quote:Originally posted by the lioness: The Copts of Egypt have distinct genetics from the Arab majority, with a lower degree of Middle Eastern ancestry and higher levels of North African and sub-Saharan African genetics.
The Copt sample doesn't have a higher degree of SSA "genetics". That's the whole point. Just like the pre-contact Canary Island aDNA shows for coastal Maghreb, their affinities bespeak that Egypt has recent SSA and non-African 'migration' ('migration' in quotes because it might just be ancestry that was already there, e.g. pale Greek/Balkan-looking Copts have been in Egypt for some time, slowly going up in the population).
And they don't have a radically lower degree of Middle eastern "genetics" either. But, as shown by Dobon et al, both their African and non African affinities seem more rooted in the region (i.e. Sudan) than other Egyptian samples, some of whom look like they could be transplants from the Arabian peninsula in some analyses (though they aren't). In the place of these these recent admixtures that the Copts from Sudan don't have as much as other Egyptian samples, they might have more of the same African ancestry that is in the Natufian samples.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's a genetics article, looks you pick out in photos are irrelevant, please re-do your commentary without reference to "looks" otherwise people will get confused
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can easily show Copts who post their genetic results. Some of them have a Balkan component. That's the difference between me and you. I know more than I let on. You, on the other hand...
Stop editing, lioness. Trying to make it about "the people".
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
[1] The Copts of Egypt have distinct genetics from the Arab majority, with a lower degree of Middle Eastern ancestry and higher levels of North African and sub-Saharan African genetics. A 2008 study of a Copts of Egyptian descent (though living in Sudan) found relatively high frequencies of the Sub-Saharan Haplogroup B. According to the study, the presence of Sub-Saharan haplogroups may also be consistent with the historical record in which southern Egypt was colonized by Nilotic populations during the early state formation.
A 2015 study by Dobon et al. identified an ancestral autosomal component of West Eurasian origin that is common to many modern Afroasiatic-speaking populations in Northeast Africa, including Somalis and Sudanese. Known as the Coptic component, it peaks among Egyptian Copts who settled in Sudan over the past two centuries; but it is also found among Copts living in Northern and Southern Egypt. Copts also formed a separated group in PCA, a close outlier to other Egyptians, Northeast Africans and Middle East populations. The Coptic component evolved out of a main Northeast African and Middle Eastern ancestral component that is shared by other Egyptians and also found at high frequencies among other Afro-Asiatic populations in Northeast Africa (~70%), such as Somalis and Sudanese. The scientists suggest that this points to a common origin for the general population of Egypt. They also associate the Coptic component with Ancient Egyptian ancestry, without the later Arabian influence that is present among other Egyptians
The genetics of East African populations: a Nilo-Saharan component in the African genetic landscape
Begoña Dobon, Hisham Y. Hassan, Hafid Laayouni, Pierre Luisi, Isis Ricaño-Ponce, Alexandra Zhernakova, Cisca Wijmenga, Hanan Tahir, David Comas, Mihai G. Netea & Jaume Bertranpetit Scientific Reports 5, Article number: 9996 (2015)
The North African/Middle Eastern genetic component is identified especially in Copts. The Coptic population present in Sudan is an example of a recent migration from Egypt over the past two centuries. They are close to Egyptians in the PCA, but remain a differentiated cluster, showing their own component at k = 4 (Fig. 3). Copts lack the influence found in Egyptians from Qatar, an Arabic population. It may suggest that Copts have a genetic composition that could resemble the ancestral Egyptian population, without the present strong Arab influence.
[2] also, ease up on the Hinduism
[1.] You're saying this to tell me what exactly? I was already aware of this when I read and spoke about Dobons research. I would like for you to tell me when exactly E-M78 was introduced to the Sudanese Nilotics though, that would be helpful... BTW, Where does J1 Originate?
[2.] ...I don't get the joke.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I can easily show Copts who post their genetic results.
You probably cannot find a single photo of a Sudanese Copt that is accompanied by genetic results
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I can easily show Copts who post their genetic results.
You probably cannot find a single photo of a Sudanese Copt that is accompanied by genetic results
I can see what you're saying now. But I was talking about pale Egyptian Copts living in Egypt, not the Copt sample under discussion here. Therefore, I don't need a picture of the sampled Egyptian-Sudanese Copts as I wasn't talking about them in that instance.
Again, the Copts living in Sudan have affinities that are more rooted in the region. The other Egyptian samples so far have more diverse affinities (e.g. some Copts with a heightened Balkan component or some Egyptians with more of a SSA component than others).
These lists with percentages don't all have to be conclusive or even accurate, but they do show important differences between various modern Egyptian samples is what I'm saying.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: You're saying this to tell me what exactly? I was already aware of this when I read and spoke about Dobons research. I would like for you to tell me when exactly E-M78 was introduced to the Sudanese Nilotics though, that would be helpful... BTW, Where does J1 Originate?
[2.] ...I don't get the joke. [/QB]
You read this ?
Y-chromosome variation among Sudanese: Restricted gene flow, concordance with language, geography, and history 2008
Authors Hisham Y. Hassan, Peter A. Underhill, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza, Muntaser E. Ibrahim
he analysis of M78 subclades among Sudanese suggests that two subclades, E-V12 and E-V22, which are very common in northern African (Cruciani et al., 2007), might have been brought to Sudan from North Africa after the progressive desertification of the Sahara around 6,000–8,000 years ago. Sudden climate change might have forced several Neolithic cultures/people to shift northwards to the Mediterranean and southwards to the Sahel and Nile Valley (Dutour et al., 1988; Rando et al., 1998). E-V32 is the most frequent subclade among Sudanese. The Masalit possesses by far the highest fre- quency of the E-M78 and of the E-V32 haplogroup, sug- gesting 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 Afri- can origin (Cruciani et al., 2007), were not found among Sudanese. Although the PC plot places the Beja and Amhara from Ethiopia in one sub-cluster based on shared fre- quencies of the haplogroup J1, the distribution of M78 subclades (Table 2) indicates that the Beja are perhaps related as well to the Oromo on the basis of the consider- able frequencies of E-V32 among Oromo in comparison to Amhara (Cruciani et al., 2007). These findings affirm the historical contact between Ethiopia and eastern Sudan (Hassan, 1968, 1973; Passarino et al., 1998), and the fact that these populations speak languages of the Afro-Asiatic family
__________________________
The Hindu thing is an xyyman thing. xyyman hates Europeans and thinks East Indian people are suck ups to them and to "Khahzar Jews." He thinks a filipino poster named Djeuhuti is Indian for some reason and then sometimes he thinks new posters are aliases of Djehuti.
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
I don't hate Europeans. I have in-laws who are Europeans. The off-springs I am very close too also. Some of my past management who were white have open doors for me a a young smart black male bursting with potential. I cannot hate white people.
I dislike the system in place . yes.
As for DJ. yes he is a suck up like most Hindus. Those in the scientific/engineering field will know what I am talking about. They have no 'nuts"
I don't think all new posters are suck puppets of DJ.
Their style and choice of words is a dead give away. Yes, his writing style is similar to DJ...so far.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Remember most posters thought Kdolo was an alias for Mike. They had similar choice of words etc.
Now we know they are two separate individuals.
Mike is pro-gay Kdolo isn't. Kdolo is pro-gun Mike isn't.
Kdolo has a problem with some type of women. etc
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Elmaestro. Just going to clarify if so that you are not confused. The quotes you pasted are for Hassan's work on E-M78 in Sudan and not the Wadi Howar research.
The Wadi Howar data deals in physical anthropology and not genetics.
@Lioness Take xyyman's advice . Please disregard spamming those figures. Like the expanded genetic results on the 18th dynasty that were supposed to be release, this data will probably never been confirmed in public or ever see the light of day. It could be entirely fabricated and above all, You, and everyone else on the web have failed to perform any real in depth analysis on the data - which basically means its useless. I am actually tired of seeing it because as with every release of rarely seen GOOD data (Kadruka! Kadruka! Kadruka!) it gets into the hands of very vocal idiots to be spammed for all the wrong reasons.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: They are trying to disconnect Ancient Egypt from the rest of Africa (aka sub-Saharan Africa). But you never see them trying to disconnect Ancient Greece from European or American history.
History and genetics are two different things. For instance on the genetic level most European Americans ancestors are German, Irish Americans, English and Italians. Most have little if any Greek ancestry, except perhaps some Italians .
So if beyoku and Swenet spend equal time on this point on the genetic level it will balance out.
Also if you look at the influence of Greece on the European enlightenment it was significant but that had to do with a willful re-examination of old Greek writings. The Greek writings were forgotten but at a certain point they revived many of their ideas and they could only do that because they had the books and the translation. and then disseminated these writings
It's true Ancient Greece has currently a greater influence to Europe than Ancient Egypt to Africa but things can change. This influence was (and still is) a choice by Europeans. Europeans during the enlightenment could have just picked up science, democracy, philosophy from Ancient Greece without making Ancient Greece part of their history. Like writing for example which was not invented in Europe. During the time of the enlightenment, the era of Ancient Greece was long gone. It was and it still is a deliberate choice by European and American historians to put Ancient Greece as part of their history. It's after they made this choice that Ancient Greece truly became important and name like Aristotle became popular. The relationship between Ancient Egypt and the rest of Africa is different than Europeans and Ancient Greece. We share common ancestors before the foundation of Ancient Egypt. At least based on current genetic and most archaeological results. Headrests found in Ancient Egypt and the rest of Africa is an example of shared cultural heritage. Divine kingship, religions, pottery, philosophy are other shared historical heritage. It was and still is a deliberate choice by European and American historians to include Ancient Greece as part of their history, making it influential, same for Ancient Egypt and the history of Africa.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @Lioness Take xyyman's advice . Please disregard spamming those figures. Like the expanded genetic results on the 18th dynasty that were supposed to be release, this data will probably never been confirmed in public or ever see the light of day. It could be entirely fabricated and above all, You, and everyone else on the web have failed to perform any real in depth analysis on the data - which basically means its useless. I am actually tired of seeing it because as with every release of rarely seen GOOD data (Kadruka! Kadruka! Kadruka!) it gets into the hands of very vocal idiots to be spammed for all the wrong reasons.
Since I was the one who brought it up in this thread in the first place, I feel it's me who has to apologize. If it's your desire to not see it spammed all over the place in public, I will stop it.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not sure what type of "in-depth" analysis you want performed. If the dataset is authentic then to some extent it supports the close connection between the Amarnas and "shorties" per Sage. Ie the Khoi-San. At least on the male side
A-M13, B-M150, BM112 and off course E-M2 being SSA. As for the mtDNA again we have L0a1, L0a , L1b1a, L0b
These are all typical African lineage with a STRONG SSA and Khoi-San/"pygmy" presence.
I am surprised by the low J-M267 typical or Berbers and Africanized Bediouns from the Arabian region. I haven't spent much time on to the regional or localization of mtDNA within Africa like L3e5 and L3D. But it seems like the females are heavily North and East Africans
---------------------------------- Quote ----------------- Also as reported by Beyoku a couple years ago in a yet to be published report.
-------------------- 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
Look where Mota fits in relationship to Africans and non-Africans in treemix and Amun Ra STILL calls people 'racist' for basically articulating what the data says. It goes to show you how pervasive mental retardation is in some quarters of this community:
And then you got people still replying to him as if he's a rational human being. Like he's not missing the same amount of chromosomes as IceJJfish.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
My view is. An African is an African is an African. Doesn't matter East, West, North or South. Including Berbers. ....or Bedoiuns. As AMRTU states that PN2 connection says it all whether E-M2 or E-M35. That is the connection. For the females we have L, M1 and even the unique clades of mtDNA hg-H. The European clades will NOT be found in AEians.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did you crayon that TreeMix chart with Mota yourself? Software? It wasn't published in the Supp or original paper. Source? Davidski? I respect some of his work. At least he is more unbiased than the fool Dienekes.
Problem with this TreeMix chart is it did NOT include East African like Luyha or Massai or other Kenyans. So it looks like Mota is on a distinct branch. Which is impossible since Mota is only 4000yo!!! Therefore the sample choice skew the results.
You should know that. Geography! Geography! Geography!
-------------------- 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: Problem with this TreeMix chart is it did NOT include East African like Luyha or Massai or other Kenyans. So it looks like Mota is on a distinct branch. Which is impossible since Mota is only 4000yo!!! Therefore the sample choice skew the results.
Now you're fanatically groping in the dark and reaching. Mota has up to 33% Pygmy-like ancestry and he's still intermediate. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Quote: "33% Pygmy-like ancestry". Really!?? What-ever you say Tonto!
-------------------- 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: Ie the Khoi-San. At least on the male side
A-M13, B-M150, BM112 and off course E-M2 being SSA. As for the mtDNA again we have L0a1, L0a , L1b1a, L0b
These are all typical African lineage with a STRONG SSA and Khoi-San/"pygmy"
What are you talking about. Your whole argument crumbles to the ground because its foundation is based on you not knowing what (the hell) you are taking about.
The lineages are positive A-M13. They were not listed as some generic A-M91, or A-M32 to where you couldn't tell the derived clade and could confuse it with those found in Southern African Khoisan.
A-M13 is a lineage specific to North East Africa and East Africa characteristic of Some AA speakers but more importantly Nilo Saharan folk especially Nilotics. See MAP
I dont know how, but SOMEHOW you dont know the difference between A-M91 derivatives in East Africa and those in Southern Africa....separated from each other by about 90 Thousand years. You also do the same thing with those maternal lineages. NONE of which have anything to do with indigenous lineages of Southern Africa. Where have you been for the last 10 years?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh-brother. You brothas. I made it clear. I haven't spent much time looking down to the details the various sub haplgroups/sub-clades WITHIN Africa.
Obviously you have. My main concern is differentiating African derived genes in Europe and Levant/Arabia.
I am a racist according to Lioness.(sic)
I am not too concerned with internal strife in Africa. They will sort themselves out.
I know yDNA hg-A is found primarily in Khoi-San and some Berbers and some East Africans.
Howvever A00 in certain groups in West Africa
B - primarily amongst pygmyy.
E- we all know that.
MtDNA
L4, L5 etc East Africa. L-M1 right across the sahel and North Africa. L-N East Africa and North Africa into Europe and the Middle East.
If I was really interested I can map it out very easily.
But I will let the continental brothas fight that war.
-------------------- 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
So it goes back to the published STR/Ancestry from JAMA/Hawass do NOT match up with the dataset you had the inside track on. Which means you were most likely duped.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: So it goes back to the published STR/Ancestry from JAMA/Hawass do NOT match up with the dataset you had the inside track on. Which means you were most likely duped.
It matches perfectly with the Hawass 2010 and 2012 alleles, as those who've actually studied the affinities of these alleles, know. So, in the event that someone fabricated these uniparentals, they obviously knew what they were doing and put great effort into making the results look credible. They are also free of Eurocentric bias as some of the results are 'southern Nile Valley' at an apparently greater frequency than I would accredit to a random survey of dynastic aDNA based on my familiarity with the subject matter. You can't appreciate these details and that they vouch for credibility to some extent (earlier, you said it could have been the work of a sixth grader), because you don't have the frame of reference to intuitively know why something is consistent or completely off.
It's the SAME reason why Toledo K-13's (Mesolithic Portugal) and Taforalt VIII's 16223 positive mtDNA L and their sseming lack of L1 and L2 MAKE SENSE given their early terminal pleistocene/holocene age. If you go looking around you will see clueless people JUST LIKE YOU trying to reinterpret Taforalt motifs as certain derived L1 or L2 lineages as anachronistic as that is. Candidates for early West African Y DNA in Portugal are thought to be E-M33 and A (not or not primarily E-M2), again, making perfect sense. But you don't have a finely tuned frame of reference and you're too busy gushing over DNA Tribes that you don't understand how preposterous the results are, taken literally. Even if you have a personal bias against Ethiopians, the Sahel is the poorest scoring Sub-Saharan African region as far as MLI scores. You must have really bumped your head if you think South Africans are closer to ancient Egyptians than Sahelians.
And, like I said, they've never been replicated. So stop fabricating that "other programs get the same results".
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
t's true Ancient Greece has currently a greater influence to Europe than Ancient Egypt to Africa but things can change. This influence was (and still is) a choice by Europeans. Europeans during the enlightenment could have just picked up science, democracy, philosophy from Ancient Greece without making Ancient Greece part of their history.
Greece is a European country and ancient Greece is a part of European history in general. Greeks cluster with other Europeans genetically.
The Roman empire in 117 AD
The Roman empire had already assimilated much of Greek learning
The Dorians who invaded Greece circa 1200 BC were R1b carriers
A European population in Minoan Bronze Age Crete 2012
Jeffery R. Hughey, Peristera Paschou, Petros Drineas, Donald Mastropaolo, Dimitra M. Lotakis, Patrick A. Navas, Manolis Michalodimitrakis, John A. Stamatoyannopoulos & George Stamatoyannopoulos AffiliationsContributionsCorresponding author Nature Communications 4, Article number: 1861 doi:10.1038/ncomms2871 Received 31 December 2012
The Minoan mtDNA haplotypes resembled those of the European populations (Figs 2b, 3a and 4; Supplementary Figs S1–S3). The majority of Minoans were classified in haplogroups H (43.2%), T (18.9%), K (16.2%) and I (8.1%). Haplogroups U5A, W, J2, U, X and J were each identified in a single individual. The greatest percentage of shared Minoan haplotypes was observed with European populations, particularly with individuals from Northern and Western Europe (26.98% and 29.28%, respectively)
Our results strongly suggest that the principal matrilineal genetic relationships of the Minoans are with Neolithic, ancient and modern European populations. Such findings are in support of the hypothesis of an autochthonous origin of the Minoan civilization by the descendants of the Neolithic settlers of the island4,
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
With the Sandwe finding themselves close to he mota, I'm curious to know how well the common ancestor of the Akie & ElmoLo people cluster w/ Mota. I would even bet Mota belongs to that ancestral group or is close to it.
@Swenet can you point me in the direction of this sahelan/AE MLI scoring from DNAtribes.
On a side note, going back to xyzmans comments on pg7, NEAfrican SSA ancestry attributed to the Maasai might partially be attributed to the known Kalenjin presence in lower Egypt go back at least 2.5kya... If recorded history even matters that is.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Elmaestro. I would suggest reading or rereading the Tishkoff and the Hirbo Data. They have data on the Akie and the El-Molo ID you made a typo.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
There is no such thing as whim-based eclecticism in science. You can't take a bit here, a bit there, based on whim. I say Mota is not particularly related to Sandawe based on his genome, you repeatedly say he is and don't present evidence. I say the Copts have a component with continuity and you repeatedly attack strawmen saying they are admixed. I asked that you read some papers in response to your query and from your comments it doesn't seem like you are implementing them. You don't seem interested in what I have to say unless it agrees with what you want to hear. I'm not a pawn.
I suggest you direct your questions to some of the vets. Beyoku is around and seems willing to help. Ask him. No hard feelings.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Wtf are you talking about? you said Sahelian peeps score low in MLI testing... I'm asking where you seen this at... and Correct me if I'm wrong, but, I remember being called a "Hindu" for also suggesting that this 'overlapping Coptic component' should be evident. As for mota... _____________________________________________________ Mota was placed close to the Ethiopian samples (Fig. 1, A), in between the clusters formed by the Ari and the Sandawe (but very close to an Ari individual that stands out from the rest of that group). The Ari can be split into two castes, Ari Cultivator and Ari Blacksmith, which share a common origin within the last 4,500 years (62). Since data on a larger number of SNPs are available for Ethiopian populations (4), we repeated the PCA using this higher quality dataset (processed as in SM S6), which gave us 484,161 usable SNPs that could be called in Mota. Once again, Mota fell in between the Ari and the Sandawe cluster (Fig. S5). _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
Ari ...have by far the greatest genetic affinity to Mota (Fig. 1, B and C). The Ari speak a language classified as Omotic, which is the most differentiated branch of the Afro-Asiatic languages. Gumuz, a population member of the Nilo-Saharan family (also an Afro-Asiatic language), also shows a high level of shared drift with Mota, but significantly less than the Ari. Sandawe, which are closer to Mota in the PCAs, do not show high shared drift with Mota in the f3, possibly because they are closer to the Khoisan populations than the other Eastern African populations. ____________________________________________________
This is all I have seen and read so far on Mota's Genome. Sandawe people don't have shared drift w/ Mota which says they're not descendant from the specimen nor have it's (Motas) population "mixed" with a "pre-Sandawe" (like you would say)...but Mota do share drift with the Ari and this is based on single neucleotide polymorphisms right? specifically Y-Chromosome right? This piece also suggests that Mota predates major Western Eurasian geneflow right? Being that the Sandawe are said to be descendants from the Khoisan with geneflow from neighboring northern tribes out of ethiopia, and this PCA was done on Y-dna which subsequently shows Mota clustering closer to the sandawe w/o the account of genetic drift... how is hypothesizing that the Mota and some of the Sandawe could have had shared ancestry eclecticism?
Lighten up, not everyone hear have an "agenda." Apparently I must eat and swallow everything you put on the plate with out sniffing or chewing... That's the impression you gave me D1, apparently it's coming full circle. Sorry if I inconvenienced you. As for my thoughts on the Akie & ElMolo, I have no info on Y-DNA for them but Tishkoff is saying that their common ancestor was in Eithiopia post-Mota, they seem quite near to Omotic speakers in general.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Admittedly I jumped the gun (it was late last night [Roll Eyes] ) when posting beforehand, but I do have an overall Hypothesis of whats going on in totality, that I wont disclose until I have more information, which I was in hopes of getting earlier... For now, from my PoV (and even before the Natufian data dropped) Natufian =/= AE
I'm not a pawn in your eclectic real-time evidence gathering and hypothesis building while you randomly criticize authors and adopt arbitrary positions based on self-admitted pre-conceived notions. You don't have to buy anything I say—I never asked you to. (And I don't think it's too much to ask people to adhere to decent evidence when they start posting or objecting). But based on whether I see people dismiss or heed data they ask me it's at MY discretion whether I continue to help. There are enough experienced people to ask your questions, including people with your leanings. I'm just not a fit. It's not the end of the world.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Those results make sense to me. Only Beyoku knows the source and veracity but it's certainly cleverly made if it's not true. A great mix of mostly African haplogroups (E, A, B, Ls) with a few coming from Western Asia. Which makes sense according to the geography and history of that region.
As we know on this site, Ancient Egypt was a indigenous African civilization. With population continuity and archaeological continuity from the Pleistocene to the foundation of the Ancient Egyptian state in the Holocene ( http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008815 ).
We also know, the Nile was both the source and a refuge for the peopling and desertification of the Sahara between 10 000BC and 4000BC. People migrating back and forth toward the Nile after the desertification of the Green Sahara (wavy line pottery culture, Tasian-Badarian, Nabta Playa, Kadruka, Cave of Swimmers-beast, etc).
So it makes sense Ancient Egypt would be a mix of all those African haplogroups with some admixture from neighboring Aamu people (the word Ancient Egyptians used for Hyksos/West Asians).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
You really have a bad habit of posting on old stuff. This was discussed already back when it first came out. I posted on it. See ESR. Bottom line, as usual the headliner is what it is..,. a headliner and a lie. Look through the Supplemental. The data shows the Neolithic came from the “south”. What is south of Crete? Answer=Africa. The author did not explicitly say…Africa. He used the word they came from the “south”. Sources cited. Why did he come to that conclusion? Because the unique haplotypes of mtDNA H is found in the south and NOT on the mainland Europe. The mainland has higher frequency but NOT unique haplotypes. Kefi et al confirmed that in 2014.
Stop misleading the readers!!!!!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
A European population in Minoan Bronze Age Crete 2012
Our results strongly suggest that the principal matrilineal genetic relationships of the Minoans are with Neolithic, ancient and modern European populations. Such findings are in support of the hypothesis of an autochthonous origin of the Minoan civilization by the descendants of the Neolithic settlers of the island4,
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Those results make sense to me. Only Beyoku knows the source and veracity but it's certainly cleverly made if it's not true. A great mix of mostly African haplogroups (E, A, B, Ls) with a few coming from Western Asia. Which makes sense according to the geography and history of that region.
Is IceJJfish parroting me? I talk about the results making sense and the first chance he gets he's parroting me, talking about "the results make sense" and that they were "cleverly made if fabricated". He doesn't know whether to call me a 'wasist' or to leech from my posts.
And I thought it was asked that people do not spam these haplogroup data again and again. First thing he does is repost it.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xxyman: Stop misleading the readers!!!!!
True, gramps. The abstract is misleading. There is really no way you can see some of these hgs European affiliated without the necessary context that they represent European hybridization. The double standard is staggering. Y DNA E is non-African if it back migrated to Africa immediately after OOA but mtDNAs that didn't arrive in Europe until very late can be called 'European' without a problem and can be used to obscure the origin of these people as "substantially western European".
Also interesting is how lioness gives the E=non African camp ample airing time during her coverage of new Y tree papers, even reposting Razib Khan's bizarre claim about humanity possibly originating in the Levant. Not surprisingly, European researchers with self-serving labeling schemes are given a pass.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: You really have a bad habit of posting on old stuff. This was discussed already back when it first came out. I posted on it. See ESR. Bottom line, as usual the headliner is what it is..,. a headliner and a lie. Look through the Supplemental. The data shows the Neolithic came from the “south”. What is south of Crete? Answer=Africa. The author did not explicitly say…Africa. He used the word they came from the “south”. Sources cited. Why did he come to that conclusion? Because the unique haplotypes of mtDNA H is found in the south and NOT on the mainland Europe. The mainland has higher frequency but NOT unique haplotypes. Kefi et al confirmed that in 2014.
Stop misleading the readers!!!!!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
A European population in Minoan Bronze Age Crete 2012
Our results strongly suggest that the principal matrilineal genetic relationships of the Minoans are with Neolithic, ancient and modern European populations. Such findings are in support of the hypothesis of an autochthonous origin of the Minoan civilization by the descendants of the Neolithic settlers of the island4,
You continue to not know what "Neolithic" means, you do do not no the origin of the term and you have never posted a definition of it or named a Neolithic site in Africa
"Neolithic" is a technological term it is not an ethnic group. There are Neolithic sites in Europe and elsewhere.
The simple fact is that Minoans had mtDNA in common with with Neolithic, ancient and modern European populations. The majority of Minoans were classified in haplogroups H (43.2%), T (18.9%), K (16.2%) and I (8.1%). Haplogroups U5A, W, J2, U, X and J were each identified in a single individual
-so the term "neolithic" is not even relevant to that point and you bringing it up is therefore a diversion. For instance if you were to say that the original settlers of Minoan form Anatolia an Iraq were not Neolithic is irrelevant to the fact that Minoan DNA is more similar to European DNA than it is to African DNA
Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C. Near Eastern Farmers Supports an Early Neolithic Pioneer Maritime Colonization of Mainland Europe through Cyprus and the Aegean Islands
Eva Fernández , Alejandro Pérez-Pérez, Cristina Gamba, Eva Prats, Pedro Cuesta, Josep Anfruns, Miquel Molist, Eduardo Arroyo-Pardo, Daniel Turbón Published: June 5, 2014http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1004401
Abstract
The genetic impact associated to the Neolithic spread in Europe has been widely debated over the last 20 years. Within this context, ancient DNA studies have provided a more reliable picture by directly analyzing the protagonist populations at different regions in Europe. However, the lack of available data from the original Near Eastern farmers has limited the achieved conclusions, preventing the formulation of continental models of Neolithic expansion. Here we address this issue by presenting mitochondrial DNA data of the original Near-Eastern Neolithic communities with the aim of providing the adequate background for the interpretation of Neolithic genetic data from European samples. Sixty-three skeletons from the Pre Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) sites of Tell Halula, Tell Ramad and Dja'de El Mughara dating between 8,700–6,600 cal. B.C. were analyzed, and 15 validated mitochondrial DNA profiles were recovered. In order to estimate the demographic contribution of the first farmers to both Central European and Western Mediterranean Neolithic cultures, haplotype and haplogroup diversities in the PPNB sample were compared using phylogeographic and population genetic analyses to available ancient DNA data from human remains belonging to the Linearbandkeramik-Alföldi Vonaldiszes Kerámia and Cardial/Epicardial cultures. We also searched for possible signatures of the original Neolithic expansion over the modern Near Eastern and South European genetic pools, and tried to infer possible routes of expansion by comparing the obtained results to a database of 60 modern populations from both regions. Comparisons performed among the 3 ancient datasets allowed us to identify K and N-derived mitochondrial DNA haplogroups as potential markers of the Neolithic expansion, whose genetic signature would have reached both the Iberian coasts and the Central European plain. Moreover, the observed genetic affinities between the PPNB samples and the modern populations of Cyprus and Crete seem to suggest that the Neolithic was first introduced into Europe through pioneer seafaring colonization.
___________________________
Again "Neolithic" means in a given area the first farmers and stone tool users in that particular area.
"Neolithic" is not an ethnic group and it's definition is irrelevant to DNA comparisons of human remains, such analysis do not change in relation to if the word "neolithic" is used or not, stop the ongoing nonsense. look at the genetic data
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Y DNA E is non-African if it back migrated to Africa immediately after OOA
I have not seen enough evidence yet to persuade me Haplogroup E is non-African. It seems to me that is it is non-African that it couldn't have back migrated that immediately back to Africa since it would have taken thousands of years to originate outside of Africa to begin with assuming it is non-African.
And I ask you, if it is non-Africa where in particular did it originate?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
Also interesting is how lioness gives the E=non African camp ample airing time during her coverage of new Y tree papers, even reposting Razib Khan's bizarre claim about humanity possibly originating in the Levant. Not surprisingly, European researchers with self-serving labeling schemes are given a pass. [/QB]
Razib Khan is European but only 57% It is curious how the earliest African lineages, Hg A and B are not represented outside of Africa.
The only reason I give your E=non African camp ample airing time is that it is not the mainstream viewpoint and very little has been said on it.
There is also the Black Eurocentric camp. You may see some in the AE forum. They postulate that mankind originated with European blacks and the populating of Africa only came later
The Chinese also have some interesting claims as well
posted
You know you are fighting a lost cause? Again you are citing a paper that we have gone over so many times(Eva Fernandez et al). Conclusion? In the Levant the farmers carried African mtDNA haplogroups also. Consistent with an African origin of the Neolithic farmers. Look at the Supp!!!! I did a complete analysis on ESR. The author tried to spin the closest to 8000yo farmers were Jews. Why? High frequency of mtDNA K, iirc. They ignored mtDNA L and concentrated on K. Parsing out all the haplotypes of K. Look it up on ESR!!!! .
-------------------- 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] You know you are fighting a lost cause? Again you are citing a paper that we have gone over so many times(Eva Fernandez et al). Conclusion? In the Levant the farmers carried African mtDNA haplogroups also. Consistent with an African origin of the Neolithic farmers.
We are you saying that if Levant farmers carried African mtDNA haplogroups that is consistent with an African origin of the Neolithic farmers?
That's like saying the theory of relativity originated in Africa because Einstein was E3
Neolithic is not a genetic term. It means humans settlements where agriculture and stone tools were used.
So if you want to discuss the Neolithic you must refer to specific sites where evidence of farming and stone tools/weapons were used. If you don't have this then be quiet you are sounding stupid
-and, Neolithic industries may have also occurred independently
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: It is curious how the earliest African lineages, Hg A and B are not represented outside of Africa.
Which means, what? Why is that curious?
If Africans were the first to populate the rest of the world where is the A and B out there? I don't draw a conclusion from this I just don't understand it, I heard the issue raised
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: It is curious how the earliest African lineages, Hg A and B are not represented outside of Africa.
Which means, what? Why is that curious?
If Africans were the first to populate the rest of the world where is the A and B out there? I don't draw a conclusion from this I just don't understand it, I heard the issue raised
Do you actually know why genetic mutations occur?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Swenet Iight cool, thanks for your help so far.
@Ish Gebor Mutations Occur more or less randomly. Why they are selected for is based on the mutation as well as the environment. You might be working yourself into a trap here, be careful.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
DNAtribes had this resolved a looooonnng time ago! The OP, Lazaridis is still waffling. lol!.
As with SNP results (see previous section of this article), the sequence of West Eurasian genetic components in the Horn of Africa expresses a GEOGRAPHICALLY ORDERED PROGRESSION of regions that BEGINS near the Nile River and Red Sea (North Africa and Arabian in Step 1) then in later steps includes West Asian and Mediterranean (Levantine, Iberian, and Mesopotamian in Steps 3A and 3C) and finally Northern European and South Asian regions (such as Northwest European and Eastern India percentages in Steps 3E-3F).
However, total percentages of West Eurasian components become progressively smaller in later iterations (starting at 42.3% in Step 1 and ending with only 12.9% in Step 3J). This suggests that the Horn of Africa’s West Eurasian related genetic components are substantially better represented by regions in early steps (such as North African and Arabian) ***than*** by regions in later steps (such as Slavic-Baltic or Eastern India).
QUOTE Within this agricultural zone range, EEF farmers came in contact with other ancient populations: In Europe and West Asia, EEF populations mixed with North Eurasians (including Siberian relatives of WHG hunter-gatherers). In the Arabian Peninsula, EEF farmers mixed with ancestral Sub-Saharan Africans related to modern Nigerian, Gambian, and Botswanan populations. In Armenia and Georgia, EEF farmers mixed with South Asian (Indian Subcontinent) populations
posted
quote; " Basal Eurasian *****origins***** near the Nile and Eastern Mediterrean".
Ask Lazaridis to stop waffling. It is a done deal.
-------------------- 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
Yep. DNA Tribes was way ahead. Only problem for gramps is that DNA Tribes puts Basal Eurasian squarely in Egypt and the Sahara. It's still unclear to me how in gramp's mind this map is valid during the early holocene, but somehow stops being valid in dynastic times, when, according to xyyman, the Egyptian population supposedly transformed into full-fledged South Africans/Great Lakes, whatever that means. To make that even more bizarre, we're supposed to believe that the AE were South Africans with modern day northern Sudanese "visuals" as he puts it. He probably knows how silly this sounds as he refused to comment on the KV55 paper.
Gramps will probably never clarify as he's known to skirt around inconvenient questions again and again, preferring to throw sand in people's eyes by talking about the words people use or changing the subject. Xyyman 101.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
DNAtribes basically corroborates Lazaridis. Europeans are primarily African Neolithics. Sergi and Coon etc. That left Africa early Holocene BEFORE the rise of AE. Still don't get it?
The exact location may not be where the map shows but it is definitely IN Africa. Remember Sergi first had the Eurafrican origins in the Great Lakes then adjusted that to the south Sudan.
Bottomline - Neolithics/Eurafricans are Africans.
Europeans are a sub-set of Africans. Always have and always will be.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xxyman: Sergi and Coon etc. That left Africa early Holocene BEFORE the rise of AE. Still don't get it?
You're not making any sense, gramps. Sergi and Coon both thought the predynastic AE epitomized certain phenotypes among the early uropean farmers. Now we have the genomes of these European early farmers. How much Great Lakes and South African do they have?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic