quote: Y-chromosome DNA haplotypes in North African populations Human Biology, Jun 2000 by Lucotte, Gerard, Aouizerate, Annie, Berriche, Sala
Abstract The frequency distribution of Y-chromosome haplotypes at DNA polymorphism p49/TaqI was studied in a sample of 505 North Africans from Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. A particulary high frequency (55.0%) of Y-haplotype 5 (A2,CO,DO,F1,11 ) was observed in these populations, with a relative predominance in those of Berber origin. Examination of the relative frequencies of other haplotypes in these populations, mainly haplotype 4 (the "African" haplotype), haplotype 15 (the "European" haplotype), and haplotypes 7 and 8 (the "Near-East" haplotypes), permit useful comparisons with neighboring peoples living in sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, and the Near East.
Because they relate to paternal ancestry, variations in DNA sequences that are specific to the nonrecombinant part of the human Y chromosome are particularly interesting from an evolutionary point of view. The probes 49f and 49a (locus DYSI ), located at Yq.11.2 (Quack et al. 1988), are able to identify 18 genomic TaqI fragments (named alphabetically, A-R), most of them being male specific. Among these the A, B, C, D, E, and I fragments can be either present or absent in males, or show variations in size (Lucotte and Ngo 1985). In the first group studied (Ngo et al. 1986), which included 50 Caucasians, 15 Africans, and 10 Asians living in Paris, 16 combinations of these DNA polymorphisms, or haplotypes (numbered 1-16), were detected. The present study examines haplotype frequencies in populations of North Africa.
In pre-Neolithic times (about 7000-3000 BP) the Mediterranean and Red Sea coasts of North Africa were populated by white, Hamite-speaking peoples, who have come to be called Berbers and Egyptians. In Pharaonic Africa (3000 years BP) the population had suffered drastic changes, with agricultural Egypt having 1 million people. Climatic changes had dried northern Africa by around 8000-4000 years BP; the forest line had retreated towards the Equator from about the 16th parallel by 3000 years BP, and the Sahara had assumed the characteristics it has today. Heavy migrations towards the North sent people to the Mediterranean coast, the Iberian peninsula, and the Canary islands.
posted
Read this: Discussion link... and you'll get some idea of what's going on in that Lucotte et al. study.
For those, who might find it too much work to open a link:
From what I can tell, Lucotte et al. don't run their haplotypes for binary markers in that 2000 study, but given that Lucotte et al. 2006 proclaimed to have used the same sequencing methods used by Lucotte et al. in earler studies, and DNA polymerase chain reaction used by Underhill et al. to test for binary markers M81 and M78, presumably including samples already tested by Lucotte et al. in previous studies, they were able to verify that Lucotte et al.'s haplotype V, deemed to be a 'characteristic Berber haplotype' and ' of predominantly Berber origin' were mainly M81 chromosomes, after having further discerned haplotype V into at least two discernable groups: Vb and Va, using Gonçalves et al.'s PCR method. All the Moroccan bearers of the sub-group Vb, turned out to be M81 carriers, including *all* the 'Berber' designated speakers of this bunch and 21 of the 59 'Arab' designated North Africans; the remaining 38 'Arab' designated north African bearers of the sub-group Va either tested positive for M78 or they didn't. To be specific, 31 of the 38 Arabic speaking North African bearers of haplotype V [sub-group Va] tested positive for M78, while the rest didn't. This results confirm the sub-group Vb to be M81, and Va to be partly M78. Going by this, the majority of what Lucotte et al. refer to as a 'characteristic Berber haplotype', are M81 chromosomes.
On the question of North African ethnic designations of "Arab" vs. "Berber" used by the authors:
They are probably going by self-ethnic identifications of the contributors of the samples in question. Apparently much of north African populations are really 'Arabized' populations, not original ethnic Arabs. However, as I've noted in my last post prior to the last one, there is something to be discerned here:
*All* subgroup Vb individuals are either "Berber" identified Tamazight individuals [47 individuals] or what appears to be "Arabized" Tamazight individuals [21 individuals], testing positive for E-M81, whereas...
out of the 38 remaining "Arabic" identified individuals who tested positive for the subgroup Va, 31 turned out to be positive for E-M78. The remaining 7 individuals of this 38 "Arabic" identified individuals didn't test positive for either E-M81 or E-M78. Those individuals *could* [but not necessarily] possibly turn out positive for a non-M78 and non-M81 marker like "R1a"; however, **if** J happens to have the same combination of RFLPs , then it could well be a possible candidate here, as it is the next frequent paternal line which isn't M35 derived, but still quite less frequent than the aboriginal E-M81 marker. Other non-M81 and non-M78 E-M35 [E3b] derived lineages could just as well still be a candidate.
Four Morroccan "Berber" individuals out of the 51 tested, appear to be unaccounted for here. They probably fell into the Va subgroup, and likely didn't test positive for either E-M81 or E-M78. These individuals could just as well test positive for the aforementioned non-M78 and non-M81 possible candidates.
In any case, non-M81 and non-M78 lineages appear to be in the minority. The majority of Morrocan "Berbers" are M81, while the majority of the Morrocan "Arabs" are largely of subgroup Va E-M78 lineage [31 individuals], but carry a significant amount of subgroup Vb E-M81 [21 individuals]. So clearly, the "Berber" group, while they share lineages [largely E-M81] with their Morrocan "Arab" counterparts, can clearly be discerned from the said "Arab" counterparts, in that the later seems to have relatively more M78 lineages, as well as relatively more non-M81 subgroup Va lineage [7 individuals] than their "Berber" identified counterparts [possibly the unaccounted for 4 "Berber" individuals].
Additionally:
We also know that the Lucotte et al. data cited by Keita also shows V haplotypes in Egypt, along with XI haplotypes. V haplotype in Egypt has a gradient that increases as one moves from south to north, while that of XI is the opposite, with a gradient increasing as one moves from north to south. So in the Egyptian context, does this mean that V is still suggestive of E-M81 chromosomes and/or E-M78? Who knows; but both M81 and M78 are certainly attested to in Egypt, albeit with M78 predominating. What about XI? Could that be suggestive of an M78 derivative? Plausible, given its high frequencies in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly east Africa. One has to ascertain this plausibility. **To be certain, one would have to be familiar with the specific binary markers that Lucotte et al. would have searched [usually done, once a restrictive digest [by restrictive enzyme] is undertaken to cut DNA into fragments] and amplified [PCR] for haplotype V in the 2001, the 2000 study above and their 2003 study cited by Keita, to see if they continued to be in the same exact contexts or if variant binary markers were used in respective studies. As noted in the linked discussion, in Lucotte et al.'s case for the 2000 study above, this doesn't appear to be the case. However, Lucotte et al. in 2006 have addressed this issue, reassuring us with relatively more precision, what specific V haplogroups were involved in Lucotte et al.'s several earlier studies.
posted
I am looking at the following bunch of pseudo scientific dribble and whether this was indeed the conclusion of the study or studies or ad lib comments made for the purposes of another article:
quote: In pre-Neolithic times (about 7000-3000 BP) the Mediterranean and Red Sea coasts of North Africa were populated by white, Hamite-speaking peoples, who have come to be called Berbers and Egyptians.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I am looking at the following bunch of pseudo scientific dribble and whether this was indeed the conclusion of the study or studies or ad lib comments made for the purposes of another article:
quote: In pre-Neolithic times (about 7000-3000 BP) the Mediterranean and Red Sea coasts of North Africa were populated by white, Hamite-speaking peoples, who have come to be called Berbers and Egyptians.
Yeah I noticed that too. If that was actually stated within the study.......whoa. "hamite" speaking? Not only is that not a real language group, they apparently make no cover-up as to their intentions to ressurrect the Hamitic hypothesis.
Posts: 426 | From: Cali-for-nia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL Indeed at the "white Hamite speaking" nonsense.
We all know that "Hamite" is derived from the Bible as the progeny or people of Ham the progenitor of black Africans according to Hebrew myth.
How is it all of a sudden they are 'white'??
Also he said "speaking" as in language. Berber and Egyptian languages belong to the Afrasian group which also includes Cushitic, Chadic, and Omotic all spoken by black Africans.
As usual, one must scientifically analyze the use of certain terms and phrases tossed around in a supposedly scientific study.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^ The context of the study is - attempt to -explain away- the affinity between current Nile Valley Africans of Upper Egypt and Lower Sudan.
This is why the *hamite* ruse is invoked. Really it's what the hamite-ruse is for.
But if you look past the authors offensive apologetics [which are meant precisely to -dominate and so obsure - the data], we find powerful evidence that Ancient Egypt was a Native African civilisation - and *not* the product of waundering mythological hamites from the Eurasia.
The key player in this is *haplotype V*.
This is the haplotype that the study assigns to *arabs* [proxy for white hamite].
However this haplotype is actually what we know know of as E3b[2].
It is African in origin, and actually and virtually non existant in Lavantines and Asiatic-Arabs.
So take the time the read the assessment of Dr. Keita.
That should be the focus of discussion on this study and not *white hamites* - making that the focus plays into the distraction, rather than playing past it.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Itsn't there a school of thought that believes that E3b arose in Somalia and then spread to the arabian penninsula and then back migrated into Africa (essentially Arabs)? I have heard the Berbers being described as white so the qualification suggests that there are White, Black and Brown Hamites (which is true of the Berbers as well). Since evolution allows for the E3b clade to so mutate I am not sure what the issue is.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osiriun: [QB] Itsn't there a school of thought that believes that E3b arose in Somalia and then spread to the arabian penninsula and then back migrated into Africa (essentially Arabs)?
Well sure, in the sense that E3b is African, that Africans bearing E3b spread into Arabia and Europe.
And European bearing E3b have migrated back into Africa - specifically Arabs sense Islamic times, and Greeks sense Ptolemiac times.
quote: I have heard the Berbers being described as white so the qualification suggests that there are White, Black and Brown Hamites
There is no such thing as 'hamites', the term is outdated and has no meaning in modern linguistics, nor ethnology.
quote:I am not sure what the issue is
^ The issue is that Asiatic Arabs - DO NOT HAVE - the haplotypes IV, V, or XII which correspond in this study to E3a, E3b1 and E3b2.
These are all native African haplotypes which give testiment to the prodominently native nature of Nile Valley populations.
Only in the delta region of the Nile Valley do non African haplotypes become preomdinent.
The appellation ‘‘Arabic’’ for V is therefore misleading, because it suggests an origin external to Africa that is not supported by the evidence. In fact, this variant was called African by Lucotte et al. (1993, p. 839; 1996, p. 469), as well as ‘‘Berberian’’ (Lucotte et al., 2001, p. 887). Significantly, it was convincingly argued by these same researchers and their associates that because the Falasha (the ‘‘black Jews’’ of Ethiopia) have such a high frequency of V and XI and none (yet found) of VII and VIII, this shows them to be ‘‘clearly of African origin’’ and to have adopted Judaism (Lucotte and Mercier, 2003b, p. 669; Lucotte and Smets, 1999). This is in contrast to their being the descendants of males from immigrant Near Eastern Jewish communities. Given these findings, it is more accurate to call V ‘‘Horn-supra-Saharan African’’ (or simply African), not ‘‘Arabic;’’ it is indigenous to AfricaPosts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is an excellent explanation rasol,I once read Keita's paper (and noted the fact it has completely destroyed any premises of an asiatic or white egypt through genetics)
But what I did not understand was the relation between haplotype V with E3a, E3b etc...
Was not clear on the naming..Now issues are more clear!
Posts: 96 | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:There is no such thing as 'hamites', the term is outdated and has no meaning in modern linguistics, nor ethnology.
Jews and modern Arabs are still called Semites and are part of the same clade. Hamite by inference refers to the PN2 clade. Since J2 clade Jews and Arabs do not look all alike I do not see why PN2 clade Hamites need to as well. Since Semite is not considered outdated I don't see why Hamite is considered outdated it just needs a broader definition to be more accurate such as including E3a. If the term Hamite was broaden to include more African groups don't you think it would make it a much more valid term?
quote:^ The issue is that Asiatic Arabs - DO NOT HAVE - the haplotypes IV, V, or XII which correspond in this study to E3a, E3b1 and E3b2.
Modern day Asiatic Arabs do not have these haplotypes in any high frequency. That does not mean that these haplotypes did not exist in the Levant at one time and due to population replacement (such as the Natufians replaced by the J2 clade) are now extinct. Is that not a possibility that the PN2 clade made it way through the Arabian peninsula and spread into Western Eurasia but it presence along this migration path was wiped out due to disease, war or natural selection pressures?
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The problem here is confusion stemming from the mixture of scientific facts with mythological/religous legends.
The story of Noah's three sons are legends. As all legends they are based on some truth, but we cannot take whole legend to be complete truth. The story merely served to explain the existence of certain populations after the cataclysmic events of the flood. 'Hamites' represented black Africans, Japhethites represented white Europeans, and Shemites represented some say 'brown' Asiatic peoples of Southwest Asia. All named after eponymous forefathers who were sons of Noah who trace descent from Adam, the first man.
Hamite was once used in its original definition to mean black Africans, but due to racism and its denial of African civilizations like Egypt being attributed to native Africans, white scholars used the Biblical myth to say that that Hamites of the Bible were different from indigenous (true negro) Africans and invaded Africa to start civilizations. All of this of course has been refuted.
Today, science via genetics shows that Egyptians and other Biblical Hamites are truly indigenous to Africa and did not have Eurasian origins. Science has also established that humans originated in Africa and black Africans were the first populations who spawned populations outside of Africa etc. Making Biblical 'Hamites' as the original people.
Semites is used today in linguistics to describe language. Semitic is a language group that is sister to Egyptian, Berber, Chadic, Omotic etc.-- Afrasian language phylum which also originated in Africa.
Southwest Asia-- Arabia and the Levant which lies right next to Africa has been both the entry point for populations exiting Africa from first human migrations, to the meeting point with Eurasians and Africans.
Genetics confirms that PN2 clade characterizes Africans as much as J and other F derived haplotypes represent Eurasians.
Berber is a language originating in Africa and spoken solely in Africa. Its first speakers in ancient times were black and its speakers today having heterogenous looks and lineages due to recent admixture. The main Berber paternal lineage is E3b2.
PN2 lineages like E3b1 in the Levant and in Arabia can only be explained through African admixture.
But lastly you cannot tell what lineage a person has due to appearance. Modern day Jews range from SW asian Levantine and Yemeni to European German and Spanish to African Ethiopian and Lemba etc. Jew is not haplotype but an ethnic, specifically religious group. 'Arab' is an ethnic type based on culture but is also heterogeneous as Arabs consist of different groups.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Modern day Asiatic Arabs do not have these haplotypes in any high frequency.
Nor do they have ancestral haplotypes, all of which originate in Africa.
quote: That does not mean that these haplotypes did not exist in the Levant at one time and due to population replacement
That's a supposition and not a form of evidence.
For example, one could suppose that Arabic language originates in Japan and existed their at one time, until Japans Arabs were -replaced-.
Impossible to -disprove- as most false theories are.
But what is the evidence in it's favor? There is none.
Arabs migrated to Africa at a known point in time - 7th century AD.
E3b2 is Neolithic and African in origin.
It is oldest in Egypt, youngest in Maghreb and absent east of the Nile.
In the Maghreb it is much more frequent among Berber rather than Afro-Arabs.
Meanwhile Asiatic-Arabs don't have it at all.... so it is clear that Arabs did not bring this African lineage into Africa.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:But what is the evidence in it's favor? There is none.
How did E3b get into Europe? Likely travelled through the Levant. Besides, it seems likely that the Natufian farmers were E3b or at least PN2. What happened to the Natufian farmers? Whatever happened to them explains the missing connection.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What are you talking about? The PN2 clade is E* and all lineages that arose from it. E3b is a downstream descendant of PN2.
The Natufians are a culture whose physical remains show African features. Their culture existed in the southern Levant during the Neolithic which is the exact same time that E3b1 in that area is dated to.
As to exact entry in Europe, I too am curious about this. It either spread from the Levant to coastal Anatolia then to Greece, or it spread directly from Egypt into the Mediterranean and the various Aegean islands until it reached mainland Greece. Or both.
Can Evergreen or anyone answer this?
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where is the genetic trail of the Natufian farmers? I thought E3b3 arose later after mutation?
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:osiroun wrote: Since J2 clade Jews and Arabs do not look all alike I do not see...
It's because arabs are relativly quite harmonically adapted to their environment while Ashkenazi jews seem to be physically ill-equiped to such a hot climate.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
Contrasting patterns of Y chromosome variation in Ashkenazi Jewish and host non-Jewish European populations Hum Genet (2004) 114 : 354–365 DOI 10.1007/s00439-003-1073-7 Received: 31 July 2003 / Accepted: 29 November 2003 / Published online: 22 January 2004
quote:Agreed but the primary clade of E3b -still- found in the Levant and Arabia is E3b3, not E3b2, E3b1, or E3a which the Leucote study is dicussing.
quote: E3b1 to E3b1 alpha.
Okay, thanks for refining my question. So, again, what happened to E3b1 in the Levant since we know it must have been there due to the Natufian farmers that migrated through that area and developed several citadels. I thought E3b3 arose from E3b1 since I presumed that it followed that E3b in Europe was due to the Natufian farmers that brought agriculture to that region of the world? Also, would not the Afroasiatic language family have been spread due to the Natufians but seemingly only the maternal side genetically survived? Basically the opposite of what happended in NW Africa where the paternal haplogroups are predominantly African but the maternal side is predominantly non-African? The missing natufian genetic markers in the Levant poses an interesting dilemma.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:osiroun wrote: Since J2 clade Jews and Arabs do not look all alike I do not see...
It's because arabs are relativly quite harmonically adapted to their environment while Ashkenazi jews seem to be physically ill-equiped to such a hot climate.
Ashkenazi Jews are European converts that likely intermarried with Jews of middle Eastern origins. I don't think the Yemeni Jews have gone through so much intermarriage.
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: it is E3b also the Y chromosome of ancient Iberians?
Ancient Iberians? What do you mean by ancient and what study are you referring to?
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: The missing natufian genetic markers in the Levant poses an interesting dilemma.
^ False delimma since there are no 'missing' Natufian markers. If E3b1 and E3b3 spread from Africa to SouthWest Asia and Europe in the Neolithic, and those markers are still found in these areas then nothing is missing.
What we have denoted is that E3b3 is more common in SouthWest Asia and E3b1 alpha is more common in Europe.
If the Levantine had mostly E3b1 but not E3b3 [opposite of what is in fact the case] the situation would be the same... and you would pose E3b3 as a -missing- natufian marker, instad of E3b1.
The only way you can pose missing -natufian- marker is by identifying a specific population that is direct descendant of Natufian and from which you would have the reasonable expectation of a very similar genetic profile.
But there is no single modern population that can relate 'natufian'.
Is natufian modern Palestinian or Israeli Jews?
Arabs from Yemen?
Greeks?
All have different genetic profiles, and different E3b frequencies.
What is common is the African origin and neolithic deriviation.
There is no missing natufian marker.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: The missing natufian genetic markers in the Levant poses an interesting dilemma.
^ False delimma since there are no 'missing' Natufian markers. If E3b1 and E3b3 spread from Africa to SouthWest Asia and Europe in the Neolithic, and those markers are still found in these areas then nothing is missing.
What we have denoted is that E3b3 is more common in SouthWest Asia and E3b1 alpha is more common in Europe.
If the Levantine had mostly E3b1 but not E3b3 [opposite of what is in fact the case] the situation would be the same... and you would pose E3b3 as a -missing- natufian marker, instad of E3b1.
The only way you can pose missing -natufian- marker is by identifying a specific population that is direct descendant of Natufian and from which you would have the reasonable expectation of a very similar genetic profile.
But there is no single modern population that can relate 'natufian'.
Is natufian modern Palestinian or Israeli Jews?
Arabs from Yemen?
Greeks?
All have different genetic profiles, and different E3b frequencies.
What is common is the African origin and neolithic deriviation.
There is no missing natufian marker.
Simple QUESTION - who are the descendents of the Natufians in the Levant? If there are none then what happened to them? I guess this is my question from the beginning. Also, I have never heard of a genetic study that states what the Natufians were. Please forward reference.
Thanks
Posts: 154 | From: Seattle Washington | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: it is E3b also the Y chromosome of ancient Iberians?
Ancient Iberians? What do you mean by ancient and what study are you referring to?
the first inhabitants of Spain, the iberians, who came before the celts,were they of E3b haplotype, or where they from another one? I mean these iberians
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: [QUOTE]the first inhabitants of Spain, the iberians, who came before the celts,were they of E3b haplotype, or where they from another one?
Evergreen Writes:
They likely had a number of different y-chromosome lineages. E3b* derivatives were likely included in this mix as the neolithic spread from the Balkans to Western Europe.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Don't forget that while J and E3b may be found among European Jews, the predominant lineages are R1a or R1b. Which is not surprising considering that not only were there only a small number of Jews who settled Europe from Israel, but there were also European converts to Judaism. Despite Ashkenazi protests that their faith does not include any pressure to convert others, many Europeans nontheless indeed converted to Judaism as early as the Roman Period. The same can be said with Jewish populations native to North Africa (Berber groups like the Aures) and East Africa (Ethiopian groups like the Falasha).
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Don't forget that while J and E3b may be found among European Jews, the predominant lineages are R1a or R1b. Which is not surprising considering that not only were there only a small number of Jews who settled Europe from Israel, but there were also European converts to Judaism. Despite Ashkenazi protests that their faith does not include any pressure to convert others, many Europeans nontheless indeed converted to Judaism as early as the Roman Period. The same can be said with Jewish populations native to North Africa (Berber groups like the Aures) and East Africa (Ethiopian groups like the Falasha).
quote: The missing natufian genetic markers in the Levant poses an interesting dilemma.
^ False delimma since there are no 'missing' Natufian markers. If E3b1 and E3b3 spread from Africa to SouthWest Asia and Europe in the Neolithic, and those markers are still found in these areas then nothing is missing.
What we have denoted is that E3b3 is more common in SouthWest Asia and E3b1 alpha is more common in Europe.
If the Levantine had mostly E3b1 but not E3b3 [opposite of what is in fact the case] the situation would be the same... and you would pose E3b3 as a -missing- natufian marker, instad of E3b1.
The only way you can pose missing -natufian- marker is by identifying a specific population that is direct descendant of Natufian and from which you would have the reasonable expectation of a very similar genetic profile.
But there is no single modern population that can relate 'natufian'.
Is natufian modern Palestinian or Israeli Jews?
Arabs from Yemen?
Greeks?
All have different genetic profiles, and different E3b frequencies.
What is common is the African origin and neolithic deriviation.
There is no missing natufian marker.
Simple QUESTION - who are the descendents of the Natufians in the Levant? If there are none then what happened to them? I guess this is my question from the beginning. Also, I have never heard of a genetic study that states what the Natufians were. Please forward reference.
Thanks
This is because no one up to now has extracted genetic material from a Natufian skeleton so we don't know what genes they carried. Any discussion of their DNA is pure conjecture.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QUOTE]This is because no one up to now has extracted genetic material from a Natufian skeleton so we don't know what genes they carried. Any discussion of their DNA is pure conjecture.
quote:Originally posted by Rasol: [QUOTE]^ Dr. Winters. Respectfully please at least try to listen to those of us who are trying to be of assistance with genetics.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Where did you get that from? E3b is the second most prevalent haplogroup in the worldwide Jewish population. J is the most prevalent.
If I'm downlevel, beam me up.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Don't forget that while J and E3b may be found among European Jews, the predominant lineages are R1a or R1b.
I think what he is getting at is that most European Jews are of European extraction and not of Levantine Jewish extraction (J,E3B) as characterized by the high frequencey of R1a and R1b found amongst the different European Jews.
Posts: 24 | From: New York | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Indeed. My statement was about European Jews and not Jews worldwide in general.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic