polymorphism/variation, the respectively low MC1r indexes suggest positive SELECTION for this particular mechanism btw, which transferred over to the asians...**
-------------------- 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 |
posted
@ ElMaestro Excellent break down!! Finally someone who has an above average analytical ability. I don’t recall much from the Rana eta al paper. Been awhile. O posted on it in ESR in my early days when I got started. In fact that and the Rees paper first gave me the clue that light skin came from sub-saharan Africa. I forgot the exact quote but to paraphrase the paper suggested that SSA carried “non-homologous” version of the alleles for light skin and that light skin seems to be the “natural” condition of human skin and the UV FORCED the African skin to be black and once the constraint was removed Moved out of Africa)the natural state was light skin.
Iirc, Rana or Rees or Mekova inferred /interpreted the pattern as “removal of constraint”. I will have to go back to my early postings on ESR. I believe I created a thread on it several years ago. Because of that statement I remember I challenged Swenet/Kalonji on pigmentation of Native Americans entering North America from Asia. Did they enter as dark or light skin? Why is that important and the significance? And why I don’t believe it is “slection” for light skin? Because Native American show the same pigmentation pattern as Africans. Darkest closest to the equator and lightest further away from the equator. It has absolutely nothing to do with sexual preference or selection. It is the NATURAL order of things. So the follow-up question ..WHY? Why are Central Americans dark, if 1000 individuals of the same tribe(of the same pigmentation color – whichever) crossed into Alaska and migrated south. Did the native American women told the light skin men to stay behind. Lol! “Only blacks allowed” in Central America? Lol! You see how ridiculous this sexual preference theory is? Quote: **found that Asians have a more Diverse Mc1r coding region (second only to SSA) and have low levels of polymorphisms in that region as well (second only to africans). sidenote: Despite the fact that Africans generally have higher degrees pf polymorphism/variation, the respectively low MC1r indexes suggest positive SELECTION for this particular mechanism btw, which transferred over to the asians...**
-------------------- 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 |
posted
This is not really too difficult to understand.
--- Quote: Abstract: Ancient genomes have revolutionized our understanding of Holocene prehistory and, particularly, the Neolithic transition in western Eurasia. In contrast, East Asia has so far received little attention, despite representing a core region at which the Neolithic transition took place independently ~3 millennia after its onset in the Near East. We report genome-wide data from two hunter-gatherers from Devil’s Gate, an early Neolithic cave site (dated to ~7.7 thousand years ago) located in East Asia, on the border between Russia and Korea. Both of these individuals are genetically most similar to geographically close modern populations from the Amur Basin, all speaking Tungusic languages, and, in particular, to the Ulchi. The similarity to nearby modern populations and the low levels of additional genetic material in the Ulchi imply a high level of genetic continuity in this region during the Holocene, a pattern that markedly contrasts with that reported for Europe.
Siska et al., Genome-wide data from two early Neolithic East Asian individuals dating to 7700 years ago, Science Advances, 01 Feb 2017: Vol. 3, no. 2, e1601877, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1601877
----
As I said before. The expansion of the Neolithic from Africa did NOT reach as far as East Asia. That is why there were only TWO(WHG/ENE and EEF) major population involved in the creation of modern Europeans reaching Harrapan Valley. The expansion did not reach East Asia. East Asians are basically ONE populations and NOT two as with modern Europeans
-------------------- 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 |
posted
This is not really too difficult to understand.
--- Quote: Abstract: Ancient genomes have revolutionized our understanding of Holocene prehistory and, particularly, the Neolithic transition in western Eurasia. In contrast, East Asia has so far received little attention, despite representing a core region at which the Neolithic transition took place independently ~3 millennia after its onset in the Near East. We report genome-wide data from two hunter-gatherers from Devil’s Gate, an early Neolithic cave site (dated to ~7.7 thousand years ago) located in East Asia, on the border between Russia and Korea. Both of these individuals are genetically most similar to geographically close modern populations from the Amur Basin, all speaking Tungusic languages, and, in particular, to the Ulchi. The similarity to nearby modern populations and the low levels of additional genetic material in the Ulchi imply a high level of genetic continuity in this region during the Holocene, a pattern that markedly contrasts with that reported for Europe.
Siska et al., Genome-wide data from two early Neolithic East Asian individuals dating to 7700 years ago, Science Advances, 01 Feb 2017: Vol. 3, no. 2, e1601877, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1601877
----
As I said before. The expansion of the Neolithic from Africa did NOT reach as far as East Asia. That is why there were only TWO(WHG/ENE and EEF) major population involved in the creation of modern Europeans reaching Harrapan Valley. The expansion did not reach East Asia. East Asians are basically ONE populations and NOT two as with modern Europeans
-------------------- 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:Iirc, Rana or Rees or Mekova inferred /interpreted the pattern as “removal of constraint”. I will have to go back to my early postings on ESR. I believe I created a thread on it several years ago. Because of that statement I remember I challenged Swenet/Kalonji on pigmentation of Native Americans entering North America from Asia. Did they enter as dark or light skin? Why is that important and the significance? And why I don’t believe it is “slection” for light skin? Because Native American show the same pigmentation pattern as Africans. Darkest closest to the equator and lightest further away from the equator. It has absolutely nothing to do with sexual preference or selection. It is the NATURAL order of things. So the follow-up question ..WHY? Why are Central Americans dark, if 1000 individuals of the same tribe(of the same pigmentation color – whichever) crossed into Alaska and migrated south. Did the native American women told the light skin men to stay behind. Lol! “Only blacks allowed” in Central America? Lol! You see how ridiculous this sexual preference theory is?
Do They? and if they follow a pattern, how much of it is because of genetics? The Amerindians entered america with the same amount of variation available to earlier East Asian populations followed by ensuing bottlenecks which was inferred by Rana's results having all 5 of the Amerindian sample scoring Homozygous for Arg163Gln, other than that I haven't seen any evidence for sweeping selection at the equatorial level. However, regardless of the genetics we will always see a correlation between UV exposed areas and local pigmentation, because of 2 things which I can't express how much they're overlooked. 1. Melanogenesis and 2. the Epigenome.
For Those unfamiliar with what those two things are as they relate to this discussion - Melanogenesis is the process & regulation for which we produce and localize melanosomes. A Laymen term for this is tanning, there are 4 collective stages to tanning, an immediate stage which produces grey pigment and happens so fast it is undetected, two intermediate stages which are the ones we're familiar with, one last for a day and the other lasts for 2 weeks or so based on prolonged sun exposure... the 4 stage though is referred to as permanent (though not necessarily permanent) and this can last for months even years knocking a subject's skin tone down multiple shades. Epigenetics involves the regulation of genes through methylation and acetylation of regions located at a targeted loci. This can be a result of imprinting (being passed down from parents) or adaptation via environmental factors. for example you can have a subject with a permanent tan one side of their body due to prolonged UV exposure during developmental stages etc. **NONE OF THESE TWO THINGS HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE GENETIC MAKEUP OF DNA.**Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
ES server was giving problems yesterday. Screwed up my postings.
-------------------- 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:Iirc, Rana or Rees or Mekova inferred /interpreted the pattern as “removal of constraint”. I will have to go back to my early postings on ESR. I believe I created a thread on it several years ago. Because of that statement I remember I challenged Swenet/Kalonji on pigmentation of Native Americans entering North America from Asia. Did they enter as dark or light skin? Why is that important and the significance? And why I don’t believe it is “slection” for light skin? Because Native American show the same pigmentation pattern as Africans. Darkest closest to the equator and lightest further away from the equator. It has absolutely nothing to do with sexual preference or selection. It is the NATURAL order of things. So the follow-up question ..WHY? Why are Central Americans dark, if 1000 individuals of the same tribe(of the same pigmentation color – whichever) crossed into Alaska and migrated south. Did the native American women told the light skin men to stay behind. Lol! “Only blacks allowed” in Central America? Lol! You see how ridiculous this sexual preference theory is?
Do They? and if they follow a pattern, how much of it is because of genetics? The Amerindians entered america with the same amount of variation available to earlier East Asian populations followed by ensuing bottlenecks which was inferred by Rana's results having all 5 of the Amerindian sample scoring Homozygous for Arg163Gln, other than that I haven't seen any evidence for sweeping selection at the equatorial level. However, regardless of the genetics we will always see a correlation between UV exposed areas and local pigmentation, because of 2 things which I can't express how much they're overlooked. 1. Melanogenesis and 2. the Epigenome.
For Those unfamiliar with what those two things are as they relate to this discussion - Melanogenesis is the process & regulation for which we produce and localize melanosomes. A Laymen term for this is tanning, there are 4 collective stages to tanning, an immediate stage which produces grey pigment and happens so fast it is undetected, two intermediate stages which are the ones we're familiar with, one last for a day and the other lasts for 2 weeks or so based on prolonged sun exposure... the 4 stage though is referred to as permanent (though not necessarily permanent) and this can last for months even years knocking a subject's skin tone down multiple shades. Epigenetics involves the regulation of genes through methylation and acetylation of regions located at a targeted loci. This can be a result of imprinting (being passed down from parents) or adaptation via environmental factors. for example you can have a subject with a permanent tan one side of their body due to prolonged UV exposure during developmental stages etc. **NONE OF THESE TWO THINGS HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE GENETIC MAKEUP OF DNA.**
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: This is not really too difficult to understand.
--- Quote: Abstract: Ancient genomes have revolutionized our understanding of Holocene prehistory and, particularly, the Neolithic transition in western Eurasia. In contrast, East Asia has so far received little attention, despite representing a core region at which the Neolithic transition took place independently ~3 millennia after its onset in the Near East. We report genome-wide data from two hunter-gatherers from Devil’s Gate, an early Neolithic cave site (dated to ~7.7 thousand years ago) located in East Asia, on the border between Russia and Korea. Both of these individuals are genetically most similar to geographically close modern populations from the Amur Basin, all speaking Tungusic languages, and, in particular, to the Ulchi. The similarity to nearby modern populations and the low levels of additional genetic material in the Ulchi imply a high level of genetic continuity in this region during the Holocene, a pattern that markedly contrasts with that reported for Europe.
Siska et al., Genome-wide data from two early Neolithic East Asian individuals dating to 7700 years ago, Science Advances, 01 Feb 2017: Vol. 3, no. 2, e1601877, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1601877
----
As I said before. The expansion of the Neolithic from Africa did NOT reach as far as East Asia. That is why there were only TWO(WHG/ENE and EEF) major population involved in the creation of modern Europeans reaching Harrapan Valley. The expansion did not reach East Asia. East Asians are basically ONE populations and NOT two as with modern Europeans
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to admit. What you are saying is insightful. Several things, in fact most things, we agree on. Some I do not know and or not have enough information on. So I can only extrapolate from the available research papers.
They do follow a pattern.. The fact of the matter is…Native Americans are darker in the tropics compared to those in Northern and Southern regions…..just as Africans. Is it through genes or something else? Not enough data is published. But we have to assume that they entered the Americas as a unit with uniform color. Homozygous for Arg163Gln means they entered as ONE uniform people. With no variation for that gene. You may be right the only other explanation may be the melanin generation pathway. But even THAT is controlled by many genes. Keep in mind the end result that is needed darker skin…in the high UV areas. “by any means necessary”.
I disagree on your melanin pathway comment. The pathway was posted on here few years ago by NamerThoth. Of course SLC24A5, OCA2, MCR1 and others plays an important part. I am not familiar with Epigenome so I will have to research that point you are making. But I agree that the parts exposed to the sun even in dark skinned population are still darker than areas of the body NOT exposed to the sun. ---
BTW something is screwing up my postings. Server or browser from different computers I post from. Causing a lot of missed or double post(dp).
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone who claims that modern East Asians are descended from the Ancient populations is highly ignoramus of East Asian history or is being presented limited data and research meant to misdirect intentionally. I strongly suspect that the research and data being presented on East Asian genetic history is highly controlled and being fudged for a certain agenda.
We have Ancient Chinese legends and stories about Ancient Indo-European peoples conquering and setting up various dynasties in Ancient China such as the Shang, Zhou, Qin, and Tang. We have historical figures and paintings of White Indo-European peoples in Chinese historical texts and a presence in Ancient China, as well as descriptions of them in Northern Asia as well mummies and skeletons of European type peoples in Eastern Asia.
We have skeletons and burial mounds and statue figures of White Europid looking peoples as far as Siberia and the far east dating back to the Neolithic and even in odd places like the Tian Shan mountains.
There is absolutely no way that modern East Asians can be the same as the ancient populations from the area, just by deductive logic alone.
Also the Indus Valley people and the Harrappan people had nothing to do with White Europeans and there was no White European intrusion during the time of the Harrapan civilization. I really don't understand the stupidity and ignorance being espoused in this thread.....
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are people on the other forum that needs....your assistance about "historical"formation of nation states.
-------------------- 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 |
@Xyyman I didn't comment on the pathway, I'm speaking solely on melanogenesis in terms of rate. (Basil vs. Active melanogenesis, etc.). We don't have to address the pathway to understand tanning as a direct response to UVR.
Short- and Long-Term Effects of UV Radiation on the Pigmentation of Human Skin Coelho, Sergio G Choi, Wonseon - 2009
quote: (1)Immediate pigment darkening (IPD), which develops in minutes and can remain for several hours (Honigsmann et al., 1986; Routaboul et al., 1999), is gray/black in color and is thought to be due to the direct effects of UV on existing melanin or melanin precursors, perhaps oxidizing them to darker colors (Lim HW and Soter NA, 1993). - (2) Persistent pigment darkening (PPD), which occurs within hours and remains for days (Moyal et al., 2000; Moyal et al., 2006) is thought to result from newly synthesized melanin in the epidermis (Tadokoro et al., 2003; Tadokoro et al., 2005). - (3) Delayed pigmentation (DP), which develops in days and remains for weeks (Ortonne, 1990), results from prolonged increases in melanin content (Miller et al., 2008; Brenner et al., 2009). (4) Long-lasting pigmentation (LLP), which remains >9 months after initial UV exposure, results from prolonged activation of the pigmentary system (Brenner et al., 2009; Coelho et al., 2009).
10.1038/jidsymp.2009.10
Essentially in most populations that can produce adequate levels of melanin, North Africans, non slc24a5 Indians, South east Asians and presumably Native Americans you will have dynamic ranges in MI. Some of which is due in part to genetics yes, but there's more to it than that.
Though not elaborated on, a breif example of what I mean comes Malick's 2013 paper, when looking at the slc24a5 mutation in Indians, Those who were homozygous negative had a greater range MI on average homozygous and Hets had an intermediate range. I guess, simply put, what I'm trying to say is that, genetics for the most part establishes who can/cannot produce adequate amounts of melanin, however, the extent at which an individual with a certain genotype can produce WILL vary within the confines of said mutation.
The Light Skin Allele of SLC24A5 in South Asians and Europeans Shares Identity by Descent C. Basu Mallick - 2007
quote:
Phenotypic assessment of melanin index (MI) across 1674 individuals from two distinct cohorts, Cohort A and Cohort B (see Materials and Methods; Tables 1, S1 and S2) demonstrated a wide variation in skin color (MI 28–79) in South Asia. Comparison with published datasets for the regions of the world revealed that the observed range in South Asians was three times greater than that in East Asians and Europeans and comparable to that of Southeast Asians (Table 1). Notably, Cohort A (n=1228) which included individuals from three closely related agricultural castes of Andhra Pradesh in South India, shows remarkable variation in skin color (MI 30–64), similar to heterogeneous pool of samples in Cohort B (MI 28–79)
10.1371/journal.pgen.1003912 --
But yeah I 100% agree with you when you say there was a NEED for darker skin in UV intense areas and in tropical areas due to multiple antimicrobial properties (Reed et al., 1995; Gunathilake et al., 2009). The problem is, there's no clear cut answer for the need for light skin, hair and eye pigmentation. There is no overall realistic factor driving selection for such an extreme phenotype/genotyping among Europeans specifically, despite there being such strong evidence for selection of some sort (pickrel 2009, Voight 2006, Metspalu 2011, Malick 2013).
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Remember Shriver et al(see his work on Cape Verde) and others concluded that AMH probably left Africa with the capability of developing light skin. He speculated it was at the time of the FIRST OOA exit. Now , aDNA of ancient Europeans have proved that it was much much much later…at least for Europeans compared to East Asians. Up to 4000BC most Europeans were black. Recent testing have even added drama to the mix because the new arriving Neolithics from the Sahara were lighter in complexion than the Black Europeans they were encountering as they migrated North.
So the question is …WHY?.....Why didn’t these black Europeans develop light skin since they live in Europe close to 30,000 years. Even more puzzling is why didn’t their relative, Neanderthal, also turn light since Neanderthal live in Eurasia for over 300,000 years. Keeping in mind the genome of Neanderthal is now published revealing they carry ancestral alleles for skin pigmentation hair and eyes. They were also black.
-----
Molecular genetics of human pigmentation diversity Richard A. Sturm -- The genetic basis underlying normal variation in the pigmentary traits of skin, hair and eye colour has been the subject of intense research directed at understanding the diversity seen both between and within human populations. A combination of approaches have been used including comparative genomics of candidate genes and the identification of regions of the human genome under positive selection, together with genome-wide and specific allele association studies. Independent selection for different pigmentation gene sets has been found between Asian, European and African populations. Several genome-wide association studies for pigmentation have now been conducted and identified single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers in known, TYR, TYRP1, OCA2, SLC45A2, SLC24A5, MC1R, ASIP, KITLG and previously unknown SLC24A4, IRF4, TPCN2, candidate genes. The contribution of SNP polymorphisms present in populations from South Asia have been tested and alleles found at TYR, SLC45A2 and SLC24A5 can largely account for differences between those of darkest and lightest skin reflectance using a simple additive model. Skin and hair colour associations in Europeans are found within a range of pigmentation gene alleles, whereas blue-brown eye colour can be explained by a single SNP proposed to regulate OCA2 expression. Functional testing of variant alleles has begun to connect phenotype correlations with biological differences. Variant MC1R alleles show direct correlations between the biochemical signalling properties of the encoded receptor and the red-hair fair skin pigmentation phenotype. Direct testing of a range of clonal melanocyte cultures derived from donor skin tissue characterized for three causal SNPs within SLC45A2, SLC24A5 and OCA2 has assessed their impact on melanin content and tyrosinase enzyme activity. From a culmination of genetic and functional studies, it is apparent that a number of genes impacting melanosome biogenesis or the melanin biosynthetic pathway are candidates to explain the diversity seen in human pigmentation.
-------------------- 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 |
posted
Several things are at play here in the discussion.
1. Many issues have been resolved like, were Paleolithic Europeans Black? Yes! 2. Were Neanderthals black? Yes! 3. What color were the incoming Neolithics from the Sahara? Lighter in color than Paleolithic Europeans! 4. I am not sure all humans came from African Pygmies. I understand pygmies were an early branch. Unless you label Khoi-San as pygmies 5. What makes modern European ‘white” has been resolved.
The discussion here is did modern East Asians become white BEFORE modern Europeans and what were the genes involved.
-------------------- 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 |
posted
Probably not as in the black Asian thread you still had non epicanthic fold type in china,Japan and Korea who were black especially Korean as some of the people where black as afriacans. http://www.realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/China_2.htmPosts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
Upper Paleolithic inhabitants of Europe were already depigmentating (becoming lighter skinned).
"Our estimates for the onset of selection at KITLG [30,000 years] are consistent with these findings, although more ancient dates (>40,000 years) cannot be excluded, due to uncertainty of age estimates." (Beleza et al. 2012)
So for example if you compared the skin colour of an average UP inhabitant from Europe, say 20,000 years ago, he/she would be lighter brown skinned than an actual black skinned person from the tropics.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The fool above: @ xyyman
You've ignored rs642742/KITLG *G.
Upper Paleolithic inhabitants of Europe were already depigmentating (becoming lighter skinned).
"Our estimates for the onset of selection at KITLG [30,000 years] are consistent with these findings, although more ancient dates (>40,000 years) cannot be excluded, due to uncertainty of age estimates." (Beleza et al. 2012)
So for example if you compared the skin colour of an average UP inhabitant from Europe, say 20,000 years ago, he/she would be lighter brown skinned than an actual black skinned person from the tropics.
IDK your motivations nor do I care, so I'm not 100% sure if its your pattern of thinking or if its your agenda to reason so linearly. Get your head out of box my friend.
quote:Xyyman said: Remember Shriver et al(see his work on Cape Verde) and others concluded that AMH probably left Africa with the capability of developing light skin. He speculated it was at the time of the FIRST OOA exit.
quote:Beleza et al. 2012 At the rs642742 SNP, the frequency of the KITLG*G derived allele in Africans is 7%, in contrast to the high frequencies found in Europeans AND East Asians (?80%)
@Xyyman I'm assuming your last statement is strictly talking about Genes. in that case two major contributors to the lightening of E.Asians have been discovered both in the OCA2 loci as I explained earlier. SNPs, rs1800414 and rs74653330, neither of which have been identified in both Europeans and Africans. (Keaton 2015., Donelly 2012., etc.)
Also...
quote:Originally posted by Xyyman: So the question is …WHY?.....Why didn’t these black Europeans develop light skin since they live in Europe close to 30,000 years. Even more puzzling is why didn’t their relative, Neanderthal, also turn light since Neanderthal live in Eurasia for over 300,000 years. Keeping in mind the genome of Neanderthal is now published revealing they carry ancestral alleles for skin pigmentation hair and eyes. They were also black.
There was no need to, the true question is what drove selection so recently! Particularly in both E.Asian & European populations if nortons postulation holds up about recent sweep in depigmentaion for E.Asians...My money is on genocide lmao jk, but not really, IDK.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note: Andamaners had black skin due to living on small islands with no *land* predators, 1/2 of time on sunny beaches, half in rainforests. The same with Papuans.
All humans derive from rainforest pygmies, with slight mixture from long-separate groups.
Pygmies are black in a sense, being rich in melanin, but existed long before KhoiSan or any other AMHs of any color.
Epicanthic fold = open sky = savanna & desert-oasis dwellers, no Pygmies had it, all KhoiSan did. The alternative was prognathic brow ridge in Australian Aborigines, Pygmies in Australia had curly hair and round eyes and notably yellow- tinted black skin.
Xyyman: "The discussion here is did modern East Asians become white BEFORE modern Europeans and what were the genes involved."
Homo erectus lived in the non-UV Dead Sea region (Paleo-Lake Huleh) 750ka, so likely there have been light-skinned people before the 400ka AMHs divergence, although skin color was over-all population Homo sapiens archaic likely dark.
North Africans may have had significant lightening due to Levant migrations, combined with camouflage advantages in desert areas (as seen in most desert animals).
East Asians seem to be KhoiSan who changed from short dome huts to tents/yurts, thus losing the curled hair.
Posts: 2021 | From: Miami | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Crackpot black supremacist IDK your motivations nor do I care, so I'm not 100% sure if its your pattern of thinking or if its your agenda to reason so linearly. Get your head out of box my friend.
My point was to falsify Xyman's bizarre statement "Up to 4000BC most Europeans were black" when they weren't.
La Brana 1
This isn't black, but a lighter brown; these Mesolithic specimens like La Brana 1 are known to have had derived ASIP, IRF4 or KITLG involved in skin lightening. Like I said, La Brana 1 looks considerably lighter than an actual black person, like say, Robert Mugabe.
posted
LaBrana lacks the staple OCA2, Slc24a5 & Slc45a2 (and even MC1r) mutations recognized for European and even North African hipopigmentation. Though fixation has been observed in SSA populations for MC1r, SSAs still have the most diverse set of Melanin related SNPs. So naming 3 non exclusive SNPs in Labrana is pointless.
Now please, Stop... I would rather us not go around the mulberry bush with you. It's counter productive.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
@theReal See my thread on ESR called "Other 'Negros'". That is my point. The "negros" outside of Africa like in Asia are closest genetically to "white" populations geographically closest to them and not African "negros". Why ...and how? Which came first? I know D'Denn speaks about a tropical belt across the Indian Ocean from Africa. That may be ONE of many explanation. But the more I read the more I am convinced that there was a land bridge somewhere in the Indian Ocean. This recent paper I read on mtDNA M adds further proof. The authors disclose the FACT is mtDNA M is Older East Asia, Madagascar, general southern and eastern regions than India. Concluding M did NOT originate in India. Now, since there is no VISIBLE land mass in the Indian Ocean they speculate that M travelled overland via Central Asia to East Asia then back to India. NONSENSE! With YDNA and Other MtDNA there is some unexplicable observation that the DNA on both sides of the Indian Ocean is very similar. This needs to be resolved.
-------------------- 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 |
posted
That is the problem with you have fanatics with their own motivation posting. They mis-guide and misdirect.
I just got back to this. As you said. Quote
Beleza et al. 2012 At the rs642742 SNP, the frequency of the KITLG*G derived allele in Africans is 7%, in contrast to the high frequencies found in Europeans AND East Asians (?80%)
So Paleolithic Africans were white @( KITLG*G derived allele in Africans is 7%,). Lol! I am Kidding of course.
-------------------- 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 |
posted
If these artist were honest and not fixated on making La Brana close to resembling modern Europeans....this is closer to La Brana.
If you had read the paper you would know based upon 1000's of SNP for La Brana ancient Europeans were closer to this....La brana.
-------------------- 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 |
No bridge. Coracles. Inverted waterproof rainforest dome huts with long spear/punt pole. Replaced by dugout canoes(Papua) and taut-bundled rafts(Lake Tana) due to better propulsion.
India: arigolu = sun boat = coracle Mbuti: mongolu = moon hut = coracle (inverted)
This I wrote at Sci.Anthropology.Paleo :
" Homo differentiated from Australopithecus by the adoption of leopard-proof water-proof rainforest ground-based dome huts=round shields, lifted on one side for entry/egress, while other side's sharp-tipped poles were jabbed into shallow post-holes and acted as a hinge, but which, when hut was flipped over, served as croc-proof bowl boats to cross rivers and other open water; a long spear was used to punt through shallow water and to pierce fish, ducks etc. and pry up water lily & sedge rhyzomes, and to knock kernels of wild rice into the basket hull, long before the advent of specialized watercraft such as dugout canoes or tautly bound rafts, which eventually replaced them due to faster lateral locomotive propulsion in most areas. " - - -
I don't like white bashing. I don't like black bashing.
BUT I really don't like Pygmy bashing. (You aren't, of course.)
Pygmies are literally being squeezed to death by tall agricultural/industrial "humanity" closing in on all sides.
I'm not blaming. I'm saying, goddam, Everybody, give Pygmies some breathing room. And nobody's listening or even understands what I'm talking about. That's hard.
And That's why I separate Pygmies from "black". Because "black" (and all other) people are (unintentionally) destroying the only home they have, one they earn every single day and have, 'forever'.
No easy answers, but simple awareness helps.
Posts: 2021 | From: Miami | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am other the impression that Cape Verde holds some answers. Again. The sea levels may have been much lower than is currently believed. We have aDNA of islands off the coast of Africa that these ancient individuals carried R1b-M269. What will the aDNA of Cape Verde tell us?
Quote:
NEWS
57% of genes in Cape Verdean population from Africa, 43% from Europe, according to Portuguese researcher 27 May 2010 “The Cape Verdean population is one of the most mixed in the world,” in which “57% of genes are of African origin and 43% of European origin.” This is the conclusion of the study “Genetic diversity in Cape Verde,” carried out by Jorge Rocha of the University of Porto’s Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology in Portugal.57% of genes in Cape Verdean population from Africa, 43% from Europe, according to Portuguese researcher The researcher presented the results of the project, developed in cooperation with the University of Cape Verde, to the public this week. The study was aimed at characterizing Cape Verde’s biological diversity. According to the web site Ciência Hoje, “the islands are a meeting point of populations coming from various different and very diversified regions.”
Considering the fact that the archipelago was uninhabited when discovered????? and was subsequently colonized by individuals of European origin and slave laborers from adjacent regions of the African continent, Cape Verde turned into a melting pot of populations which, under other conditions, were greatly differentiated.
This amalgamation is visible in the human species on various levels, ranging from the biological to the cultural. Given that “an enormous quantity of biodiversity was generated or that the existing diversity was reorganized, many characteristics that had been separate appear blended,” stressed the researcher.
Fogo shows highest levels of miscegenation
Jorge Rocha also explained that the distribution of miscegenation may be evaluated on an island-by-island basis. The most African is the island of Santiago, which was the first to be colonized and was where the largest portion of slaves disembarked, even after other islands were already populated with mixed-race populations. The island showing the highest levels of miscegenation is Fogo, the second to be colonized by families coming from the local mixed-race aristocracy.
Most of the Europeans who settled in Cape Verde were of Portuguese origin, while most of the Africans came, in historic terms, from West Africa. The largest portion of Africans likely came from Mandinga peoples, who constitute one of the largest ethnic groups in West Africa.
What’s more, miscegenation almost always occurred between European men and African women,***** explained by**** the absence of European women during the initial colonization of Cape Verde.
Skin and eye color
One of the most evident characteristics of this miscegenation is skin color, which constitutes an essential part of the study on Cape Verde’s genetic diversity. In the archipelago’s mixed populations, there is a series of combined features that are NOT found together in other African or European populations!!!!!!!!!. This variation was studied in a quantified way by measuring pigmentation.”It is possible to elaborate a melanin index and study the distribution of melanin,” affirms the author of the study.
Discovering genes
The researchers involved in the project characterized 364 individuals from Cape Verde with approximately 1 million genetic markers each. “Individuals from the same island tended to be more genetically alike,” adds the study.
Miscegenation may also be evaluated on a genetic level. According to estimates by the researchers, “57% of the genes are of African origin and 43% are of European origin,” making Cape Verde one of the most mixed populations on Earth, “much more so even than in certain zones of Brazil.”
“We know that skin color is hereditary, but we’re not too sure which genes influence it,” said Jorge Rocha. As such, one of the central parts of the study was to use the Cape Verdean population to try to discover which genes affect skin and eye color.
According to the study, at least five genes are responsible for 40% of skin color variations in Cape Verde.
-------------------- 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 |
But these people have some unusual features NOT found either African and Europeans. aDNA Cape Verde hold some answers
It will be really fascinating to see a really comprehensive study on Cape Verde. Are they remnants of initial admixture of La Brana and Neoliithic? Remember Canary Islanders carry MORE La Brana SNPs than Berbers/North Africans. I would bet the Cape Verde Islanders carry even more.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
are going post this info to reloaded or find a small picture because I can't read it that well.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- 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 |
posted
According to the study. Cape Verde Islanders have an unusual high frequency of "light eyes" ..... compared to North Africans. Remnant of La Brana? I will to be a fly on that wall in the lab when the testing is going on.
-------------------- 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 |
posted
@Xyyman That news article was a bit un-informative Read Sandra Belezas 2013 study. - I will make a proper response when I get home.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
I posted on Beleza study several years ago. On ESR. I believe the title was "white west Afticans" or something like that. The paper first gave me the clue that light/white skin did NOT originate in Europe but in Africa. We are a continuum and not races according to Rosenberg et al. Now aDNA is confirming all of this. As I told Beyoku about 5years the clues will be in the DNA of Sardinians, Greeks etc. Transition points. Now it looks like these Cape Verde and Canary Islanders still harbor these "transition" populations. Mechta Aflou?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great discussion and feedback. This should be in another thread but since we have no mods. If what I am thinking is true I would predict that Cape Verde Islands to the south will have more "African" ancestry and those to the north more "European" ancestry. Lighter eyes will also be found to the North. Darker colored eyes and skin to the south. And guess what. Santiago, the southern most island, has the most "African" ancestry. Surprise!!! Not!
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note also. R1b-M269 and V-88 is found at high frequency in Western Africa eg Guinea-Bissau. No one has made an attempt to parse out the M269 in Africa. That is to come. Assuming it came from European Colonialist. We know western Europeans males are NOT Steppe migrants. It is a fantasy, since R-M269 found the aDNA of the Steppe pastoralist is YOUNGER and on a DIFFERENT branch of R1b-M269. We know R1b-M269 was in ancient Irish(2000bc) and who has one of the highest frequency of that marker. We know that the Canary Islanders carried R1b-M269 BEFORE the "Spanish" conquest. We know that R1b-M269 has an Atlantic modal haplotype. Get the picture emerging. This is not rocket science.
-------------------- 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 |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
LaBrana lacks the staple OCA2, Slc24a5 & Slc45a2 (and even MC1r) mutations recognized for European and even North African hipopigmentation. Though fixation has been observed in SSA populations for MC1r, SSAs still have the most diverse set of Melanin related SNPs. So naming 3 non exclusive SNPs in Labrana is pointless. 
Printer-friendly view of this topic