quote: " ...in the old sources the terms Berber, Sanhaja, Massufa, Lamtuna and Tuareg are often used interchangeably"
--Marq de Villiers and Sheila Hirtle ( 2009). Timbuktu: The Sahara's Fabled city of Gold, p. 271.
quote:”Zenata (Berber: Ijenaden) are a major old Berber ethnic group of North Africa. They were an umbrella-group encompassing probably hundreds of large linguistically or genealogically related Berber tribes in the north, center and east of Berber North Africa (excluding the Nile valley of Egypt). Zenata Berbers were the founders of several Berber empires, kingdoms and princedoms in North Africa.”
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I never said it was the DNA of the original Berber speakers. I said it EITHER belongs to the original Berber speakers or the L3f1b6 population resembled the original Berber speakers.
You're free to prove me wrong.
You said it by implication
You said the DNA of the original Berber speakers has a relatively small representation in the Maghreb today.
Yet Hg H is the predominant maternal lineage of modern day berbers and it goes back 12kya in human remains in Morocco
code:
Geography Founder Analysis
Migration Time (ka) % of L3 Lineages (SE)
East Africa 58.8 74.0 (0.5)
1.8 20.1 (2.6) 0.1 5.9 (2.5)
Central Africa 42.4 75.0 (2.7) 9.2 24.1 (2.8) 0.1 0.9 (0.2)
North Africa 35.0 7.4 (2.7) 6.6 67.0 (4.0) 0.6 25.7 (3.1)
South Africa 3.2 86.7 (4.3) 0.1 13.3 (4.3)
South Africa (southern)1.8 83.4 (3.7) 0.1 16.6 (3.7)
--Pedro Soares The Expansion of mtDNA Haplogroup L3 within and out of Africa
quote:
Our results also point to a less ancient western sub-Saharan gene flow to Tunisia, including haplogroups L2a and L3b. This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 BP. These findings parallel the more recent findings of both archaeology and linguistics on the prehistory of Africa. The present work suggests that sub-Saharan contributions to North Africa have experienced several complex population processes after the occupation of the region by anatomically modern humans. Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa.
[...]
Indeed, taking into account the Tunisian sequences belonging to haplogroup L2a from Sejnane, Zriba, Kesra, Matmata, Sned, and Chenini-Douiret, we obtain a divergence age of about 28,000 ± 8,900 years, which is the same age calculated for this haplogroup including all the described sequences. However, we noticed two pairs of related haplotypes in the Kesra population, where we detected a local evolution of the L2a cluster, suggesting that this haplogroup could have been introduced earlier in Kesra.
--Frigi et al.
Ancient Local Evolution of African mtDNA Haplogroups in Tunisian Berber Populations
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:"L3f - Northeast Africa, Sahel, Arabian peninsula, Iberia. Gaalien,[12] Beja"
—Mohamed, Hisham Yousif Hassan. "Genetic Patterns of Y-chromosome and Mitochondrial DNA Variation, with Implications to the Peopling of the Sudan". University of Khartoum. Retrieved 14 June 2016
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: @Swenet @Djehuti @Lioness
Is it okay if we go back in time... Say 2010 with the Frigi S study?
quote:Our objective is to highlight the age of sub-Saharan gene flows in North Africa and particularly in Tunisia. Therefore we analyzed in a broad phylogeographic context sub-Saharan mtDNA haplogroups of Tunisian Berber populations considered representative of ancient settlement. More than 2,000 sequences were collected from the literature, and networks were constructed. The results show that the most ancient haplogroup is L3*, which would have been introduced to North Africa from eastern sub-Saharan populations around 20,000 years ago. Our results also point to a less ancient western sub-Saharan gene flow to Tunisia, including haplogroups L2a and L3b. This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 BP. These findings parallel the more recent findings of both archaeology and linguistics on the prehistory of Africa. The present work suggests that sub-Saharan contributions to North Africa have experienced several complex population processes after the occupation of the region by anatomically modern humans. Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa.
Does that offer SOME clues about L3f and the original carriers? Also what about this map?
Look at chart B, That's L3e going into Algeria 6-10 kya
I covered that >
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^These are presumably the original Berber speakers. Either that, or they are biologically very similar to the original Berber speakers.
The article is talking about a rare clade of L3 found in 5 people in an isolated region of Spain but makes no mention of berbers. How do they know how recent it is in the ancestry of these 5 people?
^ Coudray et al. 2008
The high L3 frequencies are with the Figuig
quote: The main L3d sublineage is L3d3a1, whose haplotype network shows a largely Khoisan centrality (not Damara) although this node is shared also by some unspecified "other Bantu". The Southern Africa specificity of L3d3a was already noticed in the past (see here). So it is very possible that we are before an aboriginal Southern African lineage, maybe arrived with the first Khoisan Neolithic (or whatever other ancient flow) rather than a Bantu-specific founder effect.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: If it starts in East Africa and later wound up in Asturias what does that have to do with the original location?
It has everything to do with it. During the Neolithic the Sahara was filled with populations and cultures that never made it to our era. These populations may not have a direct relevancy to the origins of the original Berbers, but culturally many of them are candidates for being the original Berber speakers. Do you have any idea what implications this has for our topic? It means that there are so many distinct regional cultures in the Sahara that searching for the original Berbers is like searching for a needle in a haystack. When that's the case, you can only hone in on the original Berber speakers by using certain data points intelligently. And using certain incontrovertible facts (like the fact that there must have been Nile Valley cultures in between the Badarian region and Iberia that so far have not been found, but which made a contribution to the Iberian neolithic and left behind L3f1b8) is an example of using data points intelligently. Especially since this is the path we know the original Berber speakers traveled on their way to the Maghreb. So, yes, you can definitely use the destination of a population to infer that the archaeological sites you asked me for haven't been found yet.
BTW, I'm wrapping up this discussion because you are not in a position to judge what I'm saying. You haven't even thought about what I've said and you don't know the full context to be able to form an opinion. You read what I said and immediately googled some charts to conjure up hollow objections. Your charts and hg statistics are just thinly veiled attempts to hide the fact that you already had your mind made up to antagonize whatever I would say.
Swenet, you read my mind exactly. During the Holocene Wet Period there were a variety of populations and assorted cultures inhabiting the region. Most of those groups are long extinct and all we have are a few remnants. Even old time scholars like Loyyd Cabbot Briggs have noted this. The Haratin for example are a unique population who despite their 'sub-saharan' features possess distinct genetic feautures not found in sub-Sahara. There was a tremendous loss of both genetic and cultural diversity and as recent findings show, this loss continued as recently as the historical period.
It's obvious lioness is arguing out of her you know what, without a proper assessment of the data and is only making a fool of herself. Just look at how I'm debunking her here.
Posts: 26348 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Within Africa, the Pleistocene migrations detected in the L3 pool were responsible for the introduction of L3bd and L3e into Central Africa in the period between 60 and 35 ka (fig. 5A), but none reached Southern Africa at that time.”
[…]
(3) From Central and Eastern Africa into North Africa: We excluded the Sahel from the analysis as this region has had continuous recurrent gene flow both from north and south, dissolving the definition of well-defined populations, and the populations in this area would be difficult to either classify as source or sink population.
[…]
L3eikx also most likely originated in Eastern Africa, with subclades L3i and L3x virtually exclusive to this region (fig. 3A) and the rare L3k mainly present in North Africa. The complete genome tree confirms that L3e (the most frequent African L3 clade: fig. 3C), however, seems to have an origin in Central/West Africa (Bandelt et al. 2001; Salas et al. 2002): the Eastern African samples are clearly derived within the tree, suggesting gene flow from Central Africa. The recent gene flow into Eastern Africa is represented by the peak at ∼1.8 ka (fig. 4A and table 2) in the HVS-I founder analysis, which includes some L3e lineages.
[…]
North Africa
The scan of founder lineage variation (fig. 4C) in North Africa indicates two peaks at 0.6 and at 6.6 ka. The data set for North Africa includes a high fraction of direct matches (nearly 20%) which contribute to the more recent peak, most likely reflecting movements into North Africa from Central/Eastern Africa within the last 1,000 years, perhaps including lineages carried with the trans-Saharan slave trade (Harich et al. 2010). We performed a founder analysis stipulating three migration times, including a third one of 35.0 ka, based on the ages of U6, L3k and the population increase in the BSP (supplementary fig. S7, Supplementary Material online) with results presented in table 1. The biggest slice corresponds to the peak at 6.6 ka, corresponding to one-third of the L3 lineages (table 2), mainly affiliated to haplogroup L3e5, which is largely restricted to Northwest Africa. It dates to 12.4–13.6 ka and so may have begun earlier than 6.6 ka. The other major lineages contributing to the 6.6 ka partition (Central African L3b, L3e1, and L3e2 lineages: founders F17, F28, and F41 in supplementary table S4, Supplementary Material online), suggest the postglacial period was characterized by gene flow across the Sahel belt (Cerný et al. 2007); these founder clades are mainly restricted to Northwest Africa and absent from Egypt.
The BSP for North Africa also indicates the major rate of increase in the effective population size centered at about 10 ka (supplementary fig. S7, Supplementary Material online; table 1), contemporaneous with Central and Eastern Africa. Since the majority of L3 lineages in the scan had an origin elsewhere, the timing of the growth signal observed in the North African BSP might in fact be describing the demography of the source, with many of the coalescences occurring prior to the dispersal into North Africa. However, an independent analysis of North African U6 (Pereira et al. 2010) indicated growth associated with this haplogroup ∼10 ka.
—Pedro Soares et al.
The Expansion of mtDNA Haplogroup L3 within and out of Africa
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: She keeps bringing up the fact that hg H was found in 12kyo Iberomarusian remains despite that proto-Berber didn't even exist at that time
At what time did proto-berber come into existence?
Good question. According to all the glottochronology studies done by experts like Ehret, Blench, and others, Proto-Berber is only 3,000 years old! Yet the same glottochronological analyses show that Proto-Afrasian began to diverge into its daughter languages 12,000-10,000 years ago. This is a huge discrepancy which can only be explained by the presence of an intermediate Pre-Proto-Berber stage which diverged from Proto-Afrasian first before itself diverging into Proto-Berber and other language groups. This is similar to the findings of Proto-Semitic which developed 6,000 years ago probably in the eastern Levant, diverging from a Pre-Proto-Semitic stage that was introduced by African immigrants. The only difference is that Proto-Semitic is twice as old as Proto-Berber.
Now the only thing missing is the archaeological culture and/or physical population representing Proto-Berber much less Pre-Proto-Berber.
Posts: 26348 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: 1) The missing cultural link between the Badarian/predynastic and related Iberian Neolithic cultures hasn't been found yet in the Sahara, so I can't point to specific sites.
2) The corresponding male YDNA to L3 is CT or something close in age. But what you presumably meant to ask is what, in my view, the male counterpart of the original Berbers and/or L3fb16 is. In my view it's E-V65, as I explained recently in Typezeis' thread. But E-V65 is simply what survived. It wasn't the only YDNA involved in the migration of the original Berbers. [/QB]
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
1) The missing cultural link between the Badarian/predynastic and related Iberian Neolithic cultures hasn't been found yet in the Sahara, so I can't point to specific sites.
E-V65 is E1b1b but if the Badarian were E1b1a maybe M191 as some Nilo Saharans are, then you couldn't connect them to Iberian Neolithic cultures or many berbers who are E1b1b
Posts: 42988 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since you always find a way to object to what I say, how about reminding you of your own sources:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:virtually no evidence exists for human occupation in the Nile valley between 10,000 and 6,000 BC except for a group of very small sites around 9,400 BC at the second cataract.
I never made a direct link between the Badarians and Neolithic Iberians. I made a link between the ancestors of the Badarians, wherever they were in the period your quote says they were absent from the Nile, and Neolithic Iberians. I also said we don't know where in the Sahara the sites are that correspond with these Badarian ancestors. This is not just me saying this. See your own quote.
And I don't see how the presence, or lack of, E1b1a among the Badarians relates to any of this. As I said, V65 was simply one hgs that survived relatively well. If most of the other hgs never made it to our era, why should E-M2 carried by the original Berbers have necessarily made it to our era? Not that I'm saying the original Berbers had a lot of E-M2. I'm just saying that your argument of an apparent lack of surviving ancient E-M2 in Iberia has no bearing on whether my ideas are valid.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You think Iberomaurusians were Berber speakers and randomly bring up E1b1a as an important hg among the Badarians. I know you're not accusing someone of having a "ghost theory". Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^These are presumably the original Berber speakers. Either that, or they are biologically very similar to the original Berber speakers.
The article is talking about a rare clade of L3 found in 5 people in an isolated region of Spain but makes no mention of berbers. How do they know how recent it is in the ancestry of these 5 people?
^ Coudray et al. 2008
The high L3 frequencies are with the Figuig
quote: The main L3d sublineage is L3d3a1, whose haplotype network shows a largely Khoisan centrality (not Damara) although this node is shared also by some unspecified "other Bantu". The Southern Africa specificity of L3d3a was already noticed in the past (see here). So it is very possible that we are before an aboriginal Southern African lineage, maybe arrived with the first Khoisan Neolithic (or whatever other ancient flow) rather than a Bantu-specific founder effect.
Chiara Barbieri et al., Migration and interaction in a contact zone: mtDNA variation among Bantu-speakers in southern Africa. bioRXiv 2014.
Figuig is a town in eastern Morocco near the Atlas Mountains, on the border with Algeria.
These are clearly mixed race people, because I've seen many admixed people in and around my community with these features.
-------------------- “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” Posts: 195 | From: Southern Africa(Azania) | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The article is talking about a rare clade of L3 found in 5 people in an isolated region of Spain but makes no mention of berbers. How do they know how recent it is in the ancestry of these 5 people?
They can count the mutations the Iberian L3 lineages have accumulated and by how different they are from the most closely related African haplotypes.
They don't mention Berbers and this is precisely the point. Berber speakers don't have much of this original Berber ancestry anymore (go over my posts in Typezeis' recent Berber thread for more explanation).
These academics don't always connect the dots. Sometimes they're not doing this because they're being 'prudent', sometimes they're not doing this because they don't know much about Africa.
You didn't answer the question as to how far back this L3 clade goes back in that region in Spain.
If this L3 clade is 8,000 years old and West African where is your logic in calling it related to berber speakers or "original berber" ?
This remains funny,
quote:The group L3c of Watson et al. (1997) is renamed here as U6 (Richards et al. 1998) since it proves to constitute a part of haplogroup U (Richards et al. 1998) since it proves to constitute a part of haplogroup U.
[…]
In contrast, subhaplogroups L3c and L3d have somewhat younger divergence times—28,300–37,300 YBP and 17,600–23,200 YBP, respectively (table 4)—suggesting that they emerged after the evolution of L3a and L3b.
[…]
This analysis confirmed the distinctive nature of haplogroups L1–L3, which we previously had described (Chen et al. 1995), and also revealed that haplogroup L3 has three distinct sublineages: L3a, L3b, and L3c (Watson et al. 1997).
[…]
Since two of the L3d haplotypes (i.e., AF01 and AF02) identified in our study possess the HinfI np-12308 site-gain marker for haplogroup U (Torroni et al. 1996), haplotype U could have arisen in Africa and migrated into Europe. Consistent with this hypothesis, the third haplotype in this subhaplogroup (i.e., AF03) lacks this haplogroup U marker but clusters with the haplogroup U mtDNAs. Hence, AF03 could be an African precursor to haplogroup U; alternatively, the haplogroup U mtDNAs in our sample may have been introduced into Africa by a back-migration/flow of European mtDNAs. Additional L3d mtDNAs, from other African populations, will need to be analyzed to further clarify the relationship of African haplogroup L3 and L3d mtDNAs to European mtDNA haplogroups.
quote:Originally posted by Autshumato: These are clearly mixed race people, because I've seen many admixed people in and around my community with these features.
Not because they "look mixed", that makes it a fact. It would be ignorant to claim that only the "true negroid" has origin in Africa.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Autshumato: These are clearly mixed race people, because I've seen many admixed people in and around my community with these features.
Not because they "look mixed", that makes it a fact. It would be ignorant to claim that only the "true negroid" has origin in Africa.
Agree.
-------------------- “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” Posts: 195 | From: Southern Africa(Azania) | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Autshumato: These are clearly mixed race people, because I've seen many admixed people in and around my community with these features.
Not because they "look mixed", that makes it a fact. It would be ignorant to claim that only the "true negroid" has origin in Africa.
So does this mean that "true whites" originated in Africa? That is the only mixture he seems to be referring to, as opposed to facial features. Because there have always been coal black Aboriginal folks with "Indian looking" Aquiline features in North Africa.
Posts: 8901 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Autshumato: These are clearly mixed race people, because I've seen many admixed people in and around my community with these features.
Not because they "look mixed", that makes it a fact. It would be ignorant to claim that only the "true negroid" has origin in Africa.
So does this mean that "true whites" originated in Africa? That is the only mixture he seems to be referring to, as opposed to facial features. Because there have always been coal black Aboriginal folks with "Indian looking" Aquiline features in North Africa.
I didn't say anything about "true whites" to have originated in Africa, but "light skin" did evolve in Africa. It is not for nothing many indigenous North Africans are intermediate. Do I think some have admixture? Yeah that too.
And yeah, I know "coal black Aboriginal" folks with "Indian looking" Aquiline features are indigenous to North Africa. I know this very well. Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic