quote: Some migration and admixture are not denied as a part of African biohistory in some regions, but most of the gene flow has been so long ago as to have been reworked by African selection pressures and circumstances, and constitute a part of an African genuine biological history (Hiernaux 1975). Overlap in a range of biological traits between biogeographical Africans and non-Africans should be expected based on evolutionary theory and the concept of serial founder effect.
From what I understood, Keita sounded like he was saying admixture events would essentially be undone to "re Africanize" a population after enough time is allowed for selection pressures. Some may argue V88 to be potential examples of this. How long do you think a given people would've needed to endure selection of an environment before they are "African" again?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think that's so much what he was saying. He's speaking on the phenotypic variation of African populations and whether one should associate it with Admixture as opposed to intrapopulational variation. And also on the other hand whether typical characteristics (phenotypically) of an african population equates to a lack of OOA admixture. A single admixture event can become physically indistinguishable after like 6 generations if there isn't continuous geneflow, depending on selection pressures and the nature of whatever genes being passed down.
From a Genotypic pov.... as it relates to V88, for admixture to become indistinguishable it'll take much much much more time regardless of selection pressure. The main problem is that we look at African populations as a static presence. V88 carriers might seem like just regular contemporary Africans, because a vague criterion is applied to determine African(ity). It's like looking at E carriers in Europe and saying they represent an admixture event undone by European selection pressures. In reality there was a complex history shaping the European genome from multiple population sources.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
He specifically acknowledges admixture events happened. But he is insisting that even if admixture happened, Africa's selection pressures would've made the people living within Africa like indigenous Africans that lived in the same area. Genotypically the admixture event will be visible, but how that is expressed biologically would be selected for by selection pressures. And to be honest, biological expression of our genetics is what's important. It can potentially impact intellect, mobility, endurance and more. How people with distant mixtures physically manage with their environment, regardless of genetic background will still require them to eventually conform biologically to Africa.
My question is if we're considering a combination of local mixtures and Africa's biological selection process, how long would this have taken? Another likely candidate for discussion (though not in Africa) is Syria. In certain parts of Syria 1/3rd of lineages are L. Does this mean those people would've been especially differentiated from other Syrians? Unless the coalescence time was recent I'd argue no. They could be L carriers but environmental selection and being surrounded by other Syrians would make them Syrians regardless of their haplogroup.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Similarly in several thousand years blacks in America will whitify and whites in Africa will blackify
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
At the rate the U.S is going it'll probably resemble Latin America. If anyone has some resources for reading about this kinda stuff please share.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Although human Y chromosomes belonging to haplogroup R1b are quite rare in Africa, being found mainly in Asia and Europe, a group of chromosomes within the paragroup R-P25(*) are found concentrated in the central-western part of the African continent, where they can be detected at frequencies as high as 95%. Phylogenetic evidence and coalescence time estimates suggest that R-P25(*) chromosomes (or their phylogenetic ancestor) may have been carried to Africa by an Asia-to-Africa back migration in prehistoric times. Here, we describe six new mutations that define the relationships among the African R-P25(*) Y chromosomes and between these African chromosomes and earlier reported R-P25 Eurasian sub-lineages. The incorporation of these new mutations into a phylogeny of the R1b haplogroup led to the identification of a new clade (R1b1a or R-V88) encompassing all the African R-P25(*) and about half of the few European/west Asian R-P25(*) chromosomes. A worldwide phylogeographic analysis of the R1b haplogroup provided strong support to the Asia-to-Africa back-migration hypothesis. The analysis of the distribution of the R-V88 haplogroup in >1800 males from 69 African populations revealed a striking genetic contiguity between the Chadic-speaking peoples from the central Sahel and several other Afroasiatic-speaking groups from North Africa. The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9.2-5.6 [corrected] kya, in the early mid Holocene. We suggest that R-V88 is a paternal genetic record of the proposed mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afroasiatic speakers through the Central Sahara into the Lake Chad Basin, and geomorphological evidence is consistent with this view.
Although human Y chromosomes belonging to haplogroup R1b are quite rare in Africa, being found mainly in Asia and Europe, a group of chromosomes within the paragroup R-P25(*) are found concentrated in the central-western part of the African continent, where they can be detected at frequencies as high as 95%. Phylogenetic evidence and coalescence time estimates suggest that R-P25(*) chromosomes (or their phylogenetic ancestor) may have been carried to Africa by an Asia-to-Africa back migration in prehistoric times. Here, we describe six new mutations that define the relationships among the African R-P25(*) Y chromosomes and between these African chromosomes and earlier reported R-P25 Eurasian sub-lineages. The incorporation of these new mutations into a phylogeny of the R1b haplogroup led to the identification of a new clade (R1b1a or R-V88) encompassing all the African R-P25(*) and about half of the few European/west Asian R-P25(*) chromosomes. A worldwide phylogeographic analysis of the R1b haplogroup provided strong support to the Asia-to-Africa back-migration hypothesis. The analysis of the distribution of the R-V88 haplogroup in >1800 males from 69 African populations revealed a striking genetic contiguity between the Chadic-speaking peoples from the central Sahel and several other Afroasiatic-speaking groups from North Africa. The R-V88 coalescence time was estimated at 9.2-5.6 [corrected] kya, in the early mid Holocene. We suggest that R-V88 is a paternal genetic record of the proposed mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afroasiatic speakers through the Central Sahara into the Lake Chad Basin, and geomorphological evidence is consistent with this view.
As much as they emphasize on this, I don't think this clade evolved outside of Africa first. Some of the chromosomes associated with this gene are found in African genes before these ever left Africa.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: As much as they emphasize on this, I don't think this clade evolved outside of Africa first. Some of the chromosomes associated with this gene are found in African genes before these ever left Africa.
I think the leaf springs on your transmission block are wearing thin there, bud; better top up your carburetor fluid.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: As much as they emphasize on this, I don't think this clade evolved outside of Africa first. Some of the chromosomes associated with this gene are found in African genes before these ever left Africa.
I think the leaf springs on your transmission block are wearing thin there, bud; better top up your carburetor fluid.
Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
No way - Ish Gabor said no such thing. Specifically where did he say this as you claim, in the mystical "Uthman Dan Fodio Institute"?
==================================================================== THE UTHMAN DAN FODIO INSTITUTE, CHICAGO ILLNOIS IS A NOW DEFUNCT PRIVATE AFROCENTRIC SCHOOL of fourteen 8th to 9th grade kids in a house, with one teacher. It has no affiliation with the University of Chicago.
My question is if we're considering a combination of local mixtures and Africa's biological selection process, how long would this have taken? Another likely candidate for discussion (though not in Africa) is Syria. In certain parts of Syria 1/3rd of lineages are L. Does this mean those people would've been especially differentiated from other Syrians? Unless the coalescence time was recent I'd argue no.
It is hard to give any exact time period- for other things are in the mix, from the groups involved, their points of origin, particular environmental pressures and changes in particular eras of migration and subsequent habitation etc. The question you raise also applies in reverse. At what point do people migrating from Africa cease to be African and become so-called "Eurasian?" As Keita notes in several publications there is a lot of distortion re so called "Eurasians" in attempts to deAfricanize African peoples.
They could be L carriers but environmental selection and being surrounded by other Syrians would make them Syrians regardless of their haplogroup.
It is a mystery exactly what parameters constitute the class "SYrian".. If "Syrian" is a biological entity, then what are its parameters? ANd what eras make someone "Syrian" and at what point do migrants from Africa moving across what is now called "Syria" become no longer Africans but "Syrians"? And why would "L" carriers be incompatible with being "Syrian"?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] lioness says:
Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
No way - Ish Gabor said no such thing. Specifically where did he say this as you claim, in the mystical "Uthman Dan Fodio Institute"?
Yes, ask Ish , he's been on Egyptseach about ten years an never has he said one single haplogroup originated outside of Africa. Ask him to name one, he won't. I understand this guy's mind. It has a leaky carburetor
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: As much as they emphasize on this, I don't think this clade evolved outside of Africa first. Some of the chromosomes associated with this gene are found in African genes before these ever left Africa.
I think the leaf springs on your transmission block are wearing thin there, bud; better top up your carburetor fluid.
It is pretty comfortable over here, thanks for your concerns but no worries.
quote: According to the current data East Africa is home to nearly 2/3 of the world genetic diversity independent of sampling effect. Similar figure have been suggested for sub-Saharan Africa populations [1]. The antiquity of the east African gene pool could be viewed not only from the perspective of the amount of genetic diversity endowed within it but also by signals of uni-modal distribution in their mitochondrial DNA (Hassan et al., unpublished) usually taken as an indication of populations that have passed through ‘‘recent’’ demographic expansion [33], although in this case, may in fact be considered a sign of extended shared history of in situ evolution where alleles are exchanged between neighboring demes [34].
--Jibril Hirbo, Sara Tishkoff et al.
The Episode of Genetic Drift Defining the Migration of Humans out of Africa Is Derived from a Large East African Population Size
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] lioness says:
Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
No way - Ish Gabor said no such thing. Specifically where did he say this as you claim, in the mystical "Uthman Dan Fodio Institute"?
Yes, ask Ish , he's been on Egyptseach about ten years an never has he said one single haplogroup originated outside of Africa. Ask him to name one, he won't. I understand this guy's mind. It has a leaky carburetor
Here is a riddle for you, longtime EgyptSearch member.
Did mankind had a longer history to form mutations, in or outside of Africa?
The slippery slope. Don't trip you might break ya' hip.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: lioness says:
Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
No way - Ish Gabor said no such thing. Specifically where did he say this as you claim, in the mystical "Uthman Dan Fodio Institute"?
==================================================================== THE UTHMAN DAN FODIO INSTITUTE, CHICAGO ILLNOIS IS A NOW DEFUNCT PRIVATE AFROCENTRIC SCHOOL of fourteen 8th to 9th grade kids in a house, with one teacher. It has no affiliation with the University of Chicago.
My question is if we're considering a combination of local mixtures and Africa's biological selection process, how long would this have taken? Another likely candidate for discussion (though not in Africa) is Syria. In certain parts of Syria 1/3rd of lineages are L. Does this mean those people would've been especially differentiated from other Syrians? Unless the coalescence time was recent I'd argue no.
It is hard to give any exact time period- for other things are in the mix, from the groups involved, their points of origin, particular environmental pressures and changes in particular eras of migration and subsequent habitation etc. The question you raise also applies in reverse. At what point do people migrating from Africa cease to be African and become so-called "Eurasian?" As Keita notes in several publications there is a lot of distortion re so called "Eurasians" in attempts to deAfricanize African peoples.
They could be L carriers but environmental selection and being surrounded by other Syrians would make them Syrians regardless of their haplogroup.
It is a mystery exactly what parameters constitute the class "SYrian".. If "Syrian" is a biological entity, then what are its parameters? ANd what eras make someone "Syrian" and at what point do migrants from Africa moving across what is now called "Syria" become no longer Africans but "Syrians"? And why would "L" carriers be incompatible with being "Syrian"?
One can only wonder why they don't call Syria a transition zone. They abruptly cut it off. Like some ICE-agent border patrol. A theory they have created decades, perhaps centuries ago.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^That's Trans-Saharan connections and the spread of Chadic languages.
Cruciani F
It has been discussed many many times in other threads
this is one link to several threads, click top section
[url= [url= https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Trans-Saharan+connections+and+the+spread+of+Chadic+languages%22+-Reply++site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.egyptsearch.com%2F&lr=&safe=images&oq=%22Trans-Sa ]https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Trans-Saharan+connections+and+the+spread+of+Chadic+languages%22+-Reply++site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.egyptsearch.com%2F&lr=&safe=images&oq=%22Trans-S a [/url] ]https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Trans-Saharan+connections+and+the+spread+of+Chadic+languages%22+-Reply++site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.egyptsearch.com%2F&lr=&safe=images&oq=%22Trans-S a [/url] ]https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Trans-Saharan+connections+and+the+spread+of+Chadic+languages%22+-Reply++site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.egyptsearch.com%2F&lr=&safe=images&oq=%22Trans-S a [/url] ]https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Trans-Saharan+connections+and+the+spread+of+Chadic+languages%22+-Reply++site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.egyptsearch.com%2F&lr=&safe=images&oq=%22Trans-S a
Your link(s) don't work, but I dare you post on Cruciani's conclusions.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: It is hard to give any exact time period- for other things are in the mix, from the groups involved, their points of origin, particular environmental pressures and changes in particular eras of migration and subsequent habitation etc. The question you raise also applies in reverse. At what point do people migrating from Africa cease to be African and become so-called "Eurasian?" As Keita notes in several publications there is a lot of distortion re so called "Eurasians" in attempts to deAfricanize African peoples.
They could be L carriers but environmental selection and being surrounded by other Syrians would make them Syrians regardless of their haplogroup.
It is a mystery exactly what parameters constitute the class "SYrian".. If "Syrian" is a biological entity, then what are its parameters? ANd what eras make someone "Syrian" and at what point do migrants from Africa moving across what is now called "Syria" become no longer Africans but "Syrians"? And why would "L" carriers be incompatible with being "Syrian"?
L lineages are not incompatible with being Syrian at all. But it is a problem when people see a Syrian with an "L" haplogroup and assume they are "African" or "SSA." No, they're Syrians. They're easterners adapting to ancient ecological systems to the east. What I am asking people to consider is that differentiation and adaptation to a new environment doesn't need to wait until a new haplogroup is established.
Yes those parameters may not be the easiest in the world to establish and place together, but to even consider those parameters people would have to be able to look at someone carrying haplogroup E and accept it doesn't necessarily mean they're a group of people adapting to Africa's selection. Their genetic data doesn't negate all other scientific disciplines.
These questions of parameters that establish adaptation and differentiation emerge whenever migrations, and adaptation to new environments take place. This is still a question even when it's 20,000 OOA. How long does differentiation take? What features clue you in that people are adapting to new environments? If someone's lineage hasn't been in Africa for 20,000 years but is E or L, are they still African adapted people? If we insisted that such problems exist in establishing parameters each time the subject arose, we wouldn't be in place to accept any differentiation in any populations. The only thing different I'm asking people to do is to consider that these things can happen regardless of whether or not people have the same haplogroup.
This people from Sudan
and people from Syria
May share the same haplogroup but be adapted to 2 different ecosystems. We could throw a European in there for good measure as well. Are they all African? I would argue one is, but not because of what his haplogroup is. One has a deeply rooted historical and archeological record that embeds them within the continent. One has physiological features that demonstrate adaptions to more than one recent ecological time period within Africa.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I get your point but the term you want to use is "tropically adapted" rather than "African adapted" .
An interesting thing about this topic are East Indian people. You don't see bone straight hair in Africans, I believe that some of original populations leaving Africa on the Southern route had settled in a more Norther region in Central Asia for a while or more Northern region and acquired straight hair there. Straight hair let's less air in and if long can cover the neck and back more easily if grown long. That is probably a cold adaptation. So they may have acquired that trait over thousands of years before migrating into India but still have dark skin. The changes in skin and hair probably have different rates of time before they start to change. Also looking at Papua New Guineans they have a relative to other populations, high percentage of admixture with the Denisova hominid that is believed to be similar to Neanderthal although I think they only have a finger bone or tooth but anyway, that was discovered in Siberia, an extremely different environment to Papua New Guinea. So populations from one climate could have had a history of settling in another climate deep into the paleolithic era. Think about all the skeletons that are buried in the world but only a tiny fraction have been found and the story keeps updating as they find new ones.
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: [qb]As much as they emphasize on this, I don't think this clade evolved outside of Africa first. Some of the chromosomes associated with this gene are found in African genes before these ever left Africa.
I think the leaf springs on your transmission block are wearing thin there, bud; better top up your carburetor fluid.
It is pretty comfortable over here, thanks for your concerns but no worries.
I guess that was a little too cryptic.
Since you clearly do not even know what a gene or a chromosome is, why the hell should anyone give any credit to your opinions about genetics? I mean seriously, you couldn't spend a couple of hours reading Wikipedia so you know the very most basic basics?
It's fine to not know things, we can't all be experts on everything, but stop pretending you have any ability to offer meaningful criticism.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's very problematic to associate modern phenotypes with population history, especially when we don't know all of the reasons or mechanism behind each of them. Suggesting East Asian straight hair is a result of a previous cold adaptation is actually baseless, just as baseless as saying a population in similar climate zones will have the same genes for pigmentation. You guys don't realize researchers constantly run into discrepancies when trying to associate certain characteristics to regional adaptations, especially when looking at ancient populations?
You have to find an explanation that accommodates the element of chance with genetics AND non genetic/ possible epigenetic factors. Look at the camel, perfect species for the dessert, but spent most of its ancestral history "evolving" in the climate and conditions of the Taiga and even temperate forests.
When looking at the possibility of "Africanization" of an ancient population, first look at the people around said source population. Theoretically, if an ancient population from china were to occupy the Sahel, which populations would be readily available for admixture? what would be their qualities? how much will each coding gene translate? How effective are certain genes in this climate zone for survival and or, more importantly, reproduction?
A population isn't going to genetically mutate to develop features just because they need to adapt, however if you also consider the fact that one disease, or one widespread catastrophe can decimate a gene pool, leading to sweeping selection (Due to Availability), you'll see that adaptation might not be what we think it is. Also with humans we have to factor in selection due to psychological and cultural influences, a population might have a widespread trait that is necessary for nothing but aesthetics.
Going back to what Keita was trying to imply, eyeballed physical traits say very little about a populations history. Africans with narrow noses don't have to be admixed or climate adapted, and a broad nosed population in Africa can be very OOA admixed. Some times its the roll of the dice that explains certain traits both physically and genomically. An actually physical trait could also be carried via linkage to a practical trait for an important coding protein shaping the phenotype for an entire region, meanwhile we are assuming everyone in this population has "Long arms" because it's necessary for survival in said region. ...I'm Afraid it doesn't (always) work like that.
Even scientists fail to understand these things sometimes, however, there's no downside to making hypothetical "suggestions."
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] lioness says:
Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
No way - Ish Gabor said no such thing. Specifically where did he say this as you claim, in the mystical "Uthman Dan Fodio Institute"?
Yes, ask Ish , he's been on Egyptseach about ten years an never has he said one single haplogroup originated outside of Africa. Ask him to name one, he won't. I understand this guy's mind. It has a leaky carburetor
No, you made the claim, how come you are trying to duck and dodge when asked for proof that Ish said it?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] lioness says:
Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
No way - Ish Gabor said no such thing. Specifically where did he say this as you claim, in the mystical "Uthman Dan Fodio Institute"?
Yes, ask Ish , he's been on Egyptseach about ten years an never has he said one single haplogroup originated outside of Africa. Ask him to name one, he won't. I understand this guy's mind. It has a leaky carburetor
No, you made the claim, how come you are trying to duck and dodge when asked for proof that Ish said it?
He doesn't have to say it. We are talking about something he never says.
You want to prove me wrong? You have thousands of Ish Geboring posts to choose one. Find one where in his own words he describes any haplogroups as non-African. I got five on it
It's like if poster A says poster B thinks the earth is flat. So poster C says "B never said that" Then poster A says "prove it" So now poster C is expected to post 16,000 poster B comments as proof that he never said the earth is flat in any one of them. Then it takes a week to check each one to see
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oshun says: Yes those parameters may not be the easiest in the world to establish and place together, but to even consider those parameters people would have to be able to look at someone carrying haplogroup E and accept it doesn't necessarily mean they're a group of people adapting to Africa's selection. Their genetic data doesn't negate all other scientific disciplines.
These questions of parameters that establish adaptation and differentiation emerge whenever migrations, and adaptation to new environments take place. This is still a question even when it's 20,000 OOA. How long does differentiation take? What features clue you in that people are adapting to new environments? If someone's lineage hasn't been in Africa for 20,000 years but is E or L, are they still African adapted people? If we insisted that such problems exist in establishing parameters each time the subject arose, we wouldn't be in place to accept any differentiation in any populations. The only thing different I'm asking people to do is to consider that these things can happen regardless of whether or not people have the same haplogroup.
This people from Sudan
and people from Syria
May share the same haplogroup but be adapted to 2 different ecosystems. We could throw a European in there for good measure as well. Are they all African? I would argue one is, but not because of what his haplogroup is. One has a deeply rooted historical and archeological record that embeds them within the continent. One has physiological features that demonstrate adaptions to more than one recent ecological time period within Africa.
You raise some good points- which is why some folk on ES, as well as mainstream academics like Keita dispute the various labels used for Africans, or people recently migrating out of ancient Africa. And I agree that genetic data does not negate other types of data- been saying that for years over against people who think DNA is the last word on everything.
There are a number of different prongs or approaches. In some cases gene divergence may precede migration of peoples, hence a gene may have mutated locally within Africa before a critical mass of people with that gene variant migrate out. Or there need not be a full blown mutation of a variant- sometimes *root types* of genes develop within Africa, and upon migration centuries or millennia later, you have the fuller mutation, but the original root type still developed within Africa. (Cordaux et al 2003).
Re adaptation, how do you mean "adapted to Africa"? Africa includes both tropical zones (extending all the way into Egypt) and sub-tropical zones, extending farther north towards the Medit for example. Both climates and environments (which would include deserts, extend outside Africa into Syria, Arabia etc etc. So are people adapting to Africa, or to the common overlapping environmental zones? Part of Arabia itself falls within the tropical belt, and said belt in Africa produces for example people with both narrow noses and broad noses, or dark skin and light brown/yellowish skin, etc. You have to clarify what you mean a bit more by adapting to Africa.
Re parameters, in some places, including academia, people are using particular haplogroups as "racial" or ethnic markers. To avoid double standards then they must be consistent and accept "African" designations as well into Europe and the Middle East. Some folk only want to play the game one way. "E" is African, as long the people in question can be said to stay within Africa. Bu when something else is labeled "Eurasian" the same limiter is curiously skipped over. 'Eurasians" are given the broadest possible range and scope, arcing across wide swathes of Africa, but anything "African" is limited narrowly- most famously seen in the bogus "true negro" stereotype, existing only in "sub-Saharan" Africa.
This is a common game played, and people like Keita and others have complained abut it. In one study Keita notes for example a broad range of data was used to designate Europeans, but just one individual from Uganda is used as a stand-in to "represent" a continent of almost one billion. (Keita and Kittles 1997, et al) The old "true negro" game is being played as usual in many places, using DNA data.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
lioness says: You want to prove me wrong? You have thousands of Ish Geboring posts to choose one. Find one where in his own words he describes any haplogroups as non-African. I got five on it
Don't try to duck and dodge. The burden of proof is on you. You made the claim. It is up to YOU to post a link or quote where Ish Gabor is denying that no haplogroup developed outside Africa.
Let's quote again what you said about Ish- Quote:
lioness says: Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
^^This clearly is false, for you can provide no proof of such. You are now trying to shift the goalposts when caught out in a falsehood. Now you demand that Ish say something "in his own words." But as you yourself indicate, he has posted many items quoting from studies where authors hold that such and such DNA element is non-African. In fact you argued with him in the link below and he referenced Canfield to the effect that a particular marker is non-African- etc etc - and this is only 1 example. Having already quoted the scholar, (and numerous others elsewhere) why does he have to say the words you want to put in his mouth so you can conjure up some bogus claim? Your diversionary shift talking bout "in his own" words fails and shows you have been caught misrepresenting what the man is actually saying. If he has already quoted from people showing outside gene development, it is clear he has no such notion that you charge him with having. http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009647;p=1#000032
Don't try to wriggle away with easily spotted diversions. You made a positive claim:
lioness says: Ish Gebor's view is that since there is lower diversity outside of Africa that no new mutations formed outside Africa, evolution stops outside of Africa.
Where is your proof of this alleged "view"?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is true more clarity is needed. However this is more preliminary for me. What I'm trying to sort out is what I'd need to look for in the first place. Your point is an interesting one and that's probably why we'd need to compare adaptations to more local ecological structures in those time periods than strictly looking into concepts that might be too broad (like only searching for tropical adaptations). Comparisons to ancient (tropical) Arabian ecosystems and people might be helpful with proper dating.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: [qb]As much as they emphasize on this, I don't think this clade evolved outside of Africa first. Some of the chromosomes associated with this gene are found in African genes before these ever left Africa.
I think the leaf springs on your transmission block are wearing thin there, bud; better top up your carburetor fluid.
It is pretty comfortable over here, thanks for your concerns but no worries.
I guess that was a little too cryptic.
Since you clearly do not even know what a gene or a chromosome is, why the hell should anyone give any credit to your opinions about genetics? I mean seriously, you couldn't spend a couple of hours reading Wikipedia so you know the very most basic basics?
It's fine to not know things, we can't all be experts on everything, but stop pretending you have any ability to offer meaningful criticism.
It was decrypted, no worries. Perhaps if you have followed some of my posts, you'd see that I follow lectures by people such as Sarah Tishkoff. But wiki is a nice alternative.
Perhaps you can explain why, 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 are positioned at the root of macro-haplogroup CT (Figure 1 and Figure S1), before leaving Africa. Why is that?
And why are the four remainder mutations of R positioned at the root of haplogroups F (V186 and V205)? Why is that?
Further more do C, CT, CF, F and DE have an African origin?
quote:
--Fulvio Cruciani et al.
A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: These revelations are actually quite shocking.
quote: Hypotheses about population origins (table 1) can be considered as quantitative questions about admixture. For example, to test the possibility that the Baluch Y chromosomes have a Syrian origin, we can ask what proportion of the Baluch Ys are derived from Syria and what proportion are from Pakistan (considered to be the Pakistani sample minus the Baluch). Data on suggested source populations were taken from the literature and three measures of admixture were calculated. The three estimates gave broadly consistent results, with small systematic differences: typically mρ > mR > Long’s WLS for the estimated contribution from the external source population (table 3). These results provide evidence for an external contribution to the Hazaras, Kalash, Negroid Makrani, and Parsis but not to the other populations.
quote: The haplogroup repertoire present in the study populations is shaped mainly by the presence of lineages that can be attributed to eastern Eurasia, South Asia, and western Eurasia (fig. 1; table 2). Sub-Saharan African lineages, represented by haplogroups L1, L2, and L3A and their internal derivatives, are virtually absent from all populations analyzed except the Makrani from southern Pakistan, among whom they reach high frequencies (39%).
^ Zee, you pointed to this
All he says here is that it is quite shocking, that is not a stance or position
Ish, that is the evidence right there
"Sub-Saharan African lineages, represented by haplogroups L1, L2, and L3A and their internal derivatives, are virtually absent from all populations analyzed except the Makrani from southern Pakistan, among whom they reach high frequencies (39%). "
^^ This shows unlike the Andaman or Papua New Guineans who look "Negroid" but have different DNA that is tens of thousands of years out of Africa the Makrani are only partially Eurasian, unlike Iranian Balouch they also have a large part of recent African descent
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: zarahan I know how Ish Gebor thinks. Above is another example of what I am talking about. He says every haploigroup is African origin.
Ish Gebor is agreeing with what I'm sayin Zee
"He says every haploigroup is African origin."
Where and when did I say that?
All I show is:
quote: According to the current data East Africa is home to nearly 2/3 of the world genetic diversity independent of sampling effect. Similar figure have been suggested for sub-Saharan Africa populations [1]. The antiquity of the east African gene pool could be viewed not only from the perspective of the amount of genetic diversity endowed within it but also by signals of uni-modal distribution in their mitochondrial DNA (Hassan et al., unpublished) usually taken as an indication of populations that have passed through ‘‘recent’’ demographic expansion [33], although in this case, may in fact be considered a sign of extended shared history of in situ evolution where alleles are exchanged between neighboring demes [34].
--Jibril Hirbo, Sara Tishkoff et al.
The Episode of Genetic Drift Defining the Migration of Humans out of Africa Is Derived from a Large East African Population Size
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: These revelations are actually quite shocking.
quote: Hypotheses about population origins (table 1) can be considered as quantitative questions about admixture. For example, to test the possibility that the Baluch Y chromosomes have a Syrian origin, we can ask what proportion of the Baluch Ys are derived from Syria and what proportion are from Pakistan (considered to be the Pakistani sample minus the Baluch). Data on suggested source populations were taken from the literature and three measures of admixture were calculated. The three estimates gave broadly consistent results, with small systematic differences: typically mρ > mR > Long’s WLS for the estimated contribution from the external source population (table 3). These results provide evidence for an external contribution to the Hazaras, Kalash, Negroid Makrani, and Parsis but not to the other populations.
quote: The haplogroup repertoire present in the study populations is shaped mainly by the presence of lineages that can be attributed to eastern Eurasia, South Asia, and western Eurasia (fig. 1; table 2). Sub-Saharan African lineages, represented by haplogroups L1, L2, and L3A and their internal derivatives, are virtually absent from all populations analyzed except the Makrani from southern Pakistan, among whom they reach high frequencies (39%).
^ Zee, you pointed to this
All he says here is that it is quite shocking, that is not a stance or position
Ish, that is the evidence right there
"Sub-Saharan African lineages, represented by haplogroups L1, L2, and L3A and their internal derivatives, are virtually absent from all populations analyzed except the Makrani from southern Pakistan, among whom they reach high frequencies (39%). "
^^ This shows unlike the Andaman or Papua New Guineans who look "Negroid" but have different DNA that is tens of thousands of years out of Africa the Makrani are only partially Eurasian, unlike Iranian Balouch they also have a large part of recent African descent
How does this prove anything? The funny part is that you shift the history of the Makrani population, only to end up with. "Makrani are only partially Eurasian" and Balouch they also have a large part of recent African descent. However, the study says Makrani and Balochi relate to an ancient African population(-s), GD13a.
quote: The site has been directly dated to 9650)9950 calBP (11), showing intense occupation over two to three centuries. The economy of the population has been shown to be that of pastoralists, focusing on goats (11). Archaeobotanical evidence is limited (16) but the evidence present is for two)row barley, probably wild, and no evidence for wheat, rye or other domesticates. In other words the overall economy is divergent from the classic agricultural mode of cereal agriculture found in the Levant, Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamian basin.
[...]
We compared GD13a with a number of other ancient genomes and modern populations (6, 17–29), using principal component analysis (PCA) (30), ADMIXTURE (31) and outgroup f3 statistics (32) (Fig. 1). GD13a did not cluster with any other early Neolithic individual from Eurasia in any of the analyses. ADMIXTURE and outgroup f3 identified Caucasus Hunter)Gatherers of Western Georgia, just north of the Zagros mountains, as the group genetically most similar to GD13a (Fig. 1B&C), whilst PCA also revealed some affinity with modern Central South Asian populations such as Balochi, Makrani and Brahui (Fig. 1A and Fig. S4). Also genetically close to GD13a were ancient samples from Steppe populations (Yamanya & Afanasievo) that were part of one or more Bronze age migrations into Europe, as well as early Bronze age cultures in that continent (Corded Ware) (17, 23), in line with previous relationships observed for the Caucasus Hunter)Gatherers (26).
[...]
Figure Legends:
Fig. 1. GD13a appears to be related to Caucasus Hunter Gatherers and to modern South Asian populations.
A) PCA loaded on modern populations (represented by open symbols). Ancient individuals (solid symbols) are projected onto these axes.
B) Outgroup f3(X, GD13a; Dinka), where Caucasus Hunter Gatherers (Kotias and Satsurblia) share the most drift with GD13a. Ancient samples have filled circles whereas modern populations are represented by empty symbols.
C) ADMIXTURE using K=17, where GD13a appears very similar to Caucasus Hunter Gatherers, and to a lesser extent to modern south Asian populations.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: the study says Makrani and Balochi relate to an ancient African population(-s), GD13a.
No the study does not say that the Baloch have ancient African ancestry
That Makrani have ancient African ancestry they are Baloch mixed with slaves of the East African slave trade, descendents of slaves brought from the sultanate of Oman, when they ruled the region, who enslaved both Baloch and Africans
I want to hear you tell me this didn't happen and does not account for high Haplogroup L frequencies in the Makrani (but not found in the "pure" Baloch)
Up to 800,000 Africans were traded as slaves in the Arab Gulf I want to hear form you that never happened and had no impact on the DNA of the Makrani region
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: the study says Makrani and Balochi relate to an ancient African population(-s), GD13a.
No the study does not say that the Baloch have ancient African ancestry
That Makrani have ancient African ancestry they are Baloch mixed with slaves of the East African slave trade, descendents of slaves brought from the sultanate of Oman, when they ruled the region, who enslaved both Baloch and Africans
I want to hear you tell me this didn't happen and does not account for high Haplogroup L frequencies in the Makrani (but not found in the "pure" Baloch)
Up to 800,000 Africans were traded as slaves in the Arab Gulf I want to hear form you that never happened and had no impact on the DNA of the Makrani region
Are you telling me Dinka are not African?
quote: where X represents a modern population and Dinka, an African population equally related to Eurasians
quote: Table S3. f3(X, GD13a; Dinka) where X represents a modern or ancient individual/population. Ancient individuals/populations are shown in bold.
Dataset preparation for population genetic analyses Genotypes were called in GD13a at sites which overlapped those in the Human Origins dataset (Lazaridis et al.17, filtered as described in Jones et al.24) using GATK Pileup44.
quote: The mitochondria of GD13a (91.74X) was assigned to haplogroup X, […] and East Africa.
Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Populations for which the ancient Caucasus genomes are best ancestral approximations include those of the Southern Caucasus and interestingly, South and Central Asia. Western Europe tends to be a mix of early farmers and western/eastern hunter-gatherers while Middle Eastern genomes are described as a mix of early farmers and Africans.
[…]
Caucasus hunter-gatherer contribution to subsequent populations. We next explored the extent to which Bichon and CHG contributed to contemporary populations using outgroup f3(African; modern, ancient) statistics, which measure the shared genetic history between an ancient genome and a modern population since they diverged from an African outgroup.
Discussion
Given their geographic origin, it seems likely that CHG and EF are the descendants of early colonists from Africa who stopped south of the Caucasus, in an area stretching south to the Levant and possibly east towards Central and South Asia. WHG, on the other hand, are likely the descendants of a wave that expanded further into Europe. The separation of these populations is one that stretches back before the Holocene, as indicated by local continuity through the Late Palaeolithic/Mesolithic boundary and deep coalescence estimates, which date to around the LGM and earlier.
—Jones, E. R., G. Gonzalez-Fortes, S. Connell, V. Siska, A. Eriksson, R. Martiniano, R. L. McLaughlin, et al. 2015.
“Upper Palaeolithic genomes reveal deep roots of modern Eurasians.” Nature Communications 6 (1): 8912. doi:10.1038/ncomms9912. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9912.Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic