Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basic lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago. 2018
Vicente M Cabrera, View ORCID ProfileJulia Patricia Marrero Rodriguez, View ORCID ProfileKhaled K Abu-Amero, Jose M Larruga doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/233502
Abstract
Background: After three decades of mtDNA studies on human evolution the only incontrovertible main result is the African origin of all extant modern humans. In addition, a southern coastal route has been relentlessly imposed to explain the Eurasian colonization of these African pioneers. Based on the age of macrohaplogroup L3, from which all maternal Eurasian and the majority of African lineages originated, that out-of-Africa event has been dated around 60-70 kya. On the opposite side, we have proposed a northern route through Central Asia across the Levant for that expansion. Consistent with the fossil record, we have dated it around 125 kya. To help bridge differences between the molecular and fossil record ages, in this article we assess the possibility that mtDNA macrohaplogroup L3 matured in Eurasia and returned to Africa as basic L3 lineages around 70 kya. Results: The coalescence ages of all Eurasian (M,N) and African L3 lineages, both around 71 kya, are not significantly different. The oldest M and N Eurasian clades are found in southeastern Asia instead near of Africa as expected by the southern route hypothesis. The split of the Y-chromosome composite DE haplogroup is very similar to the age of mtDNA L3. A Eurasian origin and back migration to Africa has been proposed for the African Y-chromosome haplogroup E. Inside Africa, frequency distributions of maternal L3 and paternal E lineages are positively correlated. This correlation is not fully explained by geographic or ethnic affinities. It seems better to be the result of a joint and global replacement of the old autochthonous male and female African lineages by the new Eurasian incomers. Conclusions: These results are congruent with a model proposing an out-of-Africa of early anatomically modern humans around 125 kya. A return to Africa of Eurasian fully modern humans around 70 kya, and a second Eurasian global expansion by 60 kya. Climatic conditions and the presence of Neanderthals played key roles in these human movements.
Results: The coalescence ages of all Eurasian (M,N) and African 28 L3 lineages, both around 71 kya, are not significantly different. The 29 oldest M and N Eurasian clades are found in southeastern Asia 30 instead near of Africa as expected by the southern route hypothesis. 31 The split of the Y-chromosome composite DE haplogroup is very 32 similar to the age of mtDNA L3. A Eurasian origin and back 33 migration to Africa has been proposed for the African Y- 34 chromosome haplogroup E. Inside Africa, frequency distributions of 35 maternal L3 and paternal E lineages are positively correlated. This 36 correlation is not fully explained by geographic or ethnic affinities. It 37 seems better to be the result of a joint and global replacement of the 38 old autochthonous male and female African lineages by the new 39 Eurasian incomers.
A new mtDNA model about the origin and dispersion of Homo 693 sapiens 694 At mtDNA level, the sampling and data accumulated during the last 695 thirty years, including those contributed by ancient DNA studies, 696 allow us to propose a more detailed model of the origin and 697 worldwide spread of modern humans than the ones proposed three 698 decades ago. There are three fossil series in northwest, northeast, 699 and southern Africa that chronologically and morphologically 700 recapitulated the evolution of Homo sapiens from early archaic 701 around 600 kya to early moderns by 200 kya [123]. The recent 702 dating of Middle Stone Age tools (315 ± 34 kya) and early modern 703 human fossils (286 ± 32 kya) from Jebel Irhoud in Morocco, places 704 the emergence of our species, and of the Middle Stone Age, close in 705 time and long before the age of about 200 kya previously suggested 706 for the common origin of all humans in eastern Africa [124]. These 707 data coincide in time with the existence of an old Y-chromosome 708 lineage (A00) detected in samples of western-central African 709 ascendance and dated 338 kya (95% CI: 237-581 kya), remarkably 710 older than common estimates based on the Y-chromosome and 711 mtDNA TMRCAs [125]. The fact that the following more divergent Y- 712 chromosome A lineages (A0, A1a) also have a western-central bioRxiv preprint first posted online Dec. 13, 2017; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/233502. 713 African location, strongly supports this region as the origin of an 714 ancestral human population from which the ancestors of early 715 modern humans emerged [90, 103]. The most ancient splits and 716 spreads of the mtDNA lineages also situated the hypothetical origin 717 of all extant maternal lineages around this area. Although the 718 earliest L0 clade diverged around 145 kya (Additional file 1: Table 719 S3) and had its first expansions in southern Africa (L0d, L0k), the 720 subsequent splits gave rise to L1 and L5 around 131 kya and 123 721 kya spreading to western and eastern Africa respectively. These 722 long range African dispersions place its putative origin somewhere 723 in Central Africa (Figure 1a). The same "centre-of-gravity" argument 724 was used by other authors to suggest a Central African origin [126]. 725 It is worth mentioning that while ancestral southern African 726 Khoesan-speaking population still maintain high frequencies of 727 primitive L0d and k lineages [94, 106, 127, 128], and that in the 728 hunter- gatherer populations of central-western Africa the L1c 729 haplogroup is dominant [108, 109], L5 in eastern Africa has today 730 only a marginal presence [114, 129], most probably due to its 731 displacement produced by more recent waves of better adapted 732 incomers. The presence of L5 in southern Africa and eastern Mbuti 733 pygmies [70, 109, 118, 127] is the result of later migrations. Most 734 probably, next split, around 100 kya, also occurred in Central Africa 735 resulting in sister clusters L2 and L3'4'6 that, respectively, produced 736 initial westward and eastward expansions (Figure 1a). Although the 737 oldest L2 lineages have been sampled in western Africa [130], 738 today, as result of successive spreads inside the continent, this 739 clade has a pan-African range [119]. In eastern Africa, the cluster 740 L3'4'6 was the embryo of the full Eurasian maternal diversity. Its first 741 split was haplogroup L6 that nowadays is a rare eastern lineage with bioRxiv preprint first posted online Dec. 13, 2017; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/233502. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 742 a deep founder age (about 100 kya) but a rather recent expansion 743 (about 25 kya). It has been found at frequencies below 1% in 744 Egyptians [131], Somalis [132], Kenyan [133], and eastern Nilotes 745 from Uganda [114]. Mean frequency rise in Ethiopia (3.15 ± 1.15 %) 746 with a maximum (15.8%) in Ongota, an extinguishing linguistic 747 isolate of uncertain adscription [129]. Outside Africa L6 has not been 748 detected in the Levant [134]. It is present in the Arabian Peninsula at 749 frequencies below 1% in Saudi samples but raises 12% in some 750 Yemeni samples [135]. Attending to the L6 phylogeny (Additional file 751 2: Figure S1), it seems that not all the Yemeni lineages are a subset 752 of the eastern African lineages as there is at least one for which its 753 common node coincides with the expansion of the whole 754 haplogroup. Based on its peculiar phylogeography, the possibility 755 that L6 could have originated from the same out-of-Africa southern 756 migration that colonized Eurasia was suggested [135]. If this were 757 the case, this early L6 expansion would give genetic support to the 758 reported presence of modern humans in the Arabian Peninsula, 759 around 125 kya, based on archaeological evidence [12–14]. This 760 suggestion also enjoys climatic support as this period coincides with 761 humid environmental conditions in Arabia [136]. However, it seems 762 that this possible human expansion did not extend beyond the 763 Peninsula as L6 derived lineages have not yet been detected across 764 Eurasia. The return to arid conditions, most probably, caused the 765 decline of the populations carrying the L6 lineage that had to retreat 766 to refuge areas as the highlands of Yemen and Ethiopia until more 767 favorable conditions made possible their subsequent recovery in 768 eastern Africa and Yemen. The long mutational stem that precedes 769 the expansion of L6 (Additional file 2: Figure S1), would faithfully 770 represent that strong and long bottleneck. Next phylogenetic bioRxiv preprint first posted online Dec. 13, 2017; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/233502. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 771 bifurcation produced the ancestors of L3 and L4 haplogroups 772 (Additional file 2: Figure S1). Nowadays, the highest frequencies 773 and diversities of L4 are found in eastern Africa, but it has spread 774 over the entire continent (Table 3). Besides, it has been detected at 775 frequencies below 1% in the Levant [137], and the Arabian 776 Peninsula [74, 138]. Most probably, as consequence of drift effects, 777 some populations show outstanding frequencies of L4. In western 778 Africa, Samoya (28.6%) and Kassena (21.2%) samples, speakers of 779 the Gur linguistic family, stand out [72]. In Ethiopia, the cases of the 780 Omotic-speaking Hamer (18.2%), the Cushitic-speaking Daasanach 781 (22.2%), and the Nilotic-speaking Gumuz (24.0%) and Nyangatom 782 (21.6%) are also remarkable [129, 139]. However, without any 783 doubt, are the Tanzanian click-speaking Hadza (58%) and Sandawe 784 (43%) whom show the highest values for L4 in Africa [111–113], 785 this, together with the elevated frequencies that Hadza (50%) and 786 Sandawe (15%) present for the Y-chromosome haplogroup B-M112 787 [140], points to human expansions from the North as those that most 788 strongly influenced the gene pool of these groups. Attending to the 789 age of bifurcation from L3 (around 95 kya), it could be thought that 790 these L4 expansions occurred before our proposed return to Africa 791 of L3 basic lineages. However, as the main spreads of its 792 descendant clusters L4a (54.8 kya) and L4b (48.9 kya) [94, 138] had 793 taken place around the same time window that the majority of the L3 794 and L2 branches in Africa, the most probable explanation is that 795 improved climatic conditions after 60 kya motivated a global 796 demographic growth on the African continent. Noticed that the 797 evidence for an L3 first expansion in East Africa [89] is likewise in 798 support of the out-of-Africa scenario than of a Eurasian back-flow as 799 proposed here. We hypothetically situated the L3'4 node in bioRxiv preprint first posted online Dec. 13, 2017; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/233502. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 800 northeast Africa or the Near East (Figure 1a) to allow an out-of- 801 Africa of the pre-L3 clade. The Y-chromosome CDEF ancestor had 802 to be its male counterpart. Other female and male lineages could 803 have moved with them but, presumably gone extinct without 804 contributing either to the maternal or paternal gene pools of the 805 living human populations of Eurasia. 806 Under the scenario proposed here, early anatomically modern 807 humans went out of Africa around 125 kya with a simple Middle 808 Stone Age technology that was not superior to that manufactured by 809 the Neanderthals. Favored by mild climatic conditions, these African 810 pioneers progressed through West Asia and reached Central Asia 811 overlapping in its way with the southern geographic range occupied 812 by the Neanderthals. A new vision of the fossil and archaeological 813 records of those regions [88, 141, 142] might uncover the path 814 followed by those early African colonizers. At favorable conditions 815 for both hominin groups, we might predict limited exchange of skills, 816 lithic technology, and sex. However, when after 75 kya glacial 817 environments became dominant, Neanderthals had to retreat 818 southwards pushing out humans in its way. Confronted with the 819 northern foothills of the Himalayas, humans moved in two directions, 820 westwards to return to Africa, and eastwards to reach southeastern 821 Asia across China (Figure 1b). The second part of this model has 822 been already outlined in precedent articles [53–55].
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You seem obsessed with these so-called "back-migration" models yet you din't seem to realize that Africa is just a landmass as are all the other continents.
The foolish assumption is that people who migrated from Africa cannot retain their African phenotypes if the places migrated to were of similar ecologies and climates.
Andaman Islanders, New Guineans, Fijians, Solomon Islanders and Melanesians(from the Greek "Melas" meaning "black") in general are all examples of "Homo Sapiens Africanus" regardless of areas of abode. So even if some hypothetical back migration did take place, then so what? A Fijian family back-migrating to, say, Kenya, East Africa would automatically be spoken to in Swahili.
The point that most researchers seem to ignore is that mutations are simply reshuffling of the A-T-C-G nucleotides on a DNA strand..
In the real world where living organisms confront each other and ecological nature, the result of that confrontation is what really counts. It is that confrontation that creates phenotypes and their corresponding genotypes.
Example: 5 UN Peacekeeper soldiers are ambushed somewhere and 1 of them is badly in need of a life-saving blood transfusion. The 4 other soldiers rush him to a rural hospital. The wounded soldier is Swedish and the others are from Uganda, Germany, India, and Japan. On subsequent blood tests, the Ugandan is A+, the Swede is A+, the 3 others not. What are the implications here?
The foolish assumption is that people who migrated from Africa cannot retain their African phenotypes if the places migrated to were of similar ecologies and climates.
No such assumption is made in the article phenotypes are not mentioned
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
This mitochondrial DNA research was done by "Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory", which an Australian - Bruce William Stillman is the director. How can I trust white Australian scientists if their people on purpose exterminated 90% of Australian natives aborigines on pretext they were subhumans? Only until recently they removed from Australian constitution that Australian aborigines were subhumans animals.
He is also the chairman of Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which recently published their genetic work research, which affirmed that Neanderthal Hominid have introduced a gene variant into the African Homo Sapiens population that enhanced human brain function. Which means, that African Homo Sapiens are intellectually inferior than humans which carry Neanderthal DNA?
It sounds to me to be a rotten manipulation as they did in South Africa schools until 1990s, by write in their history books, and taught in their schools, that European were the first humans to arrived and settled in South Africa. Therefore, South African territories belonged to white people.
In fact, we are seem in many African continent maps showing, North and South Africa regions as European, not Africa territories.
All these corrupted DNA tests results, are in fact, to continuous their occupation of lands they have invaded in the past. Before, they controlled the invaded population by wars and exterminations, and false history written in their books. Now they use false DNA tests to imposed their superiority and rewrite human history.
I like to see these white scientists to concentrating in explain why over 30% of their white race, blond and red hair, living in Europe carry a Central" Afghanistan" and East Asian Rhesus monkey recessive negative gene, which make them a "recent" related to Rheus Monkey??? Ohhh...wait, I thought our ancestors diverged from great apes, and not monkeys...
Can they tell us, since when in history those Europeans are carrying Rheus Monkey DNA? because I can see them in quite recent human history, engraved on King Hammurabi's Assyrian Black Stele, with his soldiers returning from Afghanistan carrying half humans creatures on leashes walking on their paws.
After all, these scientists should not be ashamed to tell us the truth about themselves, because, the Planet Earth is a "Big zoo", and somehow, humans are scientifically classified as an "rational animals".
-------------------- ---lnnnnn* Posts: 198 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
video link deleted Clyde, self promotion of your videos is not allowed unless they are specifically about this article and quote from it throughout
-lioness .
[ 13. January 2018, 11:24 AM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Linda Fahr: [QB] This mitochondrial DNA research was done by "Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory"
please prove that the research was done by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, otherwise I am going to have to delete your post for false information
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
By the way. I think you must read website names and the source, before posting. Seems like you are very distracted. Beside, I think you are very rude. That's why Egyptsearch website is rotten. Few people still posting. If you continuous to harassing and treating participants, which is already very few, you will end up posting to yourself.
Good luck!
-------------------- ---lnnnnn* Posts: 198 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
What the "nonprofit organization" Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory wants us to believe, is that all people living in Africa today, are not of Africa origin. In their theory all original "archaic Africans" were replaced by back to Africa Eurasians fully developed modern humans.
Starting with the majority of African living in the Subsahara region, do not have DNA contamination from Neanderthal. If their theory is correct, all Africans should have Neanderthal DNA, Denisovan DNA, including Rhesus monkey recessive negative gene, found in over 30% of European, Central, South, and East Asians, brought with them in their back to Africa theory. This factor alone, destroyed their "LAB FAKE RESULTS"!
In fact, this lab, wants to imposed that full developed modern humans are those people which have all kind of hominid and monkey DNA, which in fact exist in North Africa, Middle East, Europe, Caucus region, north and central Eurasia, south and eastern Asia. But, NOT among the pure African Homo Sapiens, which are living in the Subsahara region today, specifically the tallest average humans in the planet, which are the people living at the Omo river valley region, South Sudan, and Central Africa. All other African people have some degree of contamination, But, it was from foreign invasions which started after the Nile Civilizations were established for over two thousand years.
These false DNA tests results is absolutely geopolitical and because, Africa Continent, is the richest continent in mineral reserves, forest, fauna, water in the Earth. For over 2 thousand years, Europeans and Asians are exploring Africa's natural resources to survive, as well exploring America, and Australia were they invaded and exterminated 90% of it's populations, to steal the lands, natural resources, to enriched themselves.
In accordance with the "written history" White people are the most destructive people on Earth, not only by invasions, exterminations, but as well, environmental destruction. They will do anything to continuous to control, and destroy not only the planet Earth, but as well all other people that do not look like them...
-------------------- ---lnnnnn* Posts: 198 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Linda Fahr: [QB] This mitochondrial DNA research was done by "Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory", which an Australian - Bruce William Stillman is the director. How can I trust white Australian scientists if their people on purpose exterminated 90% of Australian natives aborigines on pretext they were subhumans? Only until recently they removed from Australian constitution that Australian aborigines were subhumans animals.
He is also the chairman of Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which recently published their genetic work research, which affirmed that Neanderthal Hominid have introduced a gene variant into the African Homo Sapiens population that enhanced human brain function. Which means, that African Homo Sapiens are intellectually inferior than humans which carry Neanderthal DNA?
show us a link or article title that says that.
I don't see you doing proper quoting or putting up URL links
quote:Originally posted by Linda Fahr:
Starting with the majority of African living in the Subsahara region, do not have DNA contamination from Neanderthal. If their theory is correct, all Africans should have Neanderthal DNA,
the articles says:
after 75 kya glacial environments became dominant, Neanderthals had to retreat southwards pushing out humans in its way. Confronted with the northern foothills of the Himalayas, humans moved in two directions, westwards to return to Africa, and eastwards to reach southeastern Asia across China (Figure 1b). The second part of this model has been already outlined in precedent articles
So this means Neanderthals might have pushed the humans back into Africa, humans who they did not mix with
but other humans who stayed in Eurasia did mix with Neanderthals
_______________________________
DNA hints at ancient cousins Scientists find evidence of an extinct humanlike species within modern-day Africans ROBERTA KWOK AUG 17, 2012 — 2
In a new study, scientists have found hints that some previously unknown ancestors of modern humans. They appear to have split off into a separate species more than a million years ago. Later, some modern humans appear to have mated with this sister species. Traces of that sister species persist today in the DNA of some African people. Scientists shared their new findings August 3 in Cell.
Modern humans belong to a group of animals called hominids. In the past, there were other hominids similar to modern humans, such as Neandertals. Those other hominids have since died out.
Sarah Tishkoff works at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. To learn more about human history, she and her colleagues studied DNA from three hunter-gatherer groups in Africa. They were the Pygmies, Hadza and Sandawe. The team analyzed samples from five people in each group.
A small fraction of the Africans’ DNA appeared to come from other, unknown hominids — the sister species. About 1.1 million years ago, these ancient hominids broke off from ancestors of modern humans to become a separate species. Then, sometime before about 30,000 to 70,000 years ago, this species mated with modern humans. That mating left a genetic mark that remains in the DNA of some people living in Africa today.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The foolish assumption is that people who migrated from Africa cannot retain their African phenotypes if the places migrated to were of similar ecologies and climates.
No such assumption is made in the article phenotypes are not mentioned
Do we need to recall your past posts by you on cacasoid affinities? You have a history, which people can trace. So, its very clear what the intent is.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basic lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago. 2018
Vicente M Cabrera, View ORCID ProfileJulia Patricia Marrero Rodriguez, View ORCID ProfileKhaled K Abu-Amero, Jose M Larruga doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/233502
This is a radically different theory than the standard OOA related theories and analysis of L3 I would say it's highly speculative at this point.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basic lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago. 2018
Vicente M Cabrera, View ORCID ProfileJulia Patricia Marrero Rodriguez, View ORCID ProfileKhaled K Abu-Amero, Jose M Larruga doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/233502
This is a radically different theory than the standard OOA related theories and analysis of L3 I would say it's highly speculative at this point.
What is radically different is that? If L3 was in Africa 70.000 years ago due to back migration, and is younger than L1, L2 while L3 which mostly comprises with “sub Sahara” Africans from the Sahel, Steppe and Sahara region. It can only mean that they migrated back from Asia carrying all these so called Eurasian genetic mutations along with them.
By the way most of the studies you post are speculative and Eurocentric B.S.. But in this particular case you see it radically different, because it shot you in the foot.
This paper confirmed the history of the Asiatic black man.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: If L3 was in Africa 70.000 years ago due to back migration, and is younger than L1, L2 while L3 which mostly comprises with “sub Sahara” Africans from the Sahel, Steppe and Sahara region. It can only mean that they migrated back from Asia carrying all these so called Eurasian genetic mutations along with them.
This paper confirmed the history of the Asiatic black man.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: If L3 was in Africa 70.000 years ago due to back migration, and is younger than L1, L2 while L3 which mostly comprises with “sub Sahara” Africans from the Sahel, Steppe and Sahara region. It can only mean that they migrated back from Asia carrying all these so called Eurasian genetic mutations along with them.
This paper confirmed the history of the Asiatic black man.
Amazing !
Indeed.
And to you it doesn’t matter the amount of ridiculousness and crazy stuff they write, although it doesn’t add up, you’ll still accept it as long as it is in support of Eurocentric B.S.. There are clear contradictions in the things you post and have posted throughout the years, with the acception, that they all claim a Eurasian back-migration into Africa.
quote: Within the human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) tree, haplogroup L3 encompasses not only many sub-Saharan Africans but also all ancient non-African lineages, and its age therefore provides an upper bound for the dispersal out of Africa. An analysis of 369 complete African L3 sequences places this maximum at ∼70 ka, virtually ruling out a successful exit before 74 ka, the date of the Toba volcanic supereruption in Sumatra.
[...]
The L3 mtDNA pool within Africa suggests a migration from Eastern Africa to Central Africa ∼60 to 35 ka and major migrations in the immediate postglacial again linked to climate. The largest population size increase seen in the L3 data is 3–4 ka in Central Africa, corresponding to Bantu expansions, leading diverse L3 lineages to spread into Eastern and Southern Africa in the last 3–2 ka.
—Pedro Soares et al.
The Expansion of mtDNA Haplogroup L3 within and out of Africa
Molecular Biology and Evolution, Volume 29, Issue 3, 1 March 2012, Pages 915–927
Funny how:
quote:In this study we presented only haplogroups displaying interesting results. A local evolution in Tunisian Berbers was observed in haplogroups L2a, L3*, and L3b.
[...]
Our results demonstrate an ancient local evolution in Tunisia of some African haplogroups (L2a, L3*, and L3b). The most ancient haplogroup is L3*, which would have been introduced from eastern sub-Saharan populations to North Africa about 20,000 years ago.
[...]
Our results also point to a less ancient western African gene flow to Tunisia involving haplogroups L2a and L3b. Thus the sub-Saharan contribution to northern Africa starting from the east would have taken place before the Neolithic. The western African contribution to North Africa should have occurred before the SaharaÂ’s formation (15,000 BP).
--Frigi et al.
Ancient Local Evolution of African mtDNA Haplogroups in Tunisian Berber Populations
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the post the lioness, this adds to my research readily available
Haplogroup L2a1 was found in two specimens from the Southern Levant Pre-Pottery Neolithic B site at Tell Halula, Syria, dating from the period between ca. 9600 and ca. 8000 BP or 7500-6000 BCE - Fernández, E. et al., MtDNA analysis of ancient samples from Castellón (Spain): Diachronic variation and genetic relationships, International Congress Series, vol. 1288 (April 2006), pp. 127-129.
and the male counterpart
“Nonetheless, in 2015 Poznik and Underhill have claimed haplogroup E, arose outside Africa. This model of geographical segregation within the CT clade requires just one continental haplogroup exchange (E to Africa), rather than three (D, C, and F out of Africa). The timing of this putative return to Africa, between the emergence of haplogroup E and its differentiation within Africa by 58 kya, is consistent with proposals, based on non–Y chromosome data, of abundant gene flow between Africa and Arabia 50–80 kya.”
Poznik, G David; et al. (2016). "Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences". Nature Genetics. 48: 593–599.
I think this makes for a very strong case in the future for a black Asiatic people living in the Levant and Turkey/Akkad during antiquity, and adds a virtual genetic mirroring to that of ancient Egyptian Ramesses III E1b1a - Revisiting the harem conspiracy and death of Ramesses III: anthropological, forensic, radiological, and genetic study BMJ 2012; 345 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e8268 (Published 17 December 2012) Cite this as: BMJ 2012;345:e8268
Posts: 5 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Jul 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:As posted elsewhere by Djehuti: According to this paper they're simply stating that it's a possiblity that L3 coalesced in Eurasia before back-migrating to Africa but unless they find evidence of ancestral L3'4 in Asia or/and an archaeological site in Asia Pre-Toba in age that is derived from an African one, then it is just wishful thinking. And of course they propose the same Eurasian origins in regards to a paternal counterpart in this case YAP+ (DE). Though the highest frequency of DE* to date yet is found in Africa.
For the record Joshua, haplogroup L2 is an even older clade than L3 that experts never speculate is Eurasian but absolutely African. Which means its presence in the Levant is due to recent Out-of-African migration. The same can be said about the paternal E clade in mesolithic Levant--E-Z827-- which is a downstream or young descendant form of E-M123. In other words recent migration from Africa.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: So... many of those "true negro" West Africans were Asiatics?
wikipedia, L3
quote:
L3 is common in Northeast Africa, in contrast to others parts of Africa where the haplogroups L1 and L2 represent two thirds of mtDNAs. L3 sublineages are also frequent in the Arabian peninsula.
According to Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), "L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2". L3 is the haplogroup from which all modern humans outside Africa derive.
posted
..so 1/3rd are "Eurasian" including many of the "true negro" west Africans. I never said all non Northeast Africans were L3 or even that most were.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Lioness L3 has the highest frequency in the Kanuri of Nigeria btw... So lets not go on a spin cycle... Don't forget that according to the OP haplogroup E is the paternal counterpart. It's quite clear that the synopsis is "most SSA's Are Eurasian", like Oshun is correctly pointing out.
EDIT..matterfact, the Herero has the highest, then Kanuri... being mindful of the number of samples, it should be noted that in aggregate the annang averages a lower frequency than the KanuriPosts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
The Expansion of mtDNA Haplogroup L3 within and out of Africa.
Pedro Soares, Farida Alshamali, +9 authors Luísa Pereira Published 2012
The L3 mtDNA pool within Africa suggests a migration from Eastern Africa to Central Africa ∼60 to 35 ka and major migrations in the immediate postglacial again linked to climate. The largest population size increase seen in the L3 data is 3-4 ka in Central Africa, corresponding to Bantu expansions, leading diverse L3 lineages to spread into Eastern and Southern Africa in the last 3-2 ka.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: @Lioness L3 has the highest frequency in the Kanuri of Nigeria btw... So lets not go on a spin cycle... Don't forget that according to the OP haplogroup E is the paternal counterpart. It's quite clear that the synopsis is "most SSA's Are Eurasian", like Oshun is correctly pointing out.
And many more people that aren't L3 likely had family that mixed with L3 lineages at several times in history. So Eurasian or Eurasian admixed.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:So... many of those "true negro" West Africans were Asiatics?
If there are "true negros"--then who are the "true blancos"? LOL. Or "true amarillos"--i.e "true yellows".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Supposedly FIRST EUROPEAN portrayed as a black African has undergone a make-over since it was found he was actually an ASIAN IN ORIGIN. He was NOT the first European anyway because the earliest European has been found in Italy and dated 45 000 years.
posted
Oase Man of Romania has gone a transformation since it was found he carried the Asian Haplogroup K and was closely related to Ust Ishim Man of Siberia. He also had about 9% Neanderthal DNA. http://kenniskennis.com/images/site/451.jpg
Mitochondrial DNA Variation in Mauritania and Mali and their Genetic Relationship to Other Western Africa Populations
Table 2) was detected in Mali. Although it shares the HVI222transitionwithotherNorthAfricansequences belonging to haplogroup H (Rando et al. 1998), the RFLP analysis placed it in the basal HV cluster. Surprisingly for a western Africa country, around 42% of the sub-Saharan African sequences were L3 lineages . The predominant haplogroups belonged to L3b (17%), L3e (13%) and L3d (8%), but with different distribution within ethnolinguistc groups. Whereas the Bambara have higher frequencies of L3b (21%) and L3e (10%), L3d (10%) is similar in both samples
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: Old argument simply repackaged. We have been through this before.
Nothing on this tree indicates L3 as an obvious back migrant.
For those of us who're laypeople in genetics: If there had been a back migration what would that look like? I'm not sure what I should be noticing on the first graph either.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dinkum: Supposedly FIRST EUROPEAN portrayed as a black African has undergone a make-over since it was found he was actually an ASIAN IN ORIGIN. He was NOT the first European anyway because the earliest European has been found in Italy and dated 45 000 years.
Why would they need to give him a "make over" because he was Asian? There are Asians who look like light Han Chinese to darker or "negrito" looking.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Oshun. What would support backmigration would be Asian specific subclades of L3 other than M and N. Think of a fictional L3y specific to India and L3z specific to the Middle East or an L3p somewhere in the caucus......with all of them being older or having similar ages to their African Sister lineages:L3a-L3x. Of course this is not a reality. Also think if a lineage like L4 or L6....somewhat sister lineages to L3 In phylogeny having and origin or even an old presence anywhere in EurAsia. They don’t.
It’s basically the same thing we have with Haplogroup E. Good supporting evidence for E being Asian would be if E1a was totally Asian, like East Asian in fact. And E2 was Indian or something and didn’t even exist in Africa.
IF........L3 was Asian it really wouldn’t mean anything as far as phylogeny. It would be like the African origin of F-M89. The Haplogroup E/L3= Asian is probably part of a larger genetic scenario I am sure they are trying to condition us to accepting about Africans. Ancient dna is going to make their world fall apart though. LOL. Wait and see.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^Question... And I feel you're getting tired of newbie questions beyoku. lol. Anyways, why would E1a have to be totally Asian to prove that E is not African in origin? Wouldn't E1b(which certain Eurasian groups do carry) be enough? Or am I looking at it the wrong way.
Also, I think this "conditioning" is that SOME repeat SOME in this field are still uncomfortable about the human origins being in Africa especially those from China and India.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Its hard to assign a haplogroups origins to somewhere where there's no basal/unique clades. Theres no E* lineages that are found only outside of Africa. for example E1a branched off earlier than E1b1... I'd likely branch off closer to the original location of E1. E2 is somewhat exclusively African aswell and so forth.
The same thing is applied to Mt.Haplogroups L0* and Yhap A0* ...both are the most basal Uniparental haps. Where are the daughters found uniquely?
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote: Results: The coalescence ages of all Eurasian (M,N) and African L3 lineages, both around 71 kya, are not significantly different. The oldest M and N Eurasian clades are found in southeastern Asia instead near of Africa as expected by the southern route hypothesis. The split of the Y-chromosome composite DE haplogroup is very similar to the age of mtDNA L3. A Eurasian origin and back migration to Africa has been proposed for the African Y-chromosome haplogroup E. Inside Africa, frequency distributions of maternal L3 and paternal E lineages are positively correlated. This correlation is not fully explained by geographic or ethnic affinities. It seems better to be the result of a joint and global replacement of the old autochthonous male and female African lineages by the new Eurasian incomers.
Can't this also be viewed in reverse? The older L3 is in Africa which means if M and N arrived at the same time, M and N could've been native to Africa, with the oldest versions African version of M and N in Africa replaced over time by younger M or N lineages, or by other African lineages? This paper asks us to assume many older branches native to Africa were replaced, but I don't understand why the direction has to come from "Eurasia?" Why couldn't it have developed in Africa, with the older branches replaced being that of the oldest M and N? Anyway...if they stop to really think about what this is saying, it will not do a Eurocentrist much for his or her agenda even if true lol.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Its hard to assign a haplogroups origins to somewhere where there's no basal/unique clades. Theres no E* lineages that are found only outside of Africa. for example E1a branched off earlier than E1b1... I'd likely branch off closer to the original location of E1. E2 is somewhat exclusively African aswell and so forth.
The same thing is applied to Mt.Haplogroups L0* and Yhap A0* ...both are the most basal Uniparental haps. Where are the daughters found uniquely?
quote:
Of the clades resulting from the four deepest branching events, all but one are exclusive to Africa, and the TMRCA of all non-African lineages (that is, the TMRCA of haplogroups DE and CF) is ~76,000 years (Fig. 1, Supplementary Figs. 18 and 19, Supplementary Table 10, and Supplementary Note). We saw a notable increase in the number of lineages outside Africa ~50–55 kya, perhaps reflecting the geographical expansion and differentiation of Eurasian popula- tions as they settled the vast expanse of these continents. Consistent with previous proposals a parsimonious interpretation of the phylogeny is that the predominant African haplogroup, haplogroup E, arose outside the continent. This model of geographical segregation within the CT clade requires just one continental haplogroup exchange (E to Africa), rather than three (D, C, and F out of Africa). Furthermore, the timing of this putative return to Africa—between the emergence of haplogroup E and its differentiation within Africa by 58 kya—is consistent with proposals, based on non–Y chro- mosome data, of abundant gene flow between Africa and nearby regions of Asia 50–80 kya15.
Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences G David Poznik, Yali Xue 2016
posted
Wow E is "Eurasian" too? That means almost every African is Eurasian or Eurasian mixed. Stop. Abort mission. modern Africans still harbor ancestral genetic groups to everyone else. In this bid to be the "original man" feet are getting shot. Even if modern Africans didn't start on the land mass that is Africa, they are ancestral. Eurocentrism will be deciding soon which foot it wants to shoot off first.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Admixture occurs when genetically differentiated ancestral groups come together and mix, a process which is increasingly regarded as a common feature of human populations across the globe (Patterson et al., 2012; Hellenthal et al., 2014; Busby et al., 2015). Genome-wide analyses of African populations are refining previous models of the continent’s history and its impact on genetic diversity. One insight is the identification of clear, but complex, evidence for the movement of Eurasian ancestry back into the continent as a result of admixture over a variety of timescales (Pagani et al., 2012; Pickrell et al., 2014; Gurdasani et al., 2014; Hodgson et al., 2014a; Llorente et al., 2015). On a broad sample of 18 ethnic groups from eight countries, the African Genome Variation Project (AGVP) (Gurdasani et al., 2014) recreated a previous analysis to identify recent Eurasian admixture, within the last 1.5 thousand years (ky), in the Fulani of West Africa (Tishkoff et al., 2009; Henn et al., 2012) and several East African groups from Kenya; older Eurasian ancestry (2–5 ky) in Ethiopian groups, consistent with previous studies of similar populations (Pagani et al., 2012; Pickrell et al., 2014); and a novel signal of ancient ( > >7.5 ky) Eurasian admixture in the Yoruba of Central West Africa (Gurdasani et al., 2014). Comparisons of contemporary sub-Saharan African populations with the first ancient genome from within Africa, a 4.5 ky Ethiopian individual (Llorente et al., 2015), provide additional support for limited migration of Eurasian ancestry back into East Africa within the last 3000 years.
"The AGVP also found evidence of widespread hunter-gatherer ancestry in African populations, including ancient (9 ky) Khoesan ancestry in the Igbo from Nigeria"
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Wow E is "Eurasian" too? That means almost every African is Eurasian or Eurasian mixed. Stop. Abort mission. modern Africans still harbor ancestral genetic groups to everyone else. In this bid to be the "original man" feet are getting shot. Even if modern Africans didn't start on the land mass that is Africa, they are ancestral. Eurocentrism will be deciding soon which foot it wants to shoot off first.
You are forgetting about the Asiatic Black man and Black Eurocentrism. This is where mankind started In Eurasia and was Black
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Andromeda2025: Admixture occurs when genetically differentiated ancestral groups come together and mix, a process which is increasingly regarded as a common feature of human populations across the globe (Patterson et al., 2012; Hellenthal et al., 2014; Busby et al., 2015). Genome-wide analyses of African populations are refining previous models of the continent’s history and its impact on genetic diversity. One insight is the identification of clear, but complex, evidence for the movement of Eurasian ancestry back into the continent as a result of admixture over a variety of timescales (Pagani et al., 2012; Pickrell et al., 2014; Gurdasani et al., 2014; Hodgson et al., 2014a; Llorente et al., 2015). On a broad sample of 18 ethnic groups from eight countries, the African Genome Variation Project (AGVP) (Gurdasani et al., 2014) recreated a previous analysis to identify recent Eurasian admixture, within the last 1.5 thousand years (ky), in the Fulani of West Africa (Tishkoff et al., 2009; Henn et al., 2012) and several East African groups from Kenya; older Eurasian ancestry (2–5 ky) in Ethiopian groups, consistent with previous studies of similar populations (Pagani et al., 2012; Pickrell et al., 2014); and a novel signal of ancient ( > >7.5 ky) Eurasian admixture in the Yoruba of Central West Africa (Gurdasani et al., 2014). Comparisons of contemporary sub-Saharan African populations with the first ancient genome from within Africa, a 4.5 ky Ethiopian individual (Llorente et al., 2015), provide additional support for limited migration of Eurasian ancestry back into East Africa within the last 3000 years.
"The AGVP also found evidence of widespread hunter-gatherer ancestry in African populations, including ancient (9 ky) Khoesan ancestry in the Igbo from Nigeria"
There is no archaeological evidence of a back migration from Eurasia to Africa. We only have evidence of Africans migrating into Europe carrying their cattle and millets.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Wow E is "Eurasian" too? That means almost every African is Eurasian or Eurasian mixed. Stop. Abort mission. modern Africans still harbor ancestral genetic groups to everyone else. In this bid to be the "original man" feet are getting shot. Even if modern Africans didn't start on the land mass that is Africa, they are ancestral. Eurocentrism will be deciding soon which foot it wants to shoot off first.
You are forgetting about the Asiatic Black man and Black Eurocentrism. This is where mankind started In Eurasia and was Black
They're not saying mankind started in Eurasia, they're saying humans started in Africa, but that most black Africans (or humans in general) are mixed with Eurasian ancestry. How is it "black Eurocentrism" to state that modern blacks carry the ancestral branches more than other groups?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The paper (a preprint and not a peer-reviewed paper, from what I can tell, seems to have several questionable features and seems not to be especially strong or convincing (or to present much in the way of decisive new evidence).
Also, some commenters at forums on the subject have discussed it, and I have across some critiques there which seem interesting (some of which seem to express some similar problems in the paper to those I suspected, better than I could)
One point (among others made at the link below) by the commenter Lank, I also found interesting:
“The correlation between Y-DNA DE and mtDNA L3 in Africa has been obvious for many years. There is no a priori reason to assume Y-DNA DE originates outside Africa, especially when it has roughly the same age as mtDNA L3 (although, if it was part of a back migration, it certainly would have brought some mtDNA L3). There was mtDNA M and even pre-N, as well as a lot of Y-DNA C even in Paleolithic Europe, so the modern concentration of Y-DNA/mtDNA diversity in eastern rather than western parts of Eurasia is not representative of the distribution going back tens of thousands of years.
One other (seemingly important) observation is that the (OOA) ancestry/origin (apparently all or the the vast majority) in modern Eurasians dates from the approximately 70 ka BC wave (the second major wave) of migration of modern humans from Africa, and not from an earlier one dating to 125 ka BC ., as the authors seem to suggest (which instead seems to have left little to no legacy in modern Eurasians overall). Much less (it would seems to me) would said earlier migration (with generally little to no autosomal legacy) be likely to be the source of such major/dominant modern Eurasian uni-parental lineages (as the paper discuses)—particularly when concerning the maternal lineages ancestral to all/nearly all those of living Eurasian populations.
(The earlier migration ca 125 ks bc, before the major one ca. 70 ka BC, having as far as I know, left at most—according to some evidence at least—a small relict approximately 2% of ancestry only in certain isolated groups of southern Eurasians such as Papuans and Aboriginal Australians.)
“But the third paper, by a team led by Mait Metspalu of the Estonian Biocentre in Tartu, makes a different claim. Analyzing 379 new genomes from 125 populations worldwide, the group concludes that at least 2% of the genomes of people from Papua New Guinea comes from an early dispersal of modern humans, who left Africa perhaps 120,000 years ago. Their paper proposes that Homo sapiens left Africa in at least two waves.
Reich questions that result, but says that his and Willerslev’s studies can’t rule out a contribution of only 1% or 2% from an earlier H. sapiens migration. Akey says: “As population geneticists, we could spend the next decade arguing about that 2%, but in practical terms it doesn’t matter.” The most recent migration “explains more than 90% of the ancestry of living people.”
And one source cited by the preprint authors Cabrera et al on the early migration does not appear to support the argument it is claimed to, (as discussed at the forumbiodiversity link below)::
“The authors cite a paper that found DNA of a modern human ghost population in Neanderthals. This Neanderthal-ghost population admixture event was dated to 100ky ago. Cabrera et al use this admixture event as evidence that the ancestors of all living Eurasians must have already been in Eurasia by 100ky ago. I checked what their source (Kuhlwilm et al 2016) actually says, and it has nothing to do with living Eurasians, nor with the Africans who supposedly back migrated to Africa.
If this new OOA model were accurate, we’d expect the ghost human DNA in these Neanderthals to be closely related to living Eurasians and the Africans who supposedly back migrated. That is, the last populations we’d expect to have an affinity with this ghost population’s DNA, is Pygmies and Khoisan. However, the actual paper says that Khoisan are closest to this ghost population, not the supposed ‘backmigrants’ or Eurasians:
“”Because there is fairly weak information in the data to support such inference, the uncertainty in the inferred values is quite high, and different values are obtained in the four runs (lowest in the ‘Chinese’ analysis and highest in the ‘San’ analysis). However, if we take the union of the 95% Bayesian credible intervals for the four runs, we can conclude that the source population likely diverged from present-day humans between 138,000 and 433,000 years ago, which is consistent with divergence either before or slightly after the divergence of the San from other present-day populations.””
Note that this is not a case of a self-defeating citation that just happens to disagree with Cabrera et al. They can’t fix this by removing the citation from the preprint and pretending Kuhlwilm et al just had a different opinion. Cabrera’s whole 120ky OOA migration doesn’t even involve the ancestors of living populations, but some extinct human population that’s older than the Khoisan.
Cabrera et al are going to regret they wrote this. We’re in the aDNA age now. This is not the early 2000s where you can write a specious paper and thrive because there is no aDNA to falsify it conclusively. Cabrera et al are one aDNA sample away from getting debunked with relevant aDNA. They might get debunked with new aDNA before this comes out of preprint.
The best part of this paper is the supplementary data. Looking forward to them making good on their promise to include their trove of unpublished mtDNA and Y-DNA data.”
But one obvious issue of course seems to be a dearth of ancient DNA (to reconstruct earlier genetic distributions before later confounding population movements, etc.), which I certainly hope will be recovered from relevant populations in the fairly near future (an reduce some of the existing ambiguities in the evidence).
Posts: 5 | From: New York, New York, USA | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
To my understanding at least, an African (likely East or perhaps North East African) origin, of CT, DE, and E, seems as likely, or rather more likely than a Eurasian one (from what is now known), if not more so—though still not yet resolved—(and an African—likely Eastern African—origin yet more likely in the case of L3, a greater number of whose major branches are, as far as I know, African). As some have suggested, it seems plausible that the population associated with them may have been native to around East Africa, and related to, but perhaps distinct from, that which (left Africa and) became the OOA population. One group expanding out of Africa ca. 70 ka bc, and the other (group/cluster of related groups) within Africa from around the same time and gradually absorbing much more divergent local African homo sapiens and/or proto-sapiens populations as it expanded out from the East of the continent.
(also in second to last link of first post by me above—at forumbiodiversity—, see thread, including post by poster NonFingo, which I quoted. At last link—at anthrogenica—see posts by Lank)
"Where are those estimates coming from? I was looking at YFull, where the earliest splits within C, F, and D, are all dated to 48 kya. I found it rather remarkable that these Eurasian founding fathers had sons branching off at the same time, unlike African-affiliated E, which bifurcated ~6000 years earlier.
Also, we do find DE(xE) in Africa, and it is found in West Africa, rather than the north/east which has seen evident back-migrations from Eurasia. DE is very close in age to CT, so they should have originated in essentially the same population.
I would agree that the early ancestral nodes of C, F, D, and E most likely originated in the same population. However, IMO there is no reason at present to assume that the descendents of C/F/D/E would have branched off in the same population. Firstly, as previously mentioned, E splits off slightly earlier than the other three. Secondly, from archaeology, we can infer that these lineages branched off during a period when vast areas of the world were being colonized, in the early stages of the Late Stone Age and Upper Paleolithic technological revolutions. So there was a lot of population movement.
I am aware that modern distributions can be deceiving. However, it is possible to work with what we have in order to judge probabilities, based on the present evidence. Considering the presence of DE* in Africa, which is close in age not only to its CT ancestor, but also to mtDNA L3, and the deviant evolutionary history of E (if YFull is to be trusted), I believe an African origin is the most parsimonious scenario. It is not difficult to imagine that DE, which originated shortly after CT, may have originated in Africa just prior to OOA, while its CF sibling, which was still in its very earliest stages, could easily have gone extinct in Africa. I should add that mtDNA L3 is the likely female counterpart of CT, is of a similar age, and appears even more clearly African (East African to be more specific) based on the modern distribution.
Of course, as always, ancient DNA is the only way to get a definitive answer. I am just somewhat puzzled by the fact that some can be so confident in a Eurasian origin of Y-DNA E, when a strong case exists for an African origin, although it could go either way in the end since this was perhaps our most mobile period as a species."
Posts: 5 | From: New York, New York, USA | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
Please use the quote function to separate your own commentary from text you're quoting. Makes your posts easier to read.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Swenet Sorry about that. I wasn't sure how to use it. But I will in the future.
Posts: 5 | From: New York, New York, USA | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
The 'quote' tag is the one you're looking for. If you want to add extra emphasis, you can also use the 'qb' tag. If you look closely at how the tags are used in that link, you'll know how to apply it in your own posts.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, we have L3 and E going back to Asia. This means the African is Asian.
quote: "More generally, it has often been suggested that there is an extant tropical belt of human populations that anatomically resemble sub-Saharan Africans (with 'racial' features such as very dark skin, curly hair and so on). They include some southern Indians, the Andamese, the so-called Negritos of the Phillipines (Aeta/Agta) and the Malay Penisula (Semang), Papuans and Aboriginal Australians. These people, it as suggested, might be the survivors of a 'southern coastal route' from the Horn of Africa along the tropical coastline through to Southeast Asia and Australia (Nei and Roychoudhury 1992). The bulk of EUrasian populations were then suggested to be the survivors if a 'northern route': out of Egypt into the 'Levantine corridor', and thence into both Europe and Asia (Lahr 1996).'"
-- Hans-Jürgen Bandelt et. 2006. EDS. Human Mitochondrial DNA and the Evolution of Homo sapiens. p. 234
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic