posted
The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers 2 3 Iosif Lazaridis1,2,†,
We report genome-wide ancient DNA from 44 ancient Near Easterners ranging in time 86 between ~12,000-1,400 BCE, from Natufian hunter-gatherers to Bronze Age farmers. 87 We show that the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their 88 ancestry from a ‘Basal Eurasian’ lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture 89 and that separated from other non-African lineages prior to their separation from each 90 other. The first farmers of the southern Levant (Israel and Jordan) and Zagros 91 Mountains (Iran) were strongly genetically differentiated, and each descended from 92 local hunter-gatherers. By the time of the Bronze Age, these two populations and 93 Anatolian-related farmers had mixed with each other and with the hunter-gatherers of 94 Europe to drastically reduce genetic differentiation. The impact of the Near Eastern 95 farmers extended beyond the Near East: farmers related to those of Anatolia spread 96 westward into Europe; farmers related to those of the Levant spread southward into 97 East Africa; farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian 98 steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of 99 the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
"However, no 190 affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis,"
-------------------- 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
--- Quote: West Eurasians harbour significantly less Neanderthal ancestry than East Asians19,20-23, which could be explained if West Eurasians (but not East Asians) have partial ancestry from a source DILUTING their Neandertal inheritance21. Supporting this theory, we observe a negative correlation between Basal Eurasian ancestry and the rate of shared alleles with Neanderthals19 (Supplementary Information, section 5; Fig. 2). By extrapolation, we infer that the Basal Eurasian population had lower Neanderthal ancestry than non-Basal Eurasian populations and possibly none (ninety-five percent confidence interval truncated at zero of 0-60%; Fig. 2; Methods). ----- Xyyman comment - Everyone repeat after me...."SUBSTRUCTURE!!!!!!" and Sub-Saharan!!!!!!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
This paper is another bombshell. Anyone? Lol!.
Key points.
1. Basal Eurasian did NOT carry Neanderthal Ancestry or very little implying substruture which said from the git go. That explains why East Asians carry MORE Neanderthal ancestry than Europeans. Europeans are primariliy Africans who diluted the "Neandertal" Ancestry of asians (ANE) living in Europe at the time. This is so easy!!! 2. The researchers clearly expected to find MORE Neanderthal ancestry in the Levant farmers but did NOT find it. Keep in mind the Levant was the supposed orgy took place. Lol! 3. They ruled out Anatolia and the Levant as the source of the European EEF. Lol! What a surprise. Where did I hear this before.
Man I hate being right....not!
-------------------- 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
But gramps, why is there no significant amount of Great Lakes or South African ancestry in the northern neighbors of the ancient Egyptians if, as you claim, the pharaohs were primarily made up of this type of ancestry?
The funny part is that you really think this paper helps you out. It doesn't. You just took another L.
posted
Wow, gramps. Look at the abundance of E-V38 among the epipalaeolithic northern neighbors of Egypt! It's going through the roof! You and Amun Ra were right all this time. Shame on me for being such a 'wacist'. How dare I suggest that a literal interpretation of DNA Tribes is dubious based on well-established multi-disciplinary data?
posted
Interesting paper. How does it relate to this information?
quote:Against this background of disease, movement and pedomorphic reduction of body size (Table 2, 3) one can identify Negroid (Ethiopic or Bushmanoid?) traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers (Angel, 1972), probably from Nubia (Anderson, 1969) via the unknown predecessors of Badarians (Morant, 1935) and Tasians . . .
—Angel 1972
quote:Ofer Bar-Yosef cites the microburin technique and “microlithic forms such as arched backed bladelets and La Mouillah points" as well as the parthenocarpic figs found in Natufian territory originated in the Sudan.
--Bar-Yosef O., Pleistocene connections between Africa and South West Asia: an archaeological perspective. The African Archaeological Review; Chapter 5, pg 29-38; Kislev ME, Hartmann A, Bar-Yosef O, Early domesticated fig in the Jordan Valley. Nature 312:1372–1374.
quote:Christopher Ehret noted that the intensive use of plants among the Natufians was first found in Africa, as a precursor to the development of farming in the Fertile Crescent.
--Ehret (2002) The Civilizations of Africa: A History to 1800. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia
quote:The Natufians existed in the Mediterranean region of the Levant 15,000 to 11,500 years ago. Dr. Grosman suggests this grave could point to ideological shifts that took place due to the transition to agriculture in the region at that time.
Building on and refining stone tool typologies from North Africa,21,22 the foundation for EP research in the Levant was provided by O. Bar-Yosef23 in his seminal work identifying and defining EP cultures of the southern Levant based on these tools and other site features.
[...]
Early models of culture change associated with pre-agricultural societies of the Levant focused on the sudden, late origin of settled farming villages triggered by climate change. Accompanying this new economic and living situation was durable stone-built architecture; intensified plant and animal use; a flourishing of art and decoration; new mortuary traditions, including marked graves and cemeteries; elaborate ritual and symbolic behavior— a new way of life. This new life style arguably had a slow start, but really took off during the Epipaleolithic period (EP), spanning more than 10,000 years of Levantine prehistory from c. 23,000-11,500 cal BP. The last EP phase, immediately preceding the Neolithic, is by far the best-studied in terms of its cultural and economic contributions to questions on the origins of agriculture.
[...]
Figure 2 presents globally and locally recognized climatic events from 23,000 to 11,500 cal BP and the approximate dates for major EP phases.
[...]
In 2000, McBrearty and Brooks provided compelling evidence that the origin of modern human behavior was not an Upper Palaeolithic revolution, as it has often been interpreted, but that the components of modern human behavior developed over tens or even hundreds of thousands of years of prehistory within Africa.14 In the Near East, Gordon Childe coined the term ‘‘Neolithic revolution’’ to refer to the development of human control over the reproduction and evolution of plants and animals,111 which arguably was the single most significant social, cultural, and biological transition since the origin of our species.
--LISA A. MAHER, TOBIAS RICHTER, AND JAY T. STOCK
Evolutionary Anthropology 21:69–81 (2012)
The Pre-Natufian Epipaleolithic: Long-Term Behavioral Trends in the Levant
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Wow, gramps. Look at the abundance of E-V38 among the epipalaeolithic northern neighbors of Egypt! It's going through the roof! You and Amun Ra were right all this time. Shame on me for being such a 'wacist'. How dare I suggest that a literal interpretation of DNA Tribes is dubious based on well-established multi-disciplinary data?
Interesting, never knew they had sequenced the Natufians.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hook, line and ...everything else. I thought you would fall for it.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: But gramps, why is there no significant amount of Great Lakes or South African ancestry in the northern neighbors of the ancient Egyptians if, as you claim, the pharaohs were primarily made up of this type of ancestry?
The funny part is that you really think this paper helps you out. It doesn't. You just took another L.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: This paper is another bombshell. Anyone? Lol!.
Key points.
1. Basal Eurasian did NOT carry Neanderthal Ancestry or very little implying substruture which said from the git go. That explains why East Asians carry MORE Neanderthal ancestry than Europeans. Europeans are primariliy Africans who diluted the "Neandertal" Ancestry of asians (ANE) living in Europe at the time. This is so easy!!! 2. The researchers clearly expected to find MORE Neanderthal ancestry in the Levant farmers but did NOT find it. Keep in mind the Levant was the supposed orgy took place. Lol! 3. They ruled out Anatolia and the Levant as the source of the European EEF. Lol! What a surprise. Where did I hear this before.
Man I hate being right....not!
When the Natufians started to inhabited the region of the Levant, the Neanderthal already died out, a few decades. Ironically the Neanderthal used to inhabit the Levant for about two hundred thousand years, originating from Africa.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Yeah, you got 'this'. You got this L. The authors said Sub-Saharan African samples don't share more alleles with Natufians than Neolithic groups deeper in Eurasia. This, despite the fact that the Natufians were carriers of plenty Egypt-mediated hgs.
quote:Craniometric analyses have suggested that the Natufians may have migrated from north or sub-Saharan Africa, a result that finds some support from Y chromosome analysis which shows that the Natufians and successor Levantine Neolithic populations carried haplogroup E, of likely ultimate African origin, which has not been detected in other ancient males from West Eurasia (Supplementary Information, section 6). However, no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians (Extended Data Table 1). (We could not test for a link to present-day North Africans, who owe most of their ancestry to back-migration from Eurasia.)
posted
You know I am setting you up? lol! That is why I pulled that quote and posted it. You still don't get it? I will give you a few days. You and your FB boys get back to me then.
-------------------- 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: Consistent with previous proposals 14, a parsimonious interpretation of the phylogeny is that the predominant African haplogroup, haplogroup E, arose outside the continent. This model of geographical segregation within the CT clade requires just one continental haplogroup exchange (E to Africa), rather than three (D, C, and F out of Africa). Furthermore, the timing of this putative return to Africa—between the emergence of haplogroup E and its differentiation within Africa by 58 kya—is consistent with proposals, based on non–Y chromosome data, of abundant gene flow between Africa and nearby regions of Asia 50–80 kya15.
Other studies speak of the Sudan exclusively, as the origin for Natufians.
quote: "Haplogroup E-M78, however, is more widely distributed and is thought to have an origin in eastern African. More recently, this haplogroup has been carefully dissected and was found to depict several well-established subclades with defined geographical clustering (Cruciani et al., 2006, 2007). Although this haplogroup is common to most Sudanese populations, it has exceptionally high frequency among populations like those of western Sudan (particularly Darfur) and the Beja in eastern Sudan."
And the Masalit
"The Masalit possesses by far the highest frequency of the E-M78 and of the E-V32 haplogroup, suggesting either a recent bottleneck in the population or a proximity to the origin of the haplogroup. Both E-V13, which is believed to originate in western Asia with its low frequency in North Africa, and E-V65 of North African origin (Cruciani et al., 2007), were not found among Sudanese."
quote:
Masalit
"The distribution of E-M78 subclades among Sudanese is shown in Table 2. Only two chromosomes fell under the paragroup E-M78*. E-V65 and E-V13 were completely absent in the samples analyzed, whereas the other subclades were relatively common. E-V12* accounts for 19.3% and is widely distributed among Sudanese. E-V32 (51.8%) is by far the most common subclades among Sudanese. It has the highest frequency among populations of western Sudan and Beja."
--Hisham Y. Hassan, Peter A. Underhill, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza, and Muntaser E. Ibrahim
Y-Chromosome Variation Among Sudanese: Restricted Gene Flow, Concordance With Language, Geography, and History
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The genetic data is relevant, the rest of the article is rubbish.The Natufians originated in East Africa. The Natufans introduced farming. As a result, farming originated in Africa not the middle east. This reality makes the entire discussion of the paper.
Black folks are a trip. It is interesting that, while people discuss Lazardis genetics (he is a computer programmer)' work and he has no background in anthropology or genetics--anybody that is non white discussing the same material has to be wrote. Go figure??
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The genetic data is relevant, the rest of the article is rubbish.The Natufians originated in East Africa. The Natufans introduced farming. As a result, farming originated in Africa not the middle east. This reality makes the entire discussion of the paper.
Black folks are a trip. It is interesting that, while people discuss Lazardis genetics (he is a computer programmer)' work and he has no background in anthropology or genetics--anybody that is non white discussing the same material has to be wrote. Go figure??
I understand, by rubbish you mean interpretations, correct?
quote: "Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine early farmers than by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was not from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
--Lazaridis et al.,
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The genetic data is relevant, the rest of the article is rubbish.The Natufians originated in East Africa. The Natufans introduced farming. As a result, farming originated in Africa not the middle east. This reality makes the entire discussion of the paper.
Black folks are a trip. It is interesting that, while people discuss Lazardis genetics (he is a computer programmer)' work and he has no background in anthropology or genetics--anybody that is non white discussing the same material has to be wrote. Go figure??
But is indeed weird that the try to disassociate Natufians with being of East (Sudanese) African origin. While tool industries and assemblage do show this pattern.
The oldest I found on East Africa was, and I wonder what changed the course.
quote:From various kinds of evidence it can now be argued that agriculture in Ethiopia and the Horn was quite ancient, originating as much as 7,000 or more years ago, and that its development owed nothing to South Arabian inspiration. Moreover, the inventions of grain cultivation in particular, both in Ethiopia and separately in the Near East, seem rooted in a single, still earlier subsistence invention of North-east Africa, the intensive utilization of wild grains, beginning probably by or before 13,000 b.c. The correlation of linguistic evidence with archaeology suggests that this food-collecting innovation may have been the work of early Afroasiatic-speaking communities and may have constituted the particular economic advantage which gave impetus to the first stages of Afroasiatic expansion into Ethiopia and the Horn, the Sahara and North Africa, and parts of the Near East.
1982 (Volume 13, No. 4), Agriculture's Origins: The Seeds of Agriculture.
"Evidence found at desert sites in Egypt suggests that rudimentary agriculture began there some 18,000 years ago. Some archeologists remain skeptical."
posted
TP...is on the right track. Come on youngsta. TP is doing the lifting. 1 more day remaining.
Hint ..understand what "ancestry" means.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: [Q]
quote: [QUOTE] "Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine [b]EARLY farmers THAN by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was NOT from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe[b] (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
--Lazaridis et al.,
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311 [/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
So Early European farmers are "non" non-Africans. A double negative. lol!
Come one youngsta, I have to hold your hands like a two year old. :rolleyes:
quote: The researchers were also able to fit the genomic data of modern and ancient humans into a simplified genetic model to reconstruct the deep population history of modern humans outside Africa in the last 50,000 years. While the model suggests that present-day Europeans received contributions from at least three ancestral populations, it also suggests that Early Near Eastern farmers carried genetic material that FALLS OUTSIDE the typical non-African variation. “The finding of an ancient lineage that is present in Europeans and Near Easterners but not elsewhere in Eurasia was a major surprise of our study. It will be exciting to carry out further ancient DNA work to understand the archaeological cultures associated with the arrival of this ancestry,” says David Reich. “We are only starting to understand the complex genetic relationship of our ancestors,” adds Johannes Krause. “Only more genetic data from ancient human remains will allow us to disentagle our pre-historic past”.
posted
Follow the bread crumbs youngsta. This paper confirms what I have been saying. It is nothing new. Except they now revealed the DNA of the Natufians which is essentially PN2....as expected.
QUOTE ===== Two inferred edges were unexpected. First, perhaps the most surprising inference is that Cambodians trace about 16% of their ancestry to a population equally related to both Europeans and other East Asians (while the remaining 84% of their ancestry is related to other southeast Asians). This is partially consistent with clustering analyses, which indicate shared ancestry between Cambodians and central Asian populations [7]. To confirm that the Cambodians are admixed, we turned to less parameterized models. The predicted admixture event implies that allele frequencies in Cambodia are more similar to those in African populations than would be expected based on their East Asian ancestry. To test this, we used three-population tests [37]. We tested the trees [African, [Cambodian,Dai]] for evidence of admixture in the Cambodians (Methods). When using any African population, there is strong evidence of admixture (when using Yoruba, Z~{7:0 [p~1|10{12]; when using Mandenka, Z~{7:3 [p~1|10{12]; when using San, Z~{4:8 [p~8|10{7]). We conclude that the Cambodian population is the result of an admixture event involving a southeast Asian population related to the Dai and a Eurasian population only distantly related to those present in these data.
Finally, we infer an admixture edge from the Middle East (a population related to the Mozabite, a Berber population from northern Africa) ******to***** southern European populations (w~22%). This migration edge is the one edge that is not consistent across independent runs of TreeMix on these data (Figure S8). In particular, an alternative graph (albeit with lower likelihood) places the Mozabite as an admixture between southern Europe and Africa *****(RATHER ******than the Middle East and Africa), and does NOT include an edge from the middle East to southern Europe.
WE THUS HESITATE TO INTERPRET THIS RESULT, except to note that the relationship between northern African, the Middle East, and southern Europe involves complex patterns of gene flow that merit further investigation [43,57].
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The genetic data is relevant, the rest of the article is rubbish.The Natufians originated in East Africa. The Natufans introduced farming. As a result, farming originated in Africa not the middle east. This reality makes the entire discussion of the paper.
Black folks are a trip. It is interesting that, while people discuss Lazardis genetics (he is a computer programmer)' work and he has no background in anthropology or genetics--anybody that is non white discussing the same material has to be wrote. Go figure??
I understand, by rubbish you mean interpretations, correct?
quote: "Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine early farmers than by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was not from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
--Lazaridis et al.,
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311
Correct
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
ok! ok! I will cheat. I am not waiting one day.
What they have concluded is that the Natufians are indeed related to East Africans as they should be. But the Natufians did NOT bring farming into Europe. farming was brought into Europe by an entirely different population...albeit related to the Natufians.
tic! tic! tic!
-------------------- 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: What they have concluded is that the Natufians are indeed related to East Africans as they should be.
What East Africans are they talking about? Great Lakes, according to you? Is that where you're going with that 'East Africa' Lazaridis et al quote?
Go on.. Wasn't there supposed to a hidden 'secret' in the paper that would vindicate your earlier claims that AE are primarily Great Lakes and South African? You insisted they weren't the type of East Africans Lazaridis is talking about in your quote. So what are all their E1b1b haplogroups (as opposed to a heavy preponderance of E1b1a) doing among the northern neighbors of the epipalaeolithic Egyptians?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
huh!! E1b1a? What you talking about Willard?! understand the timeline brother. E1b1b is over 10,000YEARS older than E1b1a.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW - for those who are wondering why I posted the Cambodian reference.
well --more proof that there may be an ancient connection between Africa and Asia across the Indian Ocean.
-------------------- 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: understand the timeline brother. E1b1b is over 10,000YEARS older than E1b1a.
I love when you're so generous with evidence that debunks you. You just admitted that the people associated with E1b1a today couldn't have played an important role in the Late Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic era where we can already identify people who look like predynastic ancient Egyptians.
Like I said, gramps. Just hold this L.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The genetic data is relevant, the rest of the article is rubbish.The Natufians originated in East Africa. The Natufans introduced farming. As a result, farming originated in Africa not the middle east. This reality makes the entire discussion of the paper.
Black folks are a trip. It is interesting that, while people discuss Lazardis genetics (he is a computer programmer)' work and he has no background in anthropology or genetics--anybody that is non white discussing the same material has to be wrote. Go figure??
I understand, by rubbish you mean interpretations, correct?
quote: "Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine early farmers than by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was not from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
--Lazaridis et al.,
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311
Correct
quote:Second, we observed that all three Natufian individuals that could be assigned to a specific haplogroup belonged to haplogroup E1b1. This is thought to have an East African origin, and a 4,500-year old individual from the Ethiopian highlands 13 belonged to it.
An African origin of the Natufians has been proposed based on their ‘Sub-Saharan’ cranial morphology 14 in comparison to later West Eurasian samples. However, when we test whether present-day Sub- Saharan Africans share more alleles with Natufians than they do with other ancient West Eurasian individuals, we do not find the expected asymmetry if Natufians have ancestry related to present-day Sub-Saharan Africans (Extended Data Table 1)
--Lazaridis et al.,
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers
Again they leave out industries and assemblage. And why are people who migrated out of Africa, into the Levant are being called West Asians?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: understand the timeline brother. E1b1b is over 10,000YEARS older than E1b1a.
I love when you're so generous with evidence that debunks you. You just admitted that the people associated with E1b1a today couldn't have played an important role in the Late Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic era where we can already identify people who look like predynastic ancient Egyptians.
Like I said, gramps. Just hold this L.
Swenet, can you explain what happened to the mitochondrial DNA? It shows non-fillers, in the supplements.
Genetic ID:
I0861
I1069
I1072
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is the part were I get a bit confused:
quote:"CT, has been interpreted as supporting an African origin for anatomically modern humans,10 with Khoisan from south Africa and Ethiopians from east Africa sharing the deepest lineages of the phylogeny.15 and 16"
These chromosomes belong to a clade (haplogroup BT) in which chromosomes C and R share a common ancestor (Figure 2).
--Fulvio Cruciani et al (2011)
A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa
quote: An independent high resolution MSY phylogeny has been recently obtained from 2,870 Y-SNPs discovered (or re- discovered) in the course of a large whole-genome re-sequencing study, but the observed variable sites all belong to the recent ‘‘out of Africa’’ CT clade [15]. Recently, in a re-sequencing study of the Y chromosome, the root of the tree moved to a new position and several changes at the basal nodes of the phylogeny were introduced [16]
[..]
Phylogenetic Mapping
Most of the mutations here analyzed belong to the African portion of the MSY phylogeny, which is comprised of haplogroups A1b, A1a, A2, A3 and B [16]. Through phylogenetic mapping it was possible to identify 15 new African haplogroups and to resolve one basal trifurcation (Figure 1). A new deep branch within the ‘‘out of Africa’’ haplogroup C was also identified (Figure S1).
Haplogroup A1b. The P114 mutation, which defines hap- logroup A1b according to Karafet et al. [14], had been detected in central-western Africa at very low frequencies (in total, three chromosomes from Cameroon) [16,19].
[...]
‘‘Out of Africa’’ haplogroups. All Y-clades that are not exclusively African belong to the macro-haplogroup CT, which is defined by mutations M168, M294 and P9.1 [14,31] and is subdivided into two major clades, DE and CF [1,14]. In a recent study [16], sequencing of two chromosomes belonging to haplogroups C and R, led to the identification of 25 new mutations, eleven of which were in the C-chromosome and seven in the R-chromosome. Here, the seven mutations which were found to be shared by chromosomes of haplogroups C and R [16], were also found to be present in one DE sample (sample 33 in Table S1), and positioned at the root of macro-haplogroup CT (Figure 1 and Figure S1). Six haplogroup C chromosomes (samples 34–39 in Table S1) were analyzed for the eleven haplogroup C- specific mutations [16] and for SNPs defining branches C1 to C6 in the tree by Karafet et al. [14] (Figure S1). Through this analysis we identified a chromosome from southern Europe as a new deep branch within haplogroup C (C-V20 or C7, Figure S1). Previously, only a few examples of C chromosomes (only defined by the marker RPS4Y711) had been found in southern Europe [32,33]. To improve our knowledge regarding the distribution of haplogroup C in Europe, we surveyed 1965 European subjects for the mutation RPS4Y711 and identified one additional haplogroup C chromosome from southern Europe, which has also been classified as C7 (data not shown). Further studies are needed to establish whether C7 chromosomes are the relics of an ancient European gene pool or the signal of a recent geographical spread from Asia. Two mutations, V248 and V87, which had never been previously described, were found to be specific to haplogroups C2 and C3, respectively (Figure S1). Three of the seven R-specific mutations (V45, V69 and V88) were previously mapped within haplogroup R [34], whereas the remaining four mutations have been here positioned at the root of haplogroups F (V186 and V205), K (V104) and P (V231) (Figure S1) through the analysis of 12 haplogroup F samples (samples 40–51, in Table S1).
[...]
Supporting Information
Figure S1 Structure of the macro-haplogroup CT. For details on mutations see legend to Figure 1. Dashed lines indicate putative branchings (no positive control available). The position of V248 (haplogroup C2) and V87 (haplogroup C3) compared to mutations that define internal branches was not determined. Note that mutations V45, V69 and V88 have been previously mapped (Cruciani et al. 2010; Eur J Hum Genet 18:800–807). (TIF)
--Fulvio Cruciani et al. (PLoS One. 2012; 7(11): e49170.)
Molecular Dissection of the Basal Clades in the Human Y Chromosome Phylogenetic Tree
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Y-DNA haplogroup J evolved in the ancient Near East and was carried into North Africa [...]
The IJ haplogroup characterizes part of the second wave of emigration from Africa that occurred via the Middle East 45,000 years bp and defines two branches I and J that emigrated northwards and eastwards into Europe. The J branch subsequently split again and contributed to the current North African population.
quote:J1 lineages may have a more southern origin, as they are more often found in the Levant region, other parts of the Near East, and North Africa, with a sparse distribution in the southern Mediterranean flank of Europe, and in Ethiopia.
Southern Levant is the Sinai. The Sinai is Northeast Africa. But it also could indicate Southern Arabia, in my view it isn't clear.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ish. doesn't matter what "label" they use. PN2. E1b* is of African origin. Don't get bent out of shape with labels. Natufians are primarily Africans they are NOT closely related to modern West Africans.
As I explained to the youngsta. E1b1a is relatively young. The mutation did NOT occur circa 8000BC? When the African Natufians left Africa.
As I mentioned in another thread. I don't expect to find E1b1a in West Africa prior to 3000BC. But By 3000BC, Yes, E1b1a will occur in the Nile Valley because it is an East African Nile Valley mutation. That is why the AEians were SSA E1b1a.
Modern West Africans displaced the indigenous populations as they migrated Westwards.
The Natufians and African Levantine will not be expected to be closely related to AEians. Check the timeline.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
What this paper is surmising is what I have said all along and in the other threads. African Western Neolithics are different to Eastern African Neolithics. This is reflected in mtDNA H1/H3 vs H2, H*.
Surprisingly. There is no G2* in the Natufians or PPNB. Both were predominantly E1b1b*. While in Western Europe the Neolithics were predominantly G2*
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Natufians are primarily Africans they are NOT closely related to modern West Africans.
Please reconcile how it can be simultaneously true that the Egyptian ancestry in these Natufians is not closely related to West Africans but the Amarna family is. Did you take your meds, gramps?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The genetic data is relevant, the rest of the article is rubbish.The Natufians originated in East Africa. The Natufans introduced farming. As a result, farming originated in Africa not the middle east. This reality makes the entire discussion of the paper.
Black folks are a trip. It is interesting that, while people discuss Lazardis genetics (he is a computer programmer)' work and he has no background in anthropology or genetics--anybody that is non white discussing the same material has to be wrote. Go figure??
I understand, by rubbish you mean interpretations, correct?
quote: "Previously, the West Eurasian population known to be the best proxy for this ancestry was present-day Sardinians, who resemble Neolithic Europeans genetically.
However, our analysis shows that East African ancestry is significantly better modelled by Levantine early farmers than by Anatolian or early European farmers, implying that the spread of this ancestry to East Africa was not from the same group that spread Near Eastern ancestry into Europe (Extended 283 Data Fig. 4; Supplementary Information, section 8)" [p. 9].
--Lazaridis et al.,
The genetic structure of the world's first farmers, bioRxiv preprint, posted June 16, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059311
Correct
I've been reading some of the posters their response on the paper.
quote: Blogger Seinundzeit said...
Wow, don't even know where to begin!
I'm leaving for work in a moment, so I can't say much. I'll read this thing in detail much later (so much to digest). Anyway, I can't believe so many questions just got answered in this paper, tremendous stuff.
But just to get it out there, finally, it's good to see that the whole debate concerning the LN/EBA European genetic contribution to Central Asia/South Asia is finally over. The Kalash are 50% something very similar to Northern Europeans (and Pashtuns are fairly similar), in the words of this paper. It's funny looking back, at how contested this was.
In addition, it seems my notion concerning Balochistan was correct, but I had the wrong Baloch populations in mind. It seems Makranis (who are really coastal Baloch. Makrani is a confusing label, also applied to Balochi-speakers of predominantly African descent) are pretty much overwhelmingly Iranian Neolithic, although I'm sure there are more inland Baloch tribes who can also be construed as such. There is going to be genetic structure in such a tribal region.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I always speculated that MtDNA Haplogroup H has an African origin basd upon the geographic pattern.,,,
Europeans are a sub-set of Africans and will always be...also...at least 10% of Germans are PN2.
When? H has entered Europe about 5KYa as most aDNA studies have showed.
according to xyyman the maternal ancestry of the modern European was brought there by berbers who crossed Gibraltar.
In other words maternally, Tuaregs and Germans are of the same stock, Germans more related maternally to Tuareg than Tuareg are related maternally to Sub Saharan Africans. This African component of modern Europeans relatively quite recent " 5 kya"
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Swenet. You are all over the place. You can't stay focused
@TP "but I had the wrong Baloch populations in mind. It seems Makranis (who are Balochi-speakers of predominantly African descent) are pretty much overwhelmingly Iranian Neolithic,....."
Are they saying African Makranis are ancestral to Iranians? But wasn't KOS14 closest to Makrani. That means the time line don't add up. KOS14 was HG not Neolithic.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Ish. doesn't matter what "label" they use. PN2. E1b* is of African origin. Don't get bent out of shape with labels. Natufians are primarily Africans they are NOT closely related to modern West Africans.
As I explained to the youngsta. E1b1a is relatively young. The mutation did NOT occur circa 8000BC? When the African Natufians left Africa.
As I mentioned in another thread. I don't expect to find E1b1a in West Africa prior to 3000BC. But By 3000BC, Yes, E1b1a will occur in the Nile Valley because it is an East African Nile Valley mutation. That is why the AEians were SSA E1b1a.
Modern West Africans displaced the indigenous populations as they migrated Westwards.
The Natufians and African Levantine will not be expected to be closely related to AEians. Check the timeline.
I have seen PN2 being mentioned.
Anyway, they are very specific on Raqefet Cave, Mt. Carmel, Israel. So I had to look up some info. Perhaps Swenet, can explain more about this, considering (your background in anthropology).
quote:Flowering plants possess mechanisms that stimulate positive emotional and social responses in humans. It is difficult to establish when people started to use flowers in public and ceremonial events because of the scarcity of relevant evidence in the archaeological record. We report on uniquely preserved 13,700–11,700-y-old grave linings made of flowers, suggesting that such use began much earlier than previously thought. The only potentially older instance is the questionable use of flowers in the Shanidar IV Neanderthal grave. The earliest cemeteries (ca. 15,000–11,500 y ago) in the Levant are known from Natufian sites in northern Israel, where dozens of burials reflect a wide range of inhumation practices. The newly discovered flower linings were found in four Natufian graves at the burial site of Raqefet Cave, Mt. Carmel, Israel. Large identified plant impressions in the graves include stems of sage and other Lamiaceae (Labiatae; mint family) or Scrophulariaceae (figwort family) species; accompanied by a plethora of phytoliths, they provide the earliest direct evidence now known for such preparation and decoration of graves. Some of the plant species attest to spring burials with a strong emphasis on colorful and aromatic flowers. Cave floor chiseling to accommodate the desired grave location and depth is also evident at the site. Thus, grave preparation was a sophisticated planned process, embedded with social and spiritual meanings reflecting a complex preagricultural society undergoing profound changes at the end of the Pleistocene.
--Dani Nadela,1, Avinoam Daninb, Robert C. Powerc, Arlene M. Rosend, Fanny Bocquentine, Alexander Tsatskina, Danny Rosenberga, Reuven Yeshuruna,f, Lior Weissbroda, Noemi R. Rebollog, Omry Barzilaig, and Elisabetta Boarettog
Earliest floral grave lining from 13,700–11,700-y-old Natufian burials at Raqefet Cave, Mt. Carmel, Israel
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @ Swenet. You are all over the place. You can't stay focused
@TP "but I had the wrong Baloch populations in mind. It seems Makranis (who are Balochi-speakers of predominantly African descent) are pretty much overwhelmingly Iranian Neolithic,....."
Are they saying African Makranis are ancestral to Iranians? But wasn't KOS14 closest to Makrani. That means the time line don't add up. KOS14 was HG not Neolithic.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: What this paper is surmising is what I have said all along and in the other threads. African Western Neolithics are different to Eastern African Neolithics. This is reflected in mtDNA H1/H3 vs H2, H*.
Surprisingly. There is no G2* in the Natufians or PPNB. Both were predominantly E1b1b*. While in Western Europe the Neolithics were predominantly G2*
This thread was about G1. Are these the proto modern Europeans?
PLoS ONE 10(4): e0122968. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0122968
Deep Phylogenetic Analysis of Haplogroup G1 Provides Estimates of SNP and STR Mutation Rates on the Human Y-Chromosome and Reveals Migrations of Iranic Speakers
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @ Swenet. You are all over the place. You can't stay focused
@TP "but I had the wrong Baloch populations in mind. It seems Makranis (who are Balochi-speakers of predominantly African descent) are pretty much overwhelmingly Iranian Neolithic,....."
Are they saying African Makranis are ancestral to Iranians? But wasn't KOS14 closest to Makrani. That means the time line don't add up. KOS14 was HG not Neolithic.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I always speculated that MtDNA Haplogroup H has an African origin basd upon the geographic pattern.,,,
Europeans are a sub-set of Africans and will always be...also...at least 10% of Germans are PN2.
When? H has entered Europe about 5KYa as most aDNA studies have showed.
according to xyyman the maternal ancestry of the modern European was brought there by berbers who crossed Gibraltar.
In other words maternally, Tuaregs and Germans are of the same stock, Germans more related maternally to Tuareg than Tuareg are related maternally to Sub Saharan Africans. This African component of modern Europeans relatively quite recent " 5 kya"
I am not sure if this is on xyyman neceserally, Frigi et al. speaks on this as well.
quote:
Haplogroup L1b roots deeply in the human mtDNA phylogeny and has the characteristic motif 16126, 16187, 16189, 16223, 16264, 16270, 116278, 16311.
[...]
Our results also point to a less ancient western African gene flow to Tunisia involving haplogroups L2a and L3b. Thus the sub-Saharan contribution to northern Africa starting from the east would have taken place before the Neolithic. The western African contribution to North Africa should have occurred before the Sahara’s formation (15,000 BP).
[...]
The dates for subhaplogroups H1 and H3 (13,000 and 10,000 years, respectively) in Iberian and North African populations allow for this possibility. Kefi et al.’s (2005) data on ancient DNA could be viewed as being in agreement with such a presence in North Africa in ancient times (about 15,000–6,000 years ago) and with the fact that the North African populations are considered by most scholars as having their closest relations with European and Asian populations (Cherni et al. 2008; Ennafaa et al. 2009; Kefi et al. 2005; Rando et al. 1998). How- ever, considering the general understanding nowadays that human settlement of the rest of the world emerged from eastern northern Africa less than 50,000 years ago, a better explanation of these haplogroups might be that their frequencies re- flect the original modern human population of these parts of Africa as much as or more than intrusions from outside the continent. The ways that gene frequencies may increase or decrease based on adaptive selection, gene flow, and/or social processes is under study and would benefit from the results of studies on autosomal and Y-chromosome markers.
--Frigi et al. Ancient Local Evolution of African mtDNA Haplogroups in Tunisian Berber
quote:The Mesolithic–Neolithic transition in southern Iberia
Resumen: New data and a review of historiographic information from Neolithic sites of the Malaga and Algarve coasts (southern Iberian Peninsula) and from the Maghreb (North Africa) reveal the existence of a Neolithic settlement at least from 7.5 cal ka BP. The agricultural and pastoralist food producing economy of that population rapidly replaced the coastal economies of the Mesolithic populations. The timing of this population and economic turnover coincided withmajor changes in the continental and marine ecosystems, including upwelling intensity, sea-level changes and increased aridity in the Sahara and along the Iberian coast. These changes likely impacted the subsistence strategies of the Mesolithic populations along the Iberian seascapes and resulted in abandonments manifested as sedimentary hiatuses in some areas during the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition. The rapid expansion and area of dispersal of the early Neolithic traits suggest the use of marine technology. Different evidences for a Maghrebian origin for the first colonists have been summarized.
The recognition of an early North-African Neolithic influence in Southern Iberia and the Maghreb is vital for understanding the appearance and development of the Neolithic in Western Europe. Our review suggests links between climate change, resource allocation, and population turnover.
Cortés-Sánchez, Miguel Et al.
The Mesolithic–Neolithic transition in southern Iberia
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I always speculated that MtDNA Haplogroup H has an African origin basd upon the geographic pattern.,,,
Europeans are a sub-set of Africans and will always be...also...at least 10% of Germans are PN2.
When? H has entered Europe about 5KYa as most aDNA studies have showed.
according to xyyman the maternal ancestry of the modern European was brought there by berbers who crossed Gibraltar.
In other words maternally, Tuaregs and Germans are of the same stock, Germans more related maternally to Tuareg than Tuareg are related maternally to Sub Saharan Africans. This African component of modern Europeans relatively quite recent " 5 kya"
I am not sure if this is on xyyman neceserally, Frigi et al. speaks on this as well.
quote:
Haplogroup L1b roots deeply in the human mtDNA phylogeny and has the characteristic motif 16126, 16187, 16189, 16223, 16264, 16270, 116278, 16311.
[...]
Our results also point to a less ancient western African gene flow to Tunisia involving haplogroups L2a and L3b. Thus the sub-Saharan contribution to northern Africa starting from the east would have taken place before the Neolithic. The western African contribution to North Africa should have occurred before the Sahara’s formation (15,000 BP).
[...]
The dates for subhaplogroups H1 and H3 (13,000 and 10,000 years, respectively) in Iberian and North African populations allow for this possibility. Kefi et al.’s (2005) data on ancient DNA could be viewed as being in agreement with such a presence in North Africa in ancient times (about 15,000–6,000 years ago) and with the fact that the North African populations are considered by most scholars as having their closest relations with European and Asian populations (Cherni et al. 2008; Ennafaa et al. 2009; Kefi et al. 2005; Rando et al. 1998). How- ever, considering the general understanding nowadays that human settlement of the rest of the world emerged from eastern northern Africa less than 50,000 years ago, a better explanation of these haplogroups might be that their frequencies re- flect the original modern human population of these parts of Africa as much as or more than intrusions from outside the continent. The ways that gene frequencies may increase or decrease based on adaptive selection, gene flow, and/or social processes is under study and would benefit from the results of studies on autosomal and Y-chromosome markers.
--Frigi et al.
Thus maternally Europeans are more North African than Sub Saharan Africans are
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: considering the general understanding nowadays that human settlement of the rest of the world emerged from eastern northern Africa less than 50,000 years ago, a better explanation of these haplogroups might be that their frequencies re- flect the original modern human population of these parts of Africa as much as or more than intrusions from outside the continent. The ways that gene frequencies may increase or decrease based on adaptive selection, gene flow, and/or social processes is under study and would benefit from the results of studies on autosomal and Y-chromosome markers.
--Frigi et al.
So this is proof that no new haplogroups came about after people left Africa?
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] @ Swenet. You are all over the place. You can't stay focused
How am I all over the place, gramps? All I'm asking is clarification re: what makes you think Amarna Egyptians are closely related to West Africans but epipalaeolithic Egyptians aren't. Please clarify.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @ Swenet. You are all over the place. You can't stay focused
@TP "but I had the wrong Baloch populations in mind. It seems Makranis (who are Balochi-speakers of predominantly African descent) are pretty much overwhelmingly Iranian Neolithic,....."
Are they saying African Makranis are ancestral to Iranians? But wasn't KOS14 closest to Makrani. That means the time line don't add up. KOS14 was HG not Neolithic.
You are using a map that xyyman marked up with red text can you use proper sources please
1) it was posted to xyyman, not you. So I don't understand why you take it this personal. 2) it was in his post, and I don't know who made that map. 3) does it change the fact of the Neolithic surviving transplant populations?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic