posted
^ This is why I think the genetic components they think are "neanderthal" may in fact be a common hominid genetic component that happens to be retained in certain human populations.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ This is why I think the genetic components they think are "neanderthal" may in fact be a common hominid genetic component that happens to be retained in certain human populations.
Hmm...given that non-Africans represent a subset of native African diversity, it could be that founder effects would mean they'd have different proportions of certain genetic traits than the source populations. So if your hypothesis could be verified, that "Neanderthal" component could be amplified in OOA due to founder effect. But why the special overlap with Neanderthals and Denisovans?
Posts: 7073 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Is it possible they mixed with prior OOA populations in Arabia i.e. the Nubian Complex of Middle Stone Age Oman??
Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ This is why I think the genetic components they think are "neanderthal" may in fact be a common hominid genetic component that happens to be retained in certain human populations.
quote:
The southern most Neanderthal in the world (Amud Cave, Israel)
quote:
THE NEANDERTHALS: A HUMAN RACE
To the above can be seen the Homo sapiensne ander thalensis Amud 1 skull, discovered in Israel. It is estimated that the owner of this skull would have stood 1.80 meters (5 feet, 11 inch es) tall. Its brain volume is the largest so far encountered for Neanderthals, at 1,740 cubic centimeters.
quote:"While the largest Homo erectus brains were about 1250 ml (2 imperial pints) and modern brains average about 1200–1500 ml in volume, female Neanderthal brains were about 1300 ml and those of males about 1600 ml, extending to 1740 ml in the Amud man."
Standardized Result - 1200–1500 cm3
Stringer, Christopher & Gamble, Clive. In Search of the Neanderthals. New York: Thames & Hudson, 1993.
quote: Their origin likely relates to an episode of recolonization of Western Eurasia by hominins of African origin carrying the Acheulean technology into Europe around 600 ka.
--J. J. Hublin
The origin of Neandertals
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting back to the main topic. It was later found that the OT article finding was an error as explained here.
Mota was NOT Eurasian and therefore the so-called "extensive Eurasian" admixture does not exist. Funny how the author of this thread has yet to make a retraction.
Recent findings now show Mota's true relation to 'Eurasians'.
Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] Getting back to the main topic. It was later found that the OT article finding was an error as explained here.
Mota was NOT Eurasian and therefore the so-called "extensive Eurasian" admixture does not exist.
Ancient Ethiopian genome reveals extensive Eurasian admixture in Eastern Africa
The article on 4,500 year old ethiopian Mota man in it's original form or including the correction below never said Mota man was Eurasian,
in fact the original article said exact opposite - that Mota Man and his genome was an example of an un-admixed African prior to Eurasian influx and could be used as a yardstick to measure later Eurasian input relative to it
The implications of this was that modern Africans have much of the same DNA as Mota but they have additional ancestry that Mota did not have so therefore that additional ancestry was more recent, and it was Eurasian and this additional ancestry was found all over Africa.
Mota man was the "pure African" model. Mota Man was assigned to Mtdna haplogroup L3x2a, and Y-haplogroup E1b1. As we know there are other haplogroups found in modern Ethiopia/the horn. The article theorized that these are more recent
That hypothesis has not entirely changed with the update. What has changed is that originally they had said that modern Africans all over Africa had a small amount of Eurasian ancestry due to that fact that they had the additional genes that Mota did not have but when they reviewed the methodology they found flaws and concluded that the Eurasian admixture only applied to Africans of the Ethiopian region not over the whole of Africa. This is not the first time I have explained this
author's correction posted in recent thread below but the error had already been discussed in another older thread
Erratum for the Report "Ancient Ethiopian genome reveals extensive Eurasian admixture in Eastern Africa" (previously titled "Ancient Ethiopian genome reveals extensive Eurasian admixture throughout the African continent")
by M. Gallego Llorente, E. R. Jones, A. Eriksson, V. Siska, K. W. Arthur, J. W. Arthur, M. C. Curtis, J. T. Stock, M. Coltorti, P. Pieruccini, S. Stretton, F. Brock, T. Higham, Y. Park, M. Hofreiter, D. G. Bradley, J. Bhak, R. Pinhasi, A. Manica.
Abstract In the Report “Ancient Ethiopian genome reveals extensive Eurasian admixture in Eastern Africa,” the results were affected by a bioinformatics error. A script necessary to convert the input produced by samtools v0.1.19 to be compatible with PLINK was not run when merging the ancient genome, Mota, with the contemporary populations SNP panel, leading to homozygote positions to the human reference genome being dropped as missing data (the analysis of admixture with Neandertals and Denisovans was not affected). When those positions were included, 255,922 SNP out of 256,540 from the contemporary reference panel could be called in Mota. These changes are reflected in the corrected Fig. 2B, fig. S6, and table S5. Tables S6 and S7 have been removed from the corrected Supplementary Material, because there is no detectable Western Eurasian component in Yoruba and Mbuti. The conclusion of a migration into East Africa from Western Eurasia, and more precisely from a source genetically close to the early Neolithic farmers, is not affected. However, the geographic extent of the genetic impact of this migration was overestimated: The Western Eurasian backflow mostly affected East Africa and only a few Sub-Saharan populations; the Yoruba and Mbuti do not show higher levels of Western Eurasian ancestry compared to Mota. Hence, the title and abstract of the published paper did not accurately represent the geographical extent of the admixture, and both have been corrected accordingly. The authors acknowledge Pontus Skoglund and David Reich for detecting these problems. Erratum for Ancient Ethiopian genome reveals extensive Eurasian admixture throughout the African continent. [Science. 2015]
posted
The above is just funny. Look three post above, prior to this.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally, the Aterian was considered to be the final phase of the local Mousterian/Middle Palaeolithic tradition, and thus mostly younger than 40 ka. Current data support a more asynchronous view. Integrating new dates for the sites of El Harhoura and El Mnasra with those from other sites published recently (Barton et al., 2009; Richter et al., 2010; Schwenninger et al., 2010; Jacobs et al., 2011) suggest an older chronology, with a range of between 112 and 50 ka. Sub-divisions within the Aterian have been also recognized for some time, but based entirely on typology (Ruhlmann, 1945; Antoine, 1950a, b; Balout, 1955; Roche, 1969). Recently, Jacobs et al. (2012) proposed four phases to the MP/Aterian history in the Maghreb:
The traditional interpretation has been that the Aterian represents a local facies of the North African Mousterian, sometimes described as an ‘evolved Mousterian’ (Tixier, 1959; Balout, 1965), or as an ‘Epi- Mousterian’ (Bordes, 1961). From a technological perspective, the characterization of the generalized North African MP/MSA is not simple. Techno-typological definitions of the non-Aterian MP/MSA industries in the Maghreb are unclear: Aumassip (2001) suggests a relative rarity of retouched tools and a relatively high frequency of sidescrapers, while for others abundant and diversified side- scrapers mainly produced on Levallois blanks are what characterize non-Aterian MP/MSA assemblages in the area (Wengler, 2010: 68). However, non-Aterian regional variation in the MSA is high. Aumassip (2004) identifies a number of traditions within a scheme of Mousterian variation very similar to European Mousterian facies e (a) Mousterian of Acheulean tradition, rich in small bifaces and Levallois debitage, frequent in Morocco and the Maghrebian Sahara; (b) Denticulate Mousterian in Egypt and the Maghreb, rich in denticulates and notches; (c) Typical Mousterian across North Africa; (d) Ferrassie-type Mousterian in the Maghreb, rich in scrapers and points and without bifaces; (e) Nubian Mousterian in Egypt and Sudan, characterized by the Levallois production of Nubian points, as well as (f) the Khormusan, a distinct facies of the Sudanese record (Marks, 1968; Goder-Goldeger, 2013). However, Aumassip’s classification of the non-Aterian MP/MSA of North Africa has been criticized on the grounds that it uses a European rather than African framework, and specifically excludes a number of sites from this North African ‘Mousterian’ variation e those described by Clark and others as ‘Middle Stone Age’ in Niger and Mali, and a set of very localized industries, such as those from M’zab and Dede in Algeria. To these, one could add the Pre-Aurignacian of Cyrenaica (McBurney, 1967). This highlights the point made earlier, that to understand the Aterian and its relationship to the MSA requires a broader comparative approach to technology, and that comparative framework must be Africa.
Aterian origins have usually been thought to lie in the Maghreb (Debènath et al., 1986; Pasty, 1997), although this view has been strongly criticized (Kleindienst, 1998: 8). Alternative origins have been suggested in sub-Saharan Africa, pointing to affinities with industries with foliates, such as the Lupemban and Sangoan (Caton- Thompson, 1946; Clark, 1982, 2008; Kleindienst, 1998; Wengler, 2010; Garcea, 2012). Sub-Saharan links are pertinent, since all human fossil remains found in association with the Aterian are those of H. sapiens, thus representing one of the main regional early human populations of Africa prior to the colonization of Eurasia.
We would argue that the Central Sahara occupies a pivotal place in the origins and dispersals of modern humans, and that the MSA of Africa is the context in which we should be developing hypotheses. Following the re-dating of key Maghrebian sites, the recognition of the North African MSA diversity, and of its place within a broader complex of Mode 3 African industries, the Aterian could be considered as one among several MSA traditions that may have existed in North Africa.
Although these need chronological definition, MSA-making hominins could have occupied North Africa and the Sahara during several wet phases, both before and after MIS5, while the expansion of the Aterian during this latter period is consistent with the expansion of modern humans, and MSA sites and traditions, throughout Africa. Furthermore, Aterian and non-Aterian MSA assemblages are temporally interstratified at certain sites as Ifri N’Ammar in Morocco (Mikdad and Eiwanger, 2000; Jacobs et al., 2011) or El Guettar in Tunisia (Aouadi- Abdeljaouad and Belhouchet, 2008, 2012). Such dynamic demographic responses to changes in socio-ecological environments have been mapped in other MSA traditions of Africa, such as the Howieson’s Poort (Jacobs et al., 2008).
--Robert A. Foley er al.
The Middle Stone Age of the Central Sahara: Biogeographical opportunities and technological strategies in later human evolution
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The above is just funny. Look three post above, prior to this.
The post above s a clearly articulated summary of the study on Mota man, something you are incapable of doing. You are a copy and paste man who many people in the forum ask for explanation and often you are incapable of explaining it. That is what is funny, you and your lack of comprehension
Posts: 42925 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The above is just funny. Look three post above, prior to this.
The post above s a clearly articulated summary of the study on Mota man, something you are incapable of doing. You are a copy and paste man who many people in the forum ask for explanation and often you are incapable of explaining it. That is what is funny, you and your lack of comprehension
?
Geographical range Afro-Eurasia
Dates 600,000 – 40,000 BP[1]
"Mousterian is a name given by archaeologists to a style of predominantly flint tools (or industry) associated primarily with Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis)."
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic