posted
I'm having coherency issues with this post. Each piece, however accurate or not, doesn't tie into the rest to make a corelated whole so please correct me if I misconstrue you.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Sensitive detection of chromosomal segments of distinct ancestry in admixed populations. Price AL, Tandon A, Patterson N, Barnes KC, Rafaels N, Ruczinski I, Beaty TH, Mathias R, Reich D, Myers S.
Yes, Price places his beginning of admixture for Mzab no later than that year.
quote: wikipedia:
Mozabite people are characterized by a very high level of North African haplogroups E1b1b1b (M81) (86%) and U6 (28%).
History
According to tradition the Ibadites, after their overthrow at Tiaret (Central Algeria) by the Fatimites, they took refuge during the 10th century in the country to the southwest of Ouargla (Southern Algeria), where they founded an independent state.
In 1012, owing to further persecutions, they fled to their present location (Northern Algeria) where they long remained invulnerable.
Mzab is easy to locate by its capital Ghardaia. Ouargla is southeast of Ghardaia. That's northern Algeria. Getting to south Algeria from Wargla requires movement through Tuat central Algeria. Blind cut n paste without checking the facts first is for debate not serious discussion to round out knowledge.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Ibāḍī movement, Ibadism or Ibāḍiyya (Arabic: الاباضية al-Ibāḍiyyah) is a form of Islam distinct from the Sunni and Shī'ah denominations. It is the dominant form of Islam in Oman and Zanzibar. Ibāḑīs can also be found in Algeria, Tunisia, East Africa as well as Libya.
Believed to be an off-shoot of one of the earliest schools, the Khawārij, it is said to have been founded 60 years after the death of the prophet Muḥammad.
Kharijites
Kharijites (Arabic: خوارج Khawārij, literally "those who went out";[singular, Khārijī ) is a general term embracing various Muslims who, while initially supporting the authority of the final Rashidun Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib, the son-in-law and cousin of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, then later rejected his leadership. They first emerged in the late 7th century, concentrated in today's southern Iraq, and are distinct from Sunni Muslims and Shiʿa Muslims They form a significant part of the population of Oman (where they first settled in 686), and there are smaller concentrations of them in the M'zab of Algeria, Jerba in Tunisia, Jebel Nafusa in Libya, and Zanzibar.
basic questions for Tukuler et al
What I write and post here are my own analyses and interpretations independent of what anybody contributes and requires no meshing or dove tailing with others' opinions. So forget trying to make me fit in with some presumed group-think or alliance. With that in mind, some ESers post valid facts and sensible original thought useful to me and the world.
quote: 1) Big issue here. Ibadi are Kharijites. Kharijites were Iraqi. Ibadi seem to have some Southern Iraq roots and proably Yemne/Oman additions after settling there.Most accounts say that Mozabites are Ibadi who settled to M'zab Algeria 11th century AD.
Mzabi are an ethnic group or a geographic population found in Mzab. Ibadites are a religious sect as are Kharijites. In this case the followers' ethnicity is unrelated to the founders of the religious sects.
quote:Are Mozbites primarily 11th century non-Africans who settled in Algeria in the 11th century?
Or are the primarily a 78% ancestry European-related population from 787 BC ???
Nobody lived in the Mzab before Islam? No comment or appraisal necessary, but ...
The Mzab is a region in northern Algeria in the highlands south of the Ouled Nail part of the Saharan Atlas range around Ghardaia roughly above the word Algeria on this map.
What's currently Mzab was known to Ptolemy c.150 CE as his Usargala mountains. Its people were the Subupores with Natembes to their north and west, MelanoGaetuli further west and Nigritae Ethiops immediately to their south.
This is closest in time to Price's 8 Mzabi's with "a maximum likelihood estimate of 75 generations for the admixture event" which he sees as ongoing from at least ~800 BCE to today still ongoing.
quote: Or are the primarily a 78% ancestry European-related population from 787 BC ???
Again, Price cleary states "the Mozabite [] are not perfectly modeled as a linear combination of European and African ancestry." This means other variables are ignored because he's specifically looking into sub-Saharan Africa related and Europe-related components. Between those two and those two only do the 22% and 78% estimates apply. We don't know what percent of the whole the target represents.
quote:2) If they are primarily a 78% ancestry European-related population from 787 BC ??? What are they Iberians? What European-related population ? If this is the case Ibadi who came there were small in number and merely introduced Ibadi Islam culture to a 78% ancestry European-related population
3) If the Mozabites are a people who lived in Algeria 2,800 year ago, 787 BC and they are a 78% European-related population if they are E1b1b1b (M81) (86%) and U6 (28%) what does that say about them ??
In Europe, E-M81 is found everywhere but mostly in the Iberian Peninsula,
E-M81 has no microsatellite diversity in South Europe, so it came from NW Africa.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:frequency from 100% in some isolated Berber populations to approximately 10% to the east of this range in Egypt.[1][6][7] Because of its prevalence among these groups and also others such as Mozabite, Middle Atlas, Kabyle and other Berber groups, it is sometimes referred to as a genetic "Berber marker". Pereira et al. (2010) report high levels among Tuareg in two Saharan populations - 77.8% near Gorom-Gorom, in Burkina Faso, and 81.8% from Gosi in Mali. There was a much lower frequency of 11.1% in the vicinity of Tanut in the Republic of Niger.
E-M81 is found at 41% in some Cantabrians, < 4% sporadic in South Europeans, 3-9% in some Anatolians, 9% in Tamasheq of Tanout Niger and 30% in Tamasheq in Gossi Mali both in the Sahel, and in Sudan at 5% ancestry/ethnic group undisclosed.
quote:E-M81 is the most common Y-chromosome haplogroup in the Maghreb, dominated by its subclade E-M183. It is thought to have originated in the area of North Africa 5,600 years ago Cruciani et al. (2004) Arredi et al. (2004)
Because of its ubiquity and frequency in North Africa declining eastward E-M81 is called a "Berber" marker. It's origin is * 2600-4300 BCE (from Cruciano) * 4300-8900 BCE (from Semino) * _800-6200 BCE (from Arredi) and "Berber" is Afrasian's latest language family.
quote:We show that the Mozabite have inherited roughly 78% ancestry from a European-related population {Price) ^^^^ how can it be ? Unless you thimk M81 originated in Iberia and then later had a higher frequency in the Maghreb
E-M81 has no microsatellite diversity in South Europe, so it came from NW Africa.
The HAPMAP data includes much much more than nrY polymorphisms. It also factors in mtDNA X chromosomes and the 22 other non-sex or autosomal chromosomes. That's the 2 uniparental SNPs plus all the sex chromosomes' recombinant positions too and the multitude of autosome SNPs. See this page at HAPMAP. As Price notes in his materials and methods section HapMap provides phased haplotypes from the CEU (N&W European descendents in Utah), YRI (Yoruba) and JPT+CHB (Tokyo+Beijing Han) populations genotyped at over 3 million markers.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad you addressed these details. The wikipedia might not have been accurate in all points but it is a starting point for a historical sketch on how history relates or doesn't relate to this genetic information.
My basic question is
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
xxyman thinks they did not. I tend to think they did come from outside of Africa and then became isolated genetically over time but far prior to Islam. Based on your above comments, correct me if I'm wrong, your opinion is that you are uncertain as to the answer to this question.
Posts: 43035 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Listen bro(s)..if you can't interpret this NJ dend you shouldn't be involved in the discussion. There is common sense/logic and then there is BS pushed out by EuroCentrics.
Africans(ALL OF THEM are at the bottom of the tree) - Europeans are at the top(no pun intended). The thickest branch is ...77%.
Just like all deluded Europeans your rational is all screwed up. What about the Basque, they are just like the Mazabites in relation to Berber Africans. Are they(Basque) not Europeans? LOL!!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also keep in mind, the study I am referencing is based upon STRs NOT SNPs. STRs are still the current standard used by ALL international law enforcement authorities to identify ..point of origin...ie "race"...not right choice of words..but to make a point. CODIS uses 13 STRs but some groups uses 1O STRs. The "basic" STRs used in this study pretty standard.
SNPs are a long way off from being used....why?...because of shady manipulation. There are over 13 million SNPs. Those to be used for geographic identification are still be debated.
-------------------- 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:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] Your crew got jokes.
Listen bro(s)..if you can't interpret this NJ dend you shouldn't be involved in the discussion. There is common sense/logic and then there is BS pushed out by EuroCentrics.
Africans(ALL OF THEM are at the bottom of the tree) - Europeans are at the top(no pun intended). The thickest branch is ...77%.
I'm am not clear on if you are on the same page as Tukuler or not.
In fact your position could be construed as more Eurocentric than what I have said. The tradiional Afrocentric position is that berbers, the ones who are lighter, for example Kabyles and many Mozabites, are mainly descended from white slaves of the Barbary pirates and other non African migrations, Romans etc. You however believe that these berbers some who look a large part relativley light skinned and a large part "Caucasian" looking are indigenous Africans. The psoition is not exactly Eurocentric or Afrocentric. If it has to be a centric it could be Caucocentric
I am not even sure how the Africentric/Eurocentic paradigms apply to these to artcles. So stop fronting skully
The obvious question is
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
your position is clear Tukuler's is not
Posts: 43035 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok! I am not a historian... . so. . . I will let others speak their point of view. I rely on scientific facts FIRST . . . then what the history books say.
BTW- I am not saying there is absolutely no European influence in the Berbers. More female then male. Looking at the table I cited earlier or in another thread. R-M269 is less than 2% present in Berber groups.
In fact these Euros are so illogical they are really idiotic. Aframs are ...what...10% European ie R-M269. It follows they should be classifed as Caucasians..He! He!
That means Aframs are genetically closer to Europeans than Berbers. Right?! Simple logic...no pictures needed.
-------------------- 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 |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
I'm glad you addressed these details. The wikipedia might not have been accurate in all points but it is a starting point for a historical sketch on how history relates or doesn't relate to this genetic information.
Wiki is a good start with leads to actual competent recognized sources. Next step? Read up on authors' whose field of study is Maghrebi history and religion.
quote:My basic question is
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
xxyman thinks they did not. I tend to think they did come from outside of Africa and then became isolated genetically over time but far prior to Islam. Based on your above comments, correct me if I'm wrong, your opinion is that you are uncertain as to the answer to this question.
Your position is Mozabites "come from outside of Africa and then became isolated genetically over time but far prior to Islam."
You can't ask "Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?" when you've a priori posited they're grafted foreigners.
What's going on here is you're stating Mozabites aren't native African then looking for challenges.
Thing is, I want to see your propositions leading to your conclusion of pre-Islamic non-African heritage of Mozabite ancestry and if they're something to "challenge" or not.
So, I'm not answering what I see as a rhetorical question but my take on Mzabi origins is implicit in my last set of posts. Maybe later I'll post my data interpretations synthesized with historical analyses from reading Ptolemy, Briggs, Welch, and UNESCO on Oued Mzab inhabitants over time.
Everyone's entitled to their opinions and their interpretation of data and synthesis of analyses but to back a position need the data and sources analyzed behind your synthesis statement that's masquerading as a question.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
Also keep in mind, the study I am referencing is based upon STRs NOT SNPs. STRs are still the current standard used by ALL international law enforcement authorities to identify ..point of origin...ie "race"...not right choice of words..but to make a point. CODIS uses 13 STRs but some groups uses 1O STRs. The "basic" STRs used in this study pretty standard.
SNPs are a long way off from being used....why?...because of shady manipulation. There are over 13 million SNPs. Those to be used for geographic identification are still be debated.
Are you sure about all that? Y chromosome haplogroup assignment's only unambiguously determined by SNP after predictions based on Y STR haplotypes.
So Whit Athey's program herepredicts 96.4% E1b1a Y-SNP biallelic marker over _3.4% E1b1b for RIII's Y STR haplotype profile, a humbling admission for Mr. "no relation to blacks" Zahi Hawass, national security nonwithstanding.
After narrowing down STR haplogroup possibilities to avoid negative results, appropriate SNP tests'll show the singular defining mutation, whether E-M2 or E-M35. Since probability is 94%, why bother? Just to keep that grant money rolling in?
But haplogroup isn't what forensic STR profiling's about. Uniparental haplogroup is about useless in forensics because it can't tell cousins apart but a STR profile is damn near a fingerprint and not even twins are likely to have the exact same STR profile as in some tests.
Do you know how many STRs there are in total? Amazingly, as little as 8 aSTRs show geography.
It's a research team's own choice what they use. Bosch 2000 was back before the YCC established the discipline standard alphabetic Y chromosome tree. Her data is valid. One year later in 2001 Bosch published a paper using Y SNPS instead of autosomal STRs. She also applied HVS evaluation in Brakez 2001 and she has used other traditional genetic markers too.
Uniparental's show deep ancestry but may not tell where the individual's latest generations sprang. That's where the STRs shine. With them we see the most likely places. Like you say, can't beat 'em that's for sure.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
I'm am not clear on if you are on the same page as Tukuler or not.
...
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
your position is clear Tukuler's is not
Lioness - hold on a minute. Again, what people write is independent, from their own brains, and don't require my page check pass. I like it that Xyyman has his own niche not "on the same page" I don't look to draw others onto some "same page."
Different pages make for a faceted book.
For me it's not about US vs THEM personalities. It's about what population genetics and historical accounts add up to from applied personal perspectives.
Carry on 'cos I like it you got your own page too!.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was trying to get the link to Hawass stating the no relation to black thing, and about the noise and lips. Attach it to Zaharan's thread on ESR. The link I had is dead.
-------------------- 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 |
I'm glad you addressed these details. The wikipedia might not have been accurate in all points but it is a starting point for a historical sketch on how history relates or doesn't relate to this genetic information.
Wiki is a good start with leads to actual competent recognized sources. Next step? Read up on authors' whose field of study is Maghrebi history and religion.
quote:My basic question is
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
xxyman thinks they did not. I tend to think they did come from outside of Africa and then became isolated genetically over time but far prior to Islam. Based on your above comments, correct me if I'm wrong, your opinion is that you are uncertain as to the answer to this question.
Your position is Mozabites "come from outside of Africa and then became isolated genetically over time but far prior to Islam."
You can't ask "Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?" when you've a priori posited they're grafted foreigners.
What's going on here is you're stating Mozabites aren't native African then looking for challenges.
Thing is, I want to see your propositions leading to your conclusion of pre-Islamic non-African heritage of Mozabite ancestry and if they're something to "challenge" or not.
So, I'm not answering what I see as a rhetorical question but my take on Mzabi origins is implicit in my last set of posts. Maybe later I'll post my data interpretations synthesized with historical analyses from reading Ptolemy, Briggs, Welch, and UNESCO on Oued Mzab inhabitants over time.
This is a reasonable question
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
This is a question that should be asked regardless of if I have an opinion in it. And when I stated my opinion I even said "I tend to think" Even if I had said Mozabites do not orginally come from Africa people should still debate the obvious question and take their own point of view. It's not a rhetorical question xxyman did that, he understood the question being implied and the answer you seem to imply by highlighting a portion of the text
^^^^ This is talking about 78% ancestry from a European-related population. And this is why xxyman came out wit a different article to dispute that.
But since then, after a lot of other remarks in the thread you said:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Again, Price cleary states "the Mozabite [] are not perfectly modeled as a linear combination of European and African ancestry." This means other variables are ignored because he's specifically looking into sub-Saharan Africa related and Europe-related components. Between those two and those two only do the 22% and 78% estimates apply. We don't know what percent of the whole the target represents.
this, your interpretation, show you are uncertain that this artcicle is saying the Mozabite have mosty European ancestry. I say it's your interpretation beacause you interpret:
"not perfectly modeled as a linear combination of European and African ancestry."
as meaning they might not have mostly European ancestry. You said: " other variables are ignored.... We don't know what percent of the whole the target represents"
What could be a possible scenario in which a "whole target" transform the conclusion "78% ancestry from a European-related population" into something mainly African?
I don't undertsand how this could be possible.
" We show that the Mozabite have inherited roughly 78% ancestry from a European-related population and 22% ancestry from a population related to sub-Saharan Africans. Our analysis also shows that the Mozabite admixture has occurred over a period that began at least 100 generations ago (~2,800 years ago), and that has continued into the present day."
They said "we show" They did not say "strongly suggest" They did not say " further research is needed" or "until a broader target is analyzed"
you are raising possible doubts about that conclusion but I have no problem with that, everybody has an opinion. Your opinion is you are not convinced that the Mozabites are primarily Euroepan in ancestry until a broader target is made. Xxyman is convinced that they are primarily African dud to a different articles's STR based analysis
Although most of our simulations focused on individuals of mixed African and European ancestry, we also considered a more general set of two-way mixtures of African, European, Chinese and/or Japanese populations. We again observed that HAPMIX outperformed other methods (see Text S1). Furthermore, although HAPMIX is currently implemented assuming only two reference populations, we were able to attain accurate results in a more complex scenario of three-way admixture, by running HAPMIX in a two-way mode using different choices of reference populations ..
We simulated individuals of admixed African and European ancestry by constructing their genomes from a mosaic of real Yoruba and French individuals genotyped on the Illumina 650Y chip as part of the Human Genome Diversity Panel (HGDP) ..
We repeated our simulations at λ=6 and λ=100 using Mandenka from HGDP as the African ancestral population and Basque from HGDP as the European ancestral population for simulating admixed individuals. We simulated 20 admixed individuals using Mandenka and Basque data..
We note that these discrepancies between the ancestral populations used to construct these simulated data and the reference populations used as input to HAPMIX are substantially larger than the discrepancy between the true African ancestral population of African Americans and YRI, or the true European ancestral population of African Americans and CEU..
We ran HAPMIX on a total of 13 populations from the HGDP data that were of African, European, or Middle Eastern ancestry. For each population, we used YRI and CEU as the input reference populations, and estimated the European-related mixture proportion. For populations with European-related ancestry that was estimated to be more than 0% and less than 100%, we also estimated the number of generations since mixture...
These simulation results suggest that our method is likely to provide near optimal ancestry reconstruction in African Americans: the squared correlation between predicted and true number of European copies (across all samples) was equal to 0.98, and discernment of ancestry transitions was extremely sharp, as seen in a plot of the predicted vs. true number of European copies for an admixed sample on chromosome 1 (Figure 2A).
Posts: 43035 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Let's recap what Price was up to. He used Mzabi as an ancient admixed population to test HAPMIX's ability to "infer ancestry for even very small segments with exquisite accuracy"
Your question is reasonable but, in the light of known N African genetics and history, hardly one that should be asked. Is it a question or a round about way to state Mozabites aren't Africans without bothering any facts or documentaion at all from any qualified sources.
Thinking Mozabites are foreigners is based on what thing? I ask you again since you refused sharing your set of propositions leading to your erroneous position.
Gut feeling isn't enough and all things are possible. I can accept conclusions directly at odds IF those statements are backed by serious supporting source material.
Price tested explicitly for Africa sub-Sahara related and Europe-related components in Mzabis. What does that mean? In the test dichotomy Africa non-subSahara would be seen as Europe-related and so would SW Asia. I will confirm that in my next post.
Be respectful. Ask me what I mean if you don't get what I'm saying. Your understanding of what I said are your words not mine. I'm trying to take you at your word and give you the benefit of the doubt. Most ESers would say I'm a fool to do that but I'm trying to be fair.
I don't expect you to agree with me but I expect you to accept viable alternatives Even experts don't always agree.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
I'm glad you addressed these details. The wikipedia might not have been accurate in all points but it is a starting point for a historical sketch on how history relates or doesn't relate to this genetic information.
Wiki is a good start with leads to actual competent recognized sources. Next step? Read up on authors' whose field of study is Maghrebi history and religion.
quote:My basic question is
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
xxyman thinks they did not. I tend to think they did come from outside of Africa and then became isolated genetically over time but far prior to Islam. Based on your above comments, correct me if I'm wrong, your opinion is that you are uncertain as to the answer to this question.
Your position is Mozabites "come from outside of Africa and then became isolated genetically over time but far prior to Islam."
You can't ask "Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?" when you've a priori posited they're grafted foreigners.
What's going on here is you're stating Mozabites aren't native African then looking for challenges.
Thing is, I want to see your propositions leading to your conclusion of pre-Islamic non-African heritage of Mozabite ancestry and if they're something to "challenge" or not.
So, I'm not answering what I see as a rhetorical question but my take on Mzabi origins is implicit in my last set of posts. Maybe later I'll post my data interpretations synthesized with historical analyses from reading Ptolemy, Briggs, Welch, and UNESCO on Oued Mzab inhabitants over time.
This is a reasonable question
Did the Mozabites come from a place outside of Africa?
This is a question that should be asked regardless of if I have an opinion in it. And when I stated my opinion I even said "I tend to think" Even if I had said Mozabites do not orginally come from Africa people should still debate the obvious question and take their own point of view. It's not a rhetorical question xxyman did that, he understood the question being implied and the answer you seem to imply by highlighting a portion of the text
^^^^ This is talking about 78% ancestry from a European-related population. And this is why xxyman came out wit a different article to dispute that.
But since then, after a lot of other remarks in the thread you said:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Again, Price cleary states "the Mozabite [] are not perfectly modeled as a linear combination of European and African ancestry." This means other variables are ignored because he's specifically looking into sub-Saharan Africa related and Europe-related components. Between those two and those two only do the 22% and 78% estimates apply. We don't know what percent of the whole the target represents.
this, your interpretation, show you are uncertain that this artcicle is saying the Mozabite have mosty European ancestry. I say it's your interpretation beacause you interpret:
"not perfectly modeled as a linear combination of European and African ancestry."
as meaning they might not have mostly European ancestry. You said: " other variables are ignored.... We don't know what percent of the whole the target represents"
What could be a possible scenario in which a "whole target" transform the conclusion "78% ancestry from a European-related population" into something mainly African?
I don't undertsand how this could be possible.
" We show that the Mozabite have inherited roughly 78% ancestry from a European-related population and 22% ancestry from a population related to sub-Saharan Africans. Our analysis also shows that the Mozabite admixture has occurred over a period that began at least 100 generations ago (~2,800 years ago), and that has continued into the present day."
They said "we show" They did not say "strongly suggest" They did not say " further research is needed" or "until a broader target is analyzed"
you are raising possible doubts about that conclusion but I have no problem with that, everybody has an opinion. Your opinion is you are not convinced that the Mozabites are primarily Euroepan in ancestry until a broader target is made. Xxyman is convinced that they are primarily African dud to a different articles's STR based analysis
_________________________________
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
A European-related population isn't necessarily a European population. Let me develop it further via Henn's STRUCTURE skyline as applied to Price. You will see I have no doubts about Price's conclusion.
Price already told us Mzabis can't be a linear combination of only European and African ancestry. He was looking for those two components to the exclusion of other components.
Look at Henn's STRUCTURE skyline for Algeria at K=2 level. K is the number of postulated ancestral populations. In this case Yoruba vs Basque.
See the SSA-related and European-related components are roughly the same as Price's HAPMIX results, 22% and 78%.
But understanding Mzabis aren't composed bilinearly we'd expect to see other populations arise when allowing for more than two postulated ancestral population components.
Here's Henn's STRUCTURE skyline for Algeria with my added text comments right of the skylines. My text synthesizes Price, Henn, and others for an overview of my interpretation of the data.
Thus at K=4 we see SSA-related breaks down to Maasai and Yoruba while the European-related component splits into "Berbers" and Basque.
Berber is an ancestry and language group that developed in situ in NW Africa with genetic features showing up more in South Europe than in Africa south of 14° north, so seen as European-related instead of SSA-related.
When K=6 presumed ancestral populations the bulk of the SSA related component is like East African baNtu genetics with only a smattering of genetic matter found in Nilo-Saharan or Benue-Congo speakers.
At K=6 Qataris, Afro-Asiatic speaking SW Asians, emerge out from the European-related component.
Finally, assuming 8 ancestral components to Algeria, a further and distinctive Tunisia "Berber" signature (European-related) and Bulala Nilo-Saharan trait (SSA-related) appear.
Notice this refined level clearly shows Algeria is predominantly "Berber" with substantial SW Asian and European elements and some diverse SSA elements.
European-related elements (which include Africans of Tunisia and Algeria are the greater percentage but 6 of the 8 postulated ancestral populations are African.
"Berbers" are native North Africans with considerable South European and SW Asian admixture which is no new news and what I've always said they were here on ES.
I've explained this now to my best ability Ask me to expand or clarify where you don't understand what I write.
Now please flesh out your gut level statement about Mzabi foreigness with facts and research.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
My question was redundant because they showed that the Mozabites have inherited roughly 78% ancestry from a European-related population and 22% sub-Saharan ancestry. They could be wrong but they claimed to have showed this. I am tempted to email Price and ask if it is correct to assume that the article says Mozabites are primarily non-African just to prove the obvious
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] Let's recap what Price was up to. He used Mzabi as an ancient admixed population to test HAPMIX's ability to "infer ancestry for even very small segments with exquisite accuracy"
Your question is reasonable but, in the light of known N African genetics and history, hardly one that should be asked. Is it a question or a round about way to state Mozabites aren't Africans without bothering any facts or documentaion at all from any qualified sources.
You say the question is reasonable but then suggest it's not worth asking because of what we knew. What we know is constantly being revised and updtated by new technology. What we knew is sometimes proven wrong. This study says very clearly that the Mozabites were 78% European-related. That means not African, they use a pretty detailed state of the art methodology. I find it fairly convincing. I would only add that they have been living in North Africa long enough to take on some unique genetic characteristics, unique from other Africans as well as Europeans. Is it more afrocentric to suggest they are an indigenous to Africa population? If they have relatively lighter skin in that latitude it would also suggest that that other people, such as Northern ancient Egyptians at that latitude would have similar relativly light skin. I submit my position is more afrocentric, that these people were originally outsiders
(-wait, continued in next post)
Posts: 43035 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Thinking Mozabites are foreigners is based on what thing? I ask you again since you refused sharing your set of propositions leading to your erroneous position.
Thinking that is based on the study you posted and in particular what you highlighted. xxyman and others undertood this and tried to counter Price conclusions with different articles.
quote:Originally posted by the Tukuler:
Price tested explicitly for Africa sub-Sahara related and Europe-related components in Mzabis. What does that mean? In the test dichotomy Africa non-subSahara would be seen as Europe-related and so would SW Asia. I will confirm that in my next post.
If you mean including non-SSA but still African you cannot support that with quotes from Price.
I'm dealing with Price, Henn is a different article. This is from the Price article :
Results Simulations
Simulations of local ancestry inference We began by examining the performance of HAPMIX in a set of 20 simulated admixed individuals, with an average of 80% African ancestry and 20% European ancestry, and generated with admixture occurring 6 generations ago (λ=6; see Materials and Methods)....
To investigate whether the probabilities of 0, 1, or 2 copies of European ancestry reported by HAPMIX are well-calibrated, we binned the predicted probabilities into bins of size 0.05 and compared, for each x=0,1,2 and for each bin, the average predicted probability vs. the actual frequency in simulations of having x copies of European ancestry.
^^^ "related" is not even mentioned. Nowhere do they say or imply "European related" really means indigenous North African.
more:
We simulated individuals of admixed African and European ancestry by constructing their genomes from a mosaic of real Yoruba and French individuals genotyped on the Illumina 650Y chip as part of the Human Genome Diversity Panel (HGDP) [15]. We downloaded data from 20 Yoruba and 20 French individuals from the HGDP data set and jointly phased them using the fastPHASE program [18] to form 40 haploid Yoruba and 40 haploid French genomes
In many real-world settings, the true reference populations for a particular admixture event may not have had suitable genetic data gathered, or may no longer exist. To test for the effect of this situation on HAPMIX, we repeated our simulations at λ=6 and λ=100 using 20 admixed samples that were simulated using Mandenka and Basque individuals but modeled using reference populations YRI and CEU, which are inaccurate reference populations (see Materials and Methods).
^^^ Obviously when they say European related they mean related to Europe and there are numerous exmaples of it in the text. They don't even bother to say "related" attached to "European" in many instances. The meaning is clear from the examples
quote:Originally highlighted by Tukuler:
I don't expect you to agree with me but I expect you to accept viable alternatives Even experts don't always agree.
I leave a little room for doubt because of the other Bosch article xxyman posted. He understood and acknowledged that it was at odds with Price et al. So that means I am not crazy. In fact you even defended SNPs from his preference for STR results. Don't get all sensitive. You are simply uncertain about Price's results because they go against what you knew about North Africa.
But how can any of this be shocking? The Greeks and Phoenicans had trading colonies in Algeria. Isn't this what we knew?
_________________________________
annoying knew thing I notice, posts with a lot of quotes are not going through, I have to break one post into two posts and edits are slower speed as well
Posts: 43035 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You say I defended SNPs over STRs. I showed SNPs are as good as STRs pending what one is looking for. You don't want to see that. You want to make stuff up instead of asking for clarification of what you don't understand about what I write. You're not stupid You're deliberately making stuff up behind me but intelligent readers see right through that. I also said other genetic indicators are good too and Bosch used all of them between 1997 and 2001 not just STRs.
You deliberately made up something else and posted it in my name. You don't want to swap knowledge on Mzab you want to win an argument resorting to dirty tricks. I'm not playing your game, you win, I could care less about debate and I'll post what I want to, it's my thread.
Now away from your personal persuits and back to the topic (because knowing very little about the topic you can only talk about what you think this one says or what the other one thinks and so on).
quote:What could be a possible scenario in which a "whole target" transform the conclusion "78% ancestry from a European-related population" into something mainly African?
I don't undertsand how this could be possible.
Another statement dressed up as a phony question. I gave the explanation but you didn't want to hear it. Your so-called question is just a cowardly way for you to say an African can't be Europe-related again without having to back it up with any facts or data just like your other rhetorical question.
To put it in simplicities
E-M2 and E-M35 are cousin haplogroups from E-P2. E-M2 basically flourished in the south of Africa E-M35 expanded towards the north and east in Africa.
E-M81 derives from E-M35
E-M2 is Sub-Saharan is one kind of African hg. E-M81 is Northwestern is another African hg variety.
Both are African but E-M81 is not sub-Saharan and could not fit into the SSA-related category. The only other alternative in Prices bilinear test is European-related. And there you have 78% European-related and still African because Berber is the lion's share.
You can play like you don't get it but you know Mzabis are African that's why you can't present propositions for your hypothesis of non-Africa originating Mzabis or Imazighen in general.
You can't present propositions leading to your conclusion because there aren't any genetic or historical facts behind it.
A simple P1 + P2 + Pn = C list will do. We've waited two days, you can't do it. On the other hand I've given my back-up.
Come now. No more buck passing distractions.
I want to see your propositions leading to your conclusion of pre-Islamic non-African heritage for the Mozabite ancestral group.
Mozabites are foreigners is based on what? Wishology? Produce your set of propositions leading to your erroneous position. No more simplistic misinterpretation of Price.
Prove you know how to flesh out your gut level statement about Mzabi foreigness with facts and research.
BTW do you think no one's written Reich and Myers for clarification already? Then think again. So go ahead and show them my figure and explanations.
Pick any one of them Henn, Behar, Tishkoff, etc. Every STRUCTURE skyline for Mzabis/Algerians with K=4 shows ~20% SSA with ~80% non-SSA "remainder" and as K increases the ~80% non-SSA is revealed as Berber, one of the many locally in situ developed African populations.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
E-M2 and E-M35 are cousin haplogroups from E-P2. E-M2 basically flourished in Africa from Sahara southward E-M35 expanded towards the north and east in Africa.
E-M81 derives from E-M35
E-M2 is mostly Sub-Saharan is one kind of African hg. E-M81 is Northwestern is another African hg variety.
Both are African but E-M81 is not in sub-Sahara and could not fit into the SSA-related category.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
why don't you just argue that Price was wrong to use the word "European-related" and "European ancestry" which is also used in the article ??
why aren't you mad about that being Eurocentric ?
_______________________________________________________________ Sensitive Detection of Chromosomal Segments of Distinct Ancestry in Admixed Populations
Alkes L. Price, Arti Tandon, Nick Patterson, Kathleen C. Barnes, Nicholas Rafaels, Ingo Ruczinski, Terri H. Beaty, Rasika Mathias, David Reich mail, Simon Myers mail
Which modern-day populations are most closely related to the founder populations for the Mozabite? Following the promising results of our simulation study, we used inferred segments of African-related or European-related ancestry to estimate FST values between the true ancestral populations of the Mozabite and the two reference populations (YRI and CEU). We obtained estimates of 0.034 for the FST between the true African ancestral population and YRI, and 0.026 for the FST between the true European ancestral population and CEU. Substituting various HGDP Bantu-African and European/West Asian populations for YRI and CEU in the FST computations yielded similar results, with FST values ranging between 0.02 and 0.04. For the African founder population, the West African Mandenka and Yoruba populations, and another HGDP Bantu population, “BantuKenya”, had the smallest FST values (0.034–0.035). For the European-related founder population, the Italians and Tuscans, closely followed by the Palestinians, had the smallest FST values (0.021–0.022), suggesting an origin in South-East Europe or the Middle East. Although care should be taken in interpreting these values, they indicate that the ancestral segments of Mozabite are significantly diverged from extant Bantu-African and European-related populations. To verify this, we ran principal components analysis on the Mozabite samples together with French and Yoruba samples from HGDP, using the EIGENSOFT software [27]. Results are displayed in Figure 8. The first eigenvector indicates, as expected, that the Mozabite samples are intermediate between Europeans and sub-Saharan Africans, consistent with the admixture detected by HAPMIX, and identifying the same two outlier samples with much higher African ancestry. In support of our FST analysis on the ancestry segments, the second eigenvector appears mainly to separate the Mozabite from the other populations, indicating that they are not perfectly modeled as a linear combination of European and African ancestry. Apart from the 2 individuals with much higher African ancestry, the EIGENSOFT plot identifies a further set of 8 Mozabite individuals showing reduced genetic drift (i.e. second eigenvector coefficients), and much more variable ancestry estimates relative to the full set (Figure 8). For these 8 samples, HAPMIX gave a maximum likelihood estimate of 75 generations for the admixture event, again noticeably lower than 100 generations for the full dataset and demonstrating more recent admixture in these individuals. Therefore, we observe a correlation between time since admixture across different individuals, and level of genetic drift relative to modern-day European and African populations. A hypothesis consistent with this finding is that genetic drift has occurred in the Mozabite population itself, during or after admixture, in way that has affected both African and European ancestral segments. Alternatively, the founder populations may have gradually drifted during the thousands of years of admixture that have affected this group.
posted
Just came across an "Afrocentric" SNP study involving over 100,000 SNPs. Proving the Afrricanist of Southern Europeans . Lol! They just can't make up their minds. Modern politics!!
-------------------- 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 |
Distribution of Y haplotype EM-81 E1b1b1b in North Africa, West Asia and Europe. Data psuedocolored based on data in Table 1. from (Am J Hum Genet. 2004 May; 74(5): 1023–1034.) Regions with stripes indicate data given twice of a region but substantively different values. For albania, the colors indicate Calabrian Albanians or Albanians, For Israel the colors are either Ashkenazi or Sephardic Jews. The map from which the boundaries were derived was rebordered black, bodies of water were recolored blue
Posts: 43035 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Listen, I have never been to Africa, but I would like to. My brother has been to Namibia with his wife and kids. He has been to Egypt also. Sigh! The benefits of having your own business.
Anyways. I am not sure what a Berber look like, nevertheless the different Berber ethnic groups. Unfortunately, I have to rely on National Geographic and Hollywood etc. Which I know is stereotypically biased.
So to truly understand what is going on I have to look at the data to come to a conclusion about indigenous Africans. I look at the genetic data, geography distance(including topography), language, craniometry, limb proportion, timeline, environment, ancient art or pictures, older history books…and lastly modern pictures. Anyone can claim to belong to any ethnic group these days. This senior level guy I work with claims to be Taino. He doesn’t really look Native American but at most he may be, what, 1/10th. He has a Hispanic name, and he is proud to be Taino. Point is anyone can post a picture of themselves on the web…photobucket.. claiming to be anything. Look at what aDNA is proving…Paleolithic Europeans and Neolithic Europeans are NOT really the ancestors of modern Europeans. So all that limb proportion conclusion about tropical Europeans adapting to become modern European is all…BS!!!. I always knew it was. Just not enough time!!!
I assume these researchers do due diligence and vet these test subjects when they pull samples. In some cases they do, in others, they do not. That is why it is important to read the “Material and Methods” section in these published papers.
BTW – Anyone has a picture of a Basque, please post? I once worked with an engineer from Spain. I asked her about the Basque(by the way, she was probably a Nordic Spaniard, tall blond etc). She said that anyone in Spain can tell a Basque just by looking at them. She said, just look at their face and you know instantly they are Basque. Any input? I tried photobucket but I am not sure what I am looking at or for, or if these people were authentic pure blood Basque.
Looking at the NJ I posted they(Basque) are obviously genetically unique, albeit they are Europeans. Just as the Mazabites and Aframs are unique but are as African as the Berbers.
-------------------- 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
The History of African Gene Flow into Southern Europeans, Levantines, and Jews 4 Abstract Previous genetic studies have suggested a history of sub-Saharan African gene flow into some West Eurasian populations after the initial dispersal out of Africa that occurred at least 45,000 years ago. However, there has been no accurate characterization of the proportion of mixture, or of its date. We analyze genome-wide polymorphism data from about 40 West Eurasian groups to show that almost all Southern Europeans have inherited 1%-3% African ancestry with an average mixture date of around 55 generations ago, consistent with North African gene flow at the end of the Roman Empire and subsequent Arab migrations. Levantine groups harbor 4%-15% African ancestry with an average mixture date of about 32 generations ago, consistent with close political, economic, and cultural links with Egypt in the late middle ages. We also detect 3%-5% sub-Saharan African ancestry in all eight of the diverse Jewish populations that we analyzed. For the Jewish admixture, we obtain an average estimated date of about 72 generations. This may reflect descent of these groups from a common ancestral population that already had some African ancestry prior to the Jewish Diasporas.
Results
We assembled data on 6,529 individuals drawn from 107 populations genotyped at hundreds of thousands of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (Table S1). This included 3,845 individuals from 37 European populations in the Population Reference Sample (POPRES) [9], [10], 940 individuals from 51 populations in the Human Genome Diversity Cell Line Panel (HGDP-CEPH) [11], [12],
1,115 individuals from 11 populations in the third phase of the International Haplotype Map Project (HapMap3) [13], 392 individuals who self reported as having Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry from the InTraGen Population Genetics Database (IBD) [14] and 237 individuals from 7 populations in the Jewish HapMap Project [15]. For most analyses, we used HapMap3 Utah European Americans (CEU) to represent Northern Europeans and HapMap3 Yoruba Nigerians (YRI) to represent sub-Saharan Africans, although we also verified the robustness of our inferences using alternative populations. We curated these data using Principal Components Analysis (PCA) [16] (Table S2), with the most important steps being: (i) Removal of 140 individuals as outliers who did not cluster with the bulk of samples of the same group, (ii) Removal of all 8 Greek samples as they separated into sub-clusters in PCA so that it was not clear which of these clusters was most representative, (iii) Splitting the Bedouins into two genetically discontinuous groups, and (iv) Reclassifying the 5 Italian groups into three ancestry clusters (Sardinian, Northern-Italy, and Southern-Italy) (see details in Text S1, Figure S1). A comparison of results before and after this curation is presented in Table S3, where we show that this data curation does not affect our qualitative inferences. To study the signal of African gene flow into West Eurasian populations, we began by computing principal components (PCs) using San Bushmen (HGDP-CEPH- San) and East Eurasians (HapMap3 Han Chinese- CHB), and plotted the mean values of the samples from each West Eurasian population onto the first PC, a procedure called “PCA projection” [17], [18]. The choice of San and CHB, which are both diverged from the West Eurasian ancestral populations [19], [20], ensures that the patterns in PCA are not affected by genetic drift in West Eurasians that has occurred since their common divergence from East Eurasians and South Africans. We observe that many Levantine, Southern European and Jewish populations are shifted towards San compared to Northern Europeans, consistent with African mixture, and motivating formal testing for the presence of African ancestry (Figure 1, Figure S2).
-------------------- 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:Originally posted by xyyman: Look at what aDNA is proving…Paleolithic Europeans and Neolithic Europeans are NOT really the ancestors of modern Europeans. So all that limb proportion conclusion about tropical Europeans adapting to become modern European is all…BS!!!. I always knew it was. Just not enough time!!!
Then who are the ancestors of Europeans that were tropical where did they come from? At what point backtracking modern Europeans is there a tropically proportioned ancestor?
Or maybe you are a multi-regionalist ?
Also there may be littel or no data currently on the limb ratios of Southern Europeans
__________________________________
origins of the Basque people are still a mystery.
The Basques are considered by some to be direct descendants of the Iberians, people who once inhabited Spain. Their ancient culture is filled with undated legends and customs. They are friendly, independent people who were known in the middle ages as skilled boat makers and courageous whale hunters and frequently went far across the Atlantic Ocean in their boats. Later generations grew up in an agrarian society and worked with their livestock on isolated mountain farms throughout the Pyrenees Mountains.
The connection between the Basque people and their culture has helped in the free trade and open door to the neighbouring developing countries. They also have a large-scale fishing trading and the best finest fishermen traders.
posted
After re-reading this paper I have to admit this is much to do about nothing. It is all extreme speculation. Almost laughable. In fact the title is mis-leading and written out of context of what is documented in the paper. I guess it was titled like most things these days with the intent to create controversy and draw attention. The conclusion section says it all. The authors don’t really believe this back-migration nonsense. See highlighted sections.
Note their non-African reference population- Basque and Qatari.
I needed to read this several times to get it. Some of you may understand. But let me break it down.
Please read and understand before replying. Sage, Swenet..maybe Lioness..others give me some feedback.
Key things that jump out at you.
1. Tunisian Berbers are 100% pure indigenous. Minor “recent” near east input in other groups. 2. They used an “outlier” reference populations. Basque that are known to have Berber admixture. And Qatari which is on the other side of the Arabian peninsular. 3. The admit the result is inconclusive. They recommend that ….STR!!!…studies be performed to confirm their speculation. STRs were posted by me already. 4. They are suggesting that the Qatari came from a similar but DIFFERENT source population. 5. They are suggesting that the Berber ancestral population left Africa spent ~1Kyrs in Arabia returned to Africa for another 38-40,000yrs!!! That is like someone spending first 25yrs of their life in one city, left and spent 1 yr in the neighboring city, then returned to their home town and spent another 40yrs. Does that make them non-African? 6. They confirmed there were NO migration from the Middle-East since then ie that initial OOA, short stay and back. 7. They confirmed a decreasing West to East gradient of genetic material. Nothing new here. 8. They confirmed the initial ancestral source MAY be along the Nile. No Shyte!! Can anyone say E1b1b or Sergi. 9. They admit other Africans were in the North Africa since 65,000ya. As posted by Troll Patrol, Hublin et al. Yet they BS!! LOL!
Genomic Ancestry of North Africans Supports Back-to-Africa Migrations Brenna M. Henn1
Prior genetic studies, largely from uniparentally inherited markers(ie Haplogroups), have not resolved the location origin of North African populations or the timing of human dispersal(s) into North Africa. Analyses based on the frequencies of a small number of autosomal genetic polymorphisms(ie SNPs) and uniparental markers(ie Haplogroups) have shown that the genetic landscape follow an east-west pattern with little to no difference between Berber- and Arab-speaking populations [6,7].
Initial autosomal SNP analysis of the Algerian Mozabites indicated they carry ancestry from Europe, the Near East and sub-Saharan Africa; neighbor-joining phylogenetic analysis suggested that Mozabites branch off with Out-of-African populations, but are an outgroup to all Near Eastern populations in the Human Genome Diversity Panel (HGDP-CEPH) [17]. In short, the origins of North African populations and the number of subsequent migrations from neighboring regions have been poorly resolved.
there is a cline of putative autochthonous North African ancestry decreasing in frequency from Western Sahara eastward to Egypt. We refer to this North African ancestral component as the ‘‘Maghrebi’’ throughout the remainder of the paper, reflecting the primary geographic distribution of this ancestry in the Maghreb: West Sahara, Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. The west-to-east decline in Maghrebi assignment is only interrupted by the Tunisian Berbers, who are assigned nearly 100% Maghrebi ancestry. The Tunisian Berbers further separate as a distinct population cluster at k=8. An opposite cline of ancestry appears to originate in the Near East (i.e. Qatari Arabs) and decreases into Egypt and westward across North Africa (k= 6, 8). Islam!!
Discussion Out of Africa and Back Again?
By sampling multiple populations along an approximate transect across North Africa, we were able to identify gradients in ancestry along an east-west axis
We can reject a simple model of long-term continuous gene flow between the Near East and North Africa, as evidenced by clear geographic structure
After accounting for putative recent admixture (Figure 1), the indigenous Maghrebi component (k-based) is estimated to have diverged from Near Eastern/Europeans between 18–38 Kya (Figure 3), under a range of Ne and k values. We hence suggest that the ancestral Maghrebi population separated from Near Eastern/Europeans prior to the Holocene, and that the Maghrebi populations do not represent a large-scale demic diffusion of agropastoralists from the Near East. No shyte!! With model parameters for divergence approximately estimated, we then ask whether North African ancestral populations were part of the initial OOA exit and then returned to Africa [8], or if an in situ model of population persistence for the past 50 Kya is more likely (with variable episodes of migration from the Near East)? We can address this question only indirectly with contemporary samples; however, several auxiliary observations point toward the former hypothesis.
In contrast, we find it more parsimonious to describe model where: a) an OOA migration occurs [concurrent with a bottleneck]; b) OOA populations and North Africans diverge between 12–40 Kya when a migration back-to-Africa occurs. *****These models should be further tested with genomic sequence data, STRs!! which have better power to detect magnitude and timing of bottlenecks, and to estimate the true joint allele frequency spectrum. ****The less than 25% European ancestry in populations like Algerians and northern Moroccans could trace back to maritime migrations throughout the Mediterranean [34]. Alternatively, the Qatari could represent a poor proxy for an Arabic source population, causing additional diversity to be assigned European (e.g. European ancestry tracts were not reliably assigned as European with PCADMIX).
In summary, although paleoanthropological evidence has established the ancient presence of anatomically modern humans in northern Africa prior to 60,000 ya [35], the simplest interpretation!!!!!! of our results is that the majority of ancestry in modern North Africans derives from populations outside of Africa, through at least two episodes of increased gene flow during the past 40,000 years (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3).
Materials and Methods Samples and Data Generation
A total of 152 individuals representing seven different North African locations and the Basque Country were included in the present study. Informed consent was obtained from all of them. Samples were genotyped on the Affymetrix 6.0 chip, and after quality control filtering for missing loci and close relatives, 125 individuals remained: 18 from North Morocco, 16 from South Morocco, 18 from Western Sahara, 19 from Algeria, 18 from Tunisia, 17 from Libya and 19 from Egypt. Further information on the samples may be found in Table S1. Moreover, 20 individuals from the Spanish Basque country were included in the analysis. Data are publicly available at: bhusers.upf.edu/dcomas/. In order to study the population structure and the genetic influence of migrants in the region a database was built including African and European populations from HapMap3 [43], western Africa [20], and 20 Qatari from the Arabian Peninsula [44] as Near Eastern representatives.
-------------------- 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 |
And now for someone who completely ignores genetics:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: Mozabites as most people who've bothered study Berber history already know are descendants of Iranic Eurasian peoples with Berbers. For that reason the fairer skin Mozabites claim descent from Persians. They are a mixture of Persians who've abosrbed Berber blood so most likely that Eurasian import is about 1,300 years ago when Eurasians settled the region.
posted
@ Dana. Hats off to you and the knowledge displayed on Afro-Asian History...to Sage also.
But I rely on hard science first.....then use the history books to supplement.
As I said. Never been to the continent so I can tell a Berber from modern day Arab. Fulani from a ...whatever. I realy on published scientic data, geography, craniometry, linguistics , etc
BTW - Lioness(s). That Basque link is not working.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ the Basque link was just a google images tab search on Basque It's a starting point and then check the rest of each page to judge credibility
Posts: 43035 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| 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 |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic