quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Please cite the names of these studies so I may come to my own conclusions on the matter. [/QB]
Didn't you see the Lazaridis 2016 farmer study? They hint at the ancestry of the Natufians being North African(Egyptian) especially in terms of their almost exclusive African E paternal side.
Just saying your "poppa" lines seemed like you had a bone to pick with me when I never really debated you.
I answered your question. I don't quite necessarily think BE is SSA because as far as I can remember we don't see anything that points in that direction. And yes this is MY opinion. That does not mean it can't be African. I'm willing to admit that things can change.
Also I asked you why you think Iranians are more BE than the Natufians. I ask jusy in case I missed something.
PS: Yes, I believe you were asking me whether or not BE is descendant from SSA.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
For those who don't know (lurkers), the Hadza are a 'Khoisan' population mixed with Horner-type ancestry.
Since Horners are mixed today, it is no surprise that some analyses wrongly show Hadza to be the source population of ancestry that we know North Africans and Middle Easterners have.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: @Elmaestro
Just saying your "poppa" lines seemed like you had a bone to pick with me when I never really debated you.
I answered your question. I don't quite necessarily think BE is SSA because as far as I can remember we don't see anything that points in that direction. And yes this is MY opinion. That does not mean it can't be African. I'm willing to admit that things can change.
Also I asked you why you think Iranians are more BE than the Natufians. I ask jusy in case I missed something.
I don't "think" so, according to laz, the Iranian Neolithic population is more BE, HotuIII is the leading specimen for BE affinity. I'm giving you a heads up that BE might not be what we want or think it to be.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Trolls always start giggling when they run out of tricks and deceptions. Those in the know KNOW Hadza were a recipient of large amounts of Horn-like ancestry
quote: Genetic signature of pastoralist migration from East Africa into southern Africa that is associated with Cushitic/and or East African hunter-gatherers (3) might have involved mtDNA L4 and L0f haplotypes, and the Y chromosome E3b6 haplotype (Red arrows). Transfer of livestock and possible admixture of East Africans with Khoisan speakers probably happened in Zambia (5). There is signature of migration of Nilo-Saharan speakers from Sudan (3) into Kenya and Tanzania (mtDNA L3h, L5 and Y chromosomes A3b2, B2a1 and E2a (Text and Appendix 9)).
—Hirbo 2011
So much for his two quote-minded screenshots of k-17 while deliberately and shamelessly ignoring k=1-16.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
All the insults and potshots aside I am learning a lot from the graphs/commentary being posted
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
BBH
I don't accept unsourced references. yes I accept the biographic history of the E-M35 cousins of E-M2. Before now I paid attention to E-M123 in the Arabian Plate to the detriment of E-M78. Thx.
Uhm hmm. Hybrid. Mushabian/G Kebaran or some such. See most anything with bar-Yosef's name on it.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Who cares. If you understand what is going on that is all that counts. Think with your own brain.
Most of these folks just want people to be blind followers not independent thinkers.
Nice quote bub, did you patent this one?
@BBH 100 years ahead of you guys though I didn't hammer down the Hadza component being BE or actually representing shared drift between Neolithic populations, I knew since I started on here that something very similar or of that nature had to have been going on. And was welcomed with name calling, and nothing. But. Name. Calling at the time.... What Beyoku posted isn't revolutionary from my POV, I even gave him more sources to help solidify that position and even have more, which I will not go over on here for reasons stated in Nodnarbs thread.
So now I am going to ask you, under which circumstance will an African BE directly decended from an SSA population not be SSA related. Also why are Natufians less BE than Iranians, and some Neolithic levantine populations, with the latter 2 being closer to SSA regardless of geneflow??
Dude. Stay away from me with your silly absurd nonsense. If you can't define for me the "African" non SSA lineages, then how come you keep speaking of "SSA"? What was SSA 100,000 years ago and what lineages represent that?
I don't understand why you don't see the contradiction yet persist in pretending to understand biology.
Let me help you some more:
In this image, where are the North African DNA lineages and where did they come from? I know this is unreferenced, but it suits my point. Note that L0 is the basal mtDNA lineage of all humans. Note that L0-L4 is associated with "Sub Saharan" Africans according to most Scientists. OK. Fine. Where are the North African or Non Sub Saharan "African" lineages then and where did they come from.....
Get the point yet?
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
mhm the hadza received sooo much horn ancestry that they became predominantly partly Horner, but just the OOA portion of the horners though, lmao yeah poppa is always right. Genetics totally work that way. ...no need to waste energy tbh. Boy's desperate af.
The kid needs to fix his own narrative and stop fighting ghosts
Meanwhile I'm looking at an ADMIXTURE run with the beloved Copt's and wondering how in the world will poppa explain this... ...the Yemenite Jews must be A.Egyptians.
Somebody should take it from here, I honestly am not interested in this exchange... Beyoku, Sage? Xyyman?...Nodnarb? would one of you do me a big one.
Doug, ...Doug, please hear me out, I do know what I mean and what researchers mean by SSA. I understand how basal lineages work. things are much simpler than your making out to be, you turn everything political when it isn't supposed to be. like I said "1 truth". Have you ever heard of the term bottleneck? I constantly preemptively describe Eurasian as the post bottleneck genome. I do not know for certain where this happened geographically, it could have happened within Africa (the bottleneck(s)), but all of that is clutter at this point. I use the conventional model because it's EASY to explain and relay. ALL HUMANS CAME FROM AFRICA, from that point how are we to go about describing who's who and who recently came from where?
EDIT: LOL "for the Lurkers".... I'm not gonna waste another post count on Big poppa, I really don't feel the need to engage with a person who can't take his feelings out of a simple conversation about people who have been dead for three thousand years, he can misquote and argue with himself from here on out. I offer perspective and info and I will share perspective and info with whoever's interested.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: mhm the hadza received sooo much horn ancestry that they became predominantly partly Horner, but just the OOA portion of the horners though, lmao yeah poppa is always right. Genetics totally work that way. ...no need to waste energy tbh. Boy's desperate af.
The kid needs to fix his own narrative and stop fighting ghosts
Meanwhile I'm looking at an ADMIXTURE run with the beloved Copt's and wondering how in the world will poppa explain this... ...the Yemenite Jews must be A.Egyptians.
Somebody should take it from here, I honestly am not interested in this exchange... Beyoku, Sage? Xyyman?...Nodnarb? would one of you do me a big one.
^That's what it looks like when people have run out of their 2 little k=17 sham tactics. Lol!
I post data hard data from knowledgable Phds, they come back with butthurt "I don't like what you say" comments and other bs.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: mhm the hadza received sooo much horn ancestry that they became predominantly partly Horner, but just the OOA portion of the horners though, lmao yeah poppa is always right. Genetics totally work that way. ...no need to waste energy tbh. Boy's desperate af.
The kid needs to fix his own narrative and stop fighting ghosts
Meanwhile I'm looking at an ADMIXTURE run with the beloved Copt's and wondering how in the world will poppa explain this... ...the Yemenite Jews must be A.Egyptians.
Somebody should take it from here, I honestly am not interested in this exchange... Beyoku, Sage? Xyyman?...Nodnarb? would one of you do me a big one.
Doug, ...Doug, please hear me out, I do know what I mean and what researchers mean by SSA. I understand how basal lineages work. things are much simpler than your making out to be, you turn everything political when it isn't supposed to be. like I said "1 truth". Have you ever heard of the term bottleneck? I constantly preemptively describe Eurasian as the post bottleneck genome. I do not know for certain where this happened geographically, it could have happened within Africa (the bottleneck(s)), but all of that is clutter at this point. I use the conventional model because it's EASY to explain and relay. ALL HUMANS CAME FROM AFRICA, from that point how are we to go about describing who's who and who recently came from where?
Come on man. You got me crying over here. Please this is so simple but you make it complex. If L0 is the root, then where is the basal North African/OOA branch then? Still waiting because at this point this is sounding like fairy tale unicorn nonsense aladdin flew into North Africa on a carpet. All human lineages have to tie to the root. So what lineages represent the "indigenous African" NON SSA OOA basal North African/Eurasian/Egyptian lineages......
Come on this is simple. Because logically this is what you are trying to say but haven't seen the big hole in the logic just like the big hole on that map.
This is where the issue of where the actual main branches of M, N and R initially arose come into play. The point being that if the original OOA folks were carrying L lineages before they split then guess what: they were genetically "SSA" if that is how SSA is defined by most scientists.... But then that makes a big hole in biological history because most Northern Africans today don't carry L lineages. So either they are not related to the original OOA populations who migrated via the Northern route OR the M and N lineages they carry are echoes of the basal M and N splits that took place in Africa but mostly migrated outward with OOA populations..... It has to be one or the other. There can be no gaps in the tree. All routes lead back to SSA anyway.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Come on man. You got me crying over here. Please this is so simple but you make it complex. If L0 is the root, then where is the basal North African/OOA branch then? Still waiting because at this point this is sounding like fairy tale unicorn nonsense aladdin flew into North Africa on a carpet. All human lineages have to tie to the root. So what lineages represent the "indigenous African" NON SSA OOA basal North African/Eurasian/Egyptian lineages......
Come on this is simple. Because logically this is what you are trying to say but haven't seen the big hole in the logic just like the big hole on that map.
Do.... you even understand whats going on?
Look here..
"Doug, ...Doug, please hear me out, I do know what I mean and what researchers mean by SSA. I understand how basal lineages work. things are much simpler than your making out to be, you turn everything political when it isn't supposed to be. like I said "1 truth". Have you ever heard of the term bottleneck? I constantly preemptively describe Eurasian as the post bottleneck genome. I do not know for certain where this happened geographically, it could have happened within Africa (the bottleneck(s)), but all of that is clutter at this point. I use the conventional model because it's EASY to explain and relay. ALL HUMANS CAME FROM AFRICA, from that point how are we to go about describing who's who and who recently came from where?"
All. Humans. Came. from. Africa.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lol. Maestro turd has been debunked in regards to his two little k=17 screenshots (which is all he has; he's a one-trick pony) and to hide that fact he's weaseling out of the conversation. Hadza have 60-83% of 'northern' (i.e. north of Tanzania) L4g (L4b2). Now what?
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Come on man. You got me crying over here. Please this is so simple but you make it complex. If L0 is the root, then where is the basal North African/OOA branch then? Still waiting because at this point this is sounding like fairy tale unicorn nonsense aladdin flew into North Africa on a carpet. All human lineages have to tie to the root. So what lineages represent the "indigenous African" NON SSA OOA basal North African/Eurasian/Egyptian lineages......
Come on this is simple. Because logically this is what you are trying to say but haven't seen the big hole in the logic just like the big hole on that map.
Do.... you even understand whats going on?
Look here..
"Doug, ...Doug, please hear me out, I do know what I mean and what researchers mean by SSA. I understand how basal lineages work. things are much simpler than your making out to be, you turn everything political when it isn't supposed to be. like I said "1 truth". Have you ever heard of the term bottleneck? I constantly preemptively describe Eurasian as the post bottleneck genome. I do not know for certain where this happened geographically, it could have happened within Africa (the bottleneck(s)), but all of that is clutter at this point. I use the conventional model because it's EASY to explain and relay. ALL HUMANS CAME FROM AFRICA, from that point how are we to go about describing who's who and who recently came from where?"
All. Humans. Came. from. Africa.
No we are talking about genetic lineages and history of those lineages as they left Africa. So seeing as that is the topic and how those lineages relate to so-called SSA, lets stick to it. ALL human DNA ultimately originates with L0 in so-called "Sub Saharan" Africa. So where is the branch off of L0 that is "African" but not SSA that ultimately was the basal branch going out of Africa? Still waiting.....
If by bottleneck you mean that the Africans before they left Africa only carried L mtDNA lineages, then that means the only mtDNA lineages that are African are L lineages and all others arose outside of Africa, which means North Africans are ultimately back migrants from outside Africa sometime after OOA. Hence, all "indigenous" African lineages and the ONLY "indigenous" African mtDNA are SSA mtDNA lineages L0-L4. Otherwise, what are the "indigenous" Non L mtDNA lineages?
You can't have it both ways. It is either one or the other.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Good question, but you are asking the wrong person... I don't subscribe to an African but not SSAn native/indigenous ghost theory Doug. For the simple fact that 4.5kya is the Earliest non SSA-like DNA re-introgressed with East Africans. That's precisely what me and BBH was discussing.
whether the N.African genome is actually a product of backmigration or trans intercontinental drift is a different discussion/debate. to which the usage of "Eurasian" is semantics. Where have you been for the past few months, or years even. Look at my posts in the African studies thread or even the North African thread started by Tukuler. Fvck it, look at what I was discussing w/ Beyoku at the end of the previous Abusir Mummy thread.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lol. "Elmaestro" thought he was slick posting his two little screenshots of k=17. Now that he's debunked he tries to be slick again and pretend he's "walking away" to "be the bigger, dignified, man".
quote:Haplogroup L4g (previously designated L3g) is present in both Tanzanian click-speaking populations at high frequencies (60% Hadza, 48% Sandawe) but is absent in the SAK. The L4g haplogroup is most frequent in eastern and northeastern Africa and was previously dated to ∼40–45 kya (Salas et al. 2002; Kivisild et al. 2004).
Lol. You just can't make this up. First he insisted on talking about his quote-mined k=17 screenshot, now he wants to change the subject.
quote:Also, check out the thread you started a few days ago, look at the last page where things actually got good. There's some of your brown component right there aswell.
^What he really means with "where things got good" is "I was allowed to let my sham shine because no one pointed out it was only k=17".
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: ^Good question, but you are asking the wrong person... I don't subscribe to an African but not SSAn native/indigenous ghost theory Doug. For the simple fact that 4.5kya is the Earliest non SSA-like DNA re-introgressed with East Africans. That's precisely what me and BBH was discussing.
whether the N.African genome is actually a product of backmigration or trans intercontinental drift is a different discussion/debate. to which the usage of "Eurasian" is semantics. Where have you been for the past few months, or years even. Look at my posts in the African studies thread or even the North African thread started by Tukuler. Fvck it, look at what I was discussing w/ Beyoku at the end of the previous Abusir Mummy thread.
No, you see the contradiction. And that is the point. The scientists are sending you all on wild goose chases talking about SSA this and SSA that but none of you asked them what I just asked which is the CORE ISSUE if you are going to talk about OOA and "basal" anything. Otherwise you are following a diversion away from the key point: they don't know when or where major NON L mtdna lineages split and yes by definition they are limiting African DNA to SSA only. Otherwise, they should be able to list the non SSA "indigenous" African lineages that were part of OOA in and along the Northern Route if that is indeed the route that humans took and ancient Egyptians were part of. Otherwise they are creating ghost populations because their theoretical frameworks are flawed.
That is all I have been saying since last year but folks just don't accept that these approaches are flawed.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
he thinks I'm avoiding him outa fear when in reality I'm doing him a favor so he persists...
"A mixed population intermingled with a psuedo archaic population & made them more OOA than the former, a FIXED >70-80% of Hadzas genome is OOA because a mixed population donated all of their OOA ancestry to them"
...and he's knowledgeable in genetics? Somebody please get this dumbass off my back. forreal.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ask anyone with an understanding of population genetics what this means:
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: A mixed population intermingled with a psuedo archaic population & made them more OOA than the former, a FIXED >70-80% of Hadzas genome is OOA because a mixed population donated all of their OOA ancestry to them
by the way BlessedByHorus, remember what we were talking about a few posts ago, do you see how it makes sense here.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lol I see he's still intransigent. He hoodwinked the forum with his quote-minded cut and paste jobs. He never mentioned that his Hadza=Basal Eurasian screenshots were carefully quote-minded. But even though he tried to justify it with a dumb excuse, I'm glad he admitted that he deliberately, and carefully, picked one K level.
More on Hadza being primarily a mix of Khoisan-like and East African ancestry:
quote:TreeMix infers that the Hadza are admixed between a Khoisan population (equally related to both the northwestern and southeastern Kalahari groups) and a population most closely related to the Dinka, with about 23±2% Khoisan-related ancestry] (Supplementary Fig. S20).
As this paper indicates, Hadza cluster like a northeast/East African population when their Khoisan ancestry is taken into account/separated in treemix:
When you factor in their Khoisan-like ancestry, their position on the Human tree is different and closer to Khoisan:
This is no doubt due to their large maternal contribution from north of their location. But leave it people like "Maestro" and all this context of L4 and E1b1b in Hadza is ignored and they become a mystical Basal Eurasian population.
Was wondering when you were going to post something meaningful, lol. So why not Dinka?
What other ADMIXTURE analyses do this BTW? Don't recall any.
honestly, my cpu was running a taxing program and I didn't want to pause it just to post images. Not only that but c'mon, up until now he's still slinging insults and swinging at air, apparently he's arguing against someone who thinks Dinka/Hadza are laz's basal Eurasians. Like lets divert attention away from the fact that he tried to explain the shared component owned by the Hadza being a result of Cushitic admixture...not to mention I didn't even bring this **** up in any of these threads. Check your inbox, I'm done talking about this here.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lol. He has no answers for why other K analyses don't show Hadza as a source of Basal Eurasian. When I ask questions he's evasive and pretends he has some "bigger reason" for being evasive and full of crap. When someone else asks him why no other K analyes show Hadza as the source of Basal Eurasian, he still doesn't provide answers and starts talking about me.
All of a sudden he wants to take things offline like a coward when he started this whole conversation, thinking he could hoodwink Blessedbyhorus:
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: So now I am going to ask you, under which circumstance will an African BE directly decended from an SSA population not be SSA related.
I know why he wants to take things to a private conversation where the public can't verify his information and scrutinize it. He's a one trick pony with a carefully quote-mined screenshot.
Like who actually does that? I've never seen this before. Completely bizarre.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay Swenet lets talk like men, civilized and formal. Why don't Hadza show this component in every structural analysis?
Because the Hadza whole genome profile is very different from populations referenced in most studies. Yes, they have a strong Khoisan component and yes they're east African obviously. but what we might be seeing is remnants of an archaic precursor to N/E populations within the Hadza. In that event their khoisan like profile can help explain such bizarre instances of shared ancestry in Admixture analysis in combination with their old East African and more recent East-African recombination.
You see that chart I posted by Lazaridis, that shows you that this signature isn't due to Admixture, no matter how you want to spin it.
You can say that this signature is just a repeated Anomaly, but there are things that it can explain, which I am willing to discuss. But you don't seem interested in that right about now. Like, I told everyone over and over what to read to understand or get a grasp of what I'm saying.
I'm not going back and forth with you if you're going to resort to acting like a female about everything someone says that might go head on with your views.
EDIT: Examine everybody... look at what Swenet resorts to all the time.... I asked BBH about what he thinks of basal Eurasian and BBH brought up the HADZA situation... Look at how swenet takes peices of my posts and create his own narrative. this is why I encourage poeple to PM me, cuz this guy is sick forreal.Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Examine everybody... look at what Swenet resorts to all the time.... I asked BBH about what he thinks of basal Eurasian and BBH brought up the HADZA situation... Look at how swenet takes peices of my posts and create his own narrative. this is why I encourage poeple to PM me, cuz this guy is sick forreal.
I'm sick? Lol. You sound like an irrational teenager. You know you look stupid for saying out of nowhere that you're "100 years ahead" of Blessedbyhorus. That's why you're angry. No one cares.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: I'm 100 years ahead of you guys
^You started out chest thumping and you thought Blessedbyhorus was an easy target to hoodwink. I then took you up on your offer and there was nothing behind all that self-important bragging of being "100 years ahead of you guys". All you have is two screenshots of k=17. Let's be absolutely clear about that.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
It didn't come out of nowhere, I was talking to BBH about the improbability of Laz's BE as is being African. Now I think it would be wise if you stop splicing my quotes it makes you look bad.... I'm not responding to nothing else unless its civil, relevant to the data, or in regards to the OP... I'm honestly done with these childish games. If you want to believe I only have two screenshots more power to you lmao. **** it takes the burden of of me to explain this Anomaly.... go ahead swenet take a crack at publicly explaining whats going on here with the HADZA.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
So (and feel free to correct me) you are saying that Basal Eurasian is most likely NOT African AND that it's from SSA at the same time?
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: So now I am going to ask you, under which circumstance will an African BE directly decended from an SSA population not be SSA related.
posted
@Swenet Yeah, Kinda...and no kinda. I'm saying that the HADZA could have retained a BE like precursor component. The combination of ancestral populations in Arabia could have been similar to that of the Hadza, a HG-Koi like signature and an archaic east African signature, dragged away by drift OOA. If there was indeed a population representative of BE it could have possibly been developed OOA in Isolate from other Eurasian groups, probably in Arabia/Iran which could simultaneously explain why Iran neolithic are closest to SSAs out of all Neolithic groups and have the most Basal Eurasian Ancestry. The Hadza in comparison to just about All Eurasians are extremely heterogeneous, which is why similarly to other San, and pygmy populations they form their own clusters early in ADMIXTURE.
This relationship also explains why even though the Hadza received recent East African admixture, they score an incredibly positive F3 score. Hadza holds a basal position to both Mota AND Eurasians, the closest sample Ironically being HotuIII 60% basal Eurasian.
Edit: ^Which is why I asked that question you quoted. Cuz if BE was still in Africa until relatively recent, Ancient populations with commensurate levels of BE admixture would be much closer to SSAs.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay. So how would such a precursor component develop in the Hadza? They seem primarily split between a Khoisan component (e.g. L0d and B2b in Tanzania) and 'northern' ancestry (e.g. E1b1b and L4).
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to sum up what should be obvious, science and the anthropology of human DNA states that the "basal" mtDNA of the human people leaving Africa would have been an L mtDNA lineage, most likely L3. If there was a Northern route through what is now Egypt, then those folks would have been L3 carriers and hence "sub Saharan". Any other lineages, according to these scientists" arose after OOA and if present in Africa represent back migration. Meaning that the only "indigenous" lineages in Africa going back to OOA are the L mtDNA lineages, which arose in so-called "sub saharan" Africa. There are no other "indigenous" African lineages going back to OOA in Africa, according to this model....
quote: The modern human colonization of Eurasia and Australia is mostly explained by a single-out-of-Africa exit following a southern coastal route throughout Arabia and India. However, dispersal across the Levant would better explain the introgression with Neanderthals, and more than one exit would fit better with the different ancient genomic components discovered in indigenous Australians and in ancient Europeans. The existence of an additional Northern route used by modern humans to reach Australia was previously deduced from the phylogeography of mtDNA macrohaplogroup N. Here, we present new mtDNA data and new multidisciplinary information that add more support to this northern route.
...
Practically all humans out-of-Africa belong to mtDNA macrohaplogroups N or M, both sister branches of L3 African clade. N shows a global Eurasian distribution but most of its lineages everywhere are members of the R subclade. Only in Aboriginal Australians N(xR) lineages reach frequencies over 50% [5,79], and in some regions of East and Central Asia, haplogroups N9 and A can, respectively, exceed 10% [30,39,58,68,80]. In the rest of its geographic range, the presence of N(xR) lineages is residual and represent small younger expansions driven by the later spread of human groups, mainly harboring R derivatives in Western Asia and R and M derivatives in South and East Asia.
Our phylogenetic and phylogeographic analysis of macrohaplogroup N in Eurasia supports the existence of an additional northern route out of Africa, not involving the Arabian Peninsula or the Indian subcontinent as previously envisaged [17]. This long journey ended in Australia when it was still a part of the Sahul, most probably at the last glacial stage MIS-4 (Fig 1A). On the top of the common L3* trunk, macrohaplogroup N accumulated a stem of five mutations without any known bifurcation. From this fact, it can be deduced that, after the out-of-Africa, the bearers of this lineage seem to have had demographic difficulties and remained as a stagnate population for a long time. So, the first stages of the proposed haplogroup N northern route would be speculative and have to find indirect support on other genetic, archaeological and anthropologic evidences.
...
There is wide interdisciplinary agreement on the African origin of Anatomically Modern Humans (AMH) around 200 thousand years ago (kya), and also on the idea that they expanded out of that continent to colonize the rest of the world replacing, with only minor genetic exchanges, the indigenous hominids already present in Eurasia [1,2]. However, there is still inter and intra-disciplinary disagreement about the time and routes used by AMH in their dispersal out of Africa.
Based mainly on the coalescence age of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) L3 lineages, most geneticists propose a temporal window of 60–70 kya as the time for the exit, coinciding with the early Last Glacial stage (MIS 4). This hypothesis involves a southern route to Arabia across the Bab al Mandab strait, which, at that time, would have presented a very low sea level [3–6]. Some difficulties with this proposal are: the need of sea strait crossing, the inhospitable climatic conditions in Arabia at that time, the lack of pertinent fossil record along the trail, and the early colonization of Australia. Specially problematic is the date of the arrival of AMH to Australia, the last stage of the initial phase of the AMH colonization of the world, that occurred at least 45 kya [7] attending to the fossil record, but that could be as old as 62 to 75 kya based on genomic aboriginal Australian data [8]. However, all these problems have been overcome by appealing to navigation skills, coastal resource specialization, present-time submerged fossil record, and a very fast spread across coastal India, Myanmar, Malaysia and Indonesia to reach Australasia in time. Recent archaeological studies of Middle Paleolithic stone assemblages in several sites of the Arabian Peninsula [9–11] have added archaeological support to the southern route although entering Arabia during the last interglacial, around 120 kya, much earlier than the dates estimated from mtDNA by the geneticists. It is worth mentioning that a wade ashore across the Bab al Mandeb strait in that period would be more difficult than during a glacial stage.
On the other hand, a northern route by land across the Sinai Peninsula, for the out of Africa migration, is strongly sustained by paleontological and archaeological evidence, as the presence of AMH remains and associated stone material in the Levant around 100 kya [12,13]. The temporal coincidence of this date with an interglacial period would improve the climatic conditions of this corridor facilitating this northern exit. However, in this case, the lack of AMH fossil continuity in the area prompted researchers to consider it as an unproductive exit. Against this idea, recent studies on ancient genomes have detected a basal Eurasian component in the Near East, which diverged prior to the separation of the ancestors of Europeans and Eastern Asians. This finding reinforces the idea that the early presence of modern humans in the Levant was not an unsuccessful episode.
Which states clearly that "basal Eurasian" represents early DNA splits that occurred almost as soon as humans left Africa and quite possibly involved mixture with neanderthals in the levant and/or mixture with Denisovans on the way through Asia. Hence why the root of the Eurasian DNA tree is called "Non African", because of these proposed splits and mixture.
And hence, because of that, the only mtDNA lineages that are "African" in origin going back to OOA are the L0 - L4 mtDNA lineages. All others are the result of back migration. This is what current science says. There is no "non sub saharan" indigenous mtDNA lineage going back to OOA that is not L0-L4. Which means any populations migrating through the Nile Valley out of Africa would have been carrying L lineages. Obviously this also means that any later populations in the Nile Valley must be back migrants if these theories are correct.
For example mtDNA lineage N from the same study: Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
1 - IF you believe the L3N/L3M and M168 migrate out of Africa to Birth all Non-African diversity what issue do you have with mtdna lineages like JT, R0a1, HV, U8, etc being back migrants into the continent?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @Doug - Question
1 - IF you believe the L3N/L3M and M168 migrate out of Africa to Birth all Non-African diversity what issue do you have with mtdna lineages like JT, R0a1, HV, U8, etc being back migrants into the continent?
That was not the point. The point was that there are no African non SSA mtDNA lineages in Africa according to most studies of DNA. Otherwise what are they? What lineages would you expect to find in the Nile Valley that are ancestral to OOA and not L lineages, which science claims are SSA?
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok. I have read the paper and made my notes. Late to the party but this paper promises but do not deliver.
Supp Fig 3 would have solved this issue if they had included as much African populations (SSA East and West) as much as they included Levant and Europeans. But that was not their intention. But nevertheless. Clearly these ancient Egyptians are NOT Europeans and not East Asians But since Africans were NOT included one cannot tell which African population is the closest.
Supp Table 9 is also helpful. Derived for SLC24A5 for 2 of 3(why only 3?). I am beginning to think these Eurocentric researchers are getting desperate. Was it convenient that most pigmentation genes were inconclusive but the two derived gave some results. SLC45A2 and SLC24A5 are the two most important but since SSAfricans carry a relatively high frequency of SLC24A5(25%) and negligible amounts of SLC45A2(less2%). But West Asians carry a higher frequency of SL45A2(derived) . That means statistically/probably these AEians were black skinned. Why, only one ancient showed SLC45A2 and the gene was ANCESTRAL like most SSA and other blacks
Also they carried genes for black eyes and black hair and coarser hair (not the derived EDAR). Like Africans and Europeans.
The other interesting thing is they used haplogroup FREQUENCY to draw up their PCA charts and likelihood affiliation. The methodology is over 20 year old!!!!! Yes, back in the days of Achilli. May be they ran out of funds. Lol! The modern method in-lieu of admixture charts if haplotype comparison which they did not do. That is …weird.
But speaking about admixture charts. I would of like to see cluster charts from K2 – K20 instead of these snippets published. Which do NOT give the full picture and genetic connection and flow. Was this deliberate? I think it was.
This paper does not really work. They are making the assumptions that MtDNA L is the only African lineage. Interestingly though, NO European Haplogroup are present. H1 and H3. All the published haplogroups is quite possibly of Africans origin. They haven’t proved anything as I stated in that other thread. mtDNA M1 is clearly SSA African with an East African origin.
They cannot use haplogroup frequency to come to such a ridiculous conclusion.
BTW – I not sure where the Dinka discussion came about?
-------------------- 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
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u7MvAJWkzQ As I said in the comments: 1:52:21 Wudjau nailed it. Its not the timeline as much as the location. Its not the Delta its the neck of the Delta. Abusir and Fayum are two miles away. Same city. Abusir which brought you images of Ancient Egyptians like this in 2000BC
and the Fayum portraits in the Greece/Roman period. Strategically selected with a very old narrative.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
JK2134 is J1a2b1-P58, probably the J1-YSC234 subclade. Y-Full estimates this clade to be about 5000-6500 years old. This branch is pretty strongly associated with Semitic speakers. Bronze Age Jordanian I1705(~2100 BC) probably belonged to a related branch of J1a2b.
JK2911 is J2b1-M205, which is 4900-7600 years old by Y-Full's estimate. This is a widespread group with a notable frequency on Cyprus today. Bronze Age Jordanian I1730 (~2400 BC) also belonged to this branch.
JK2888 as we already knew is E1b1b1a1b2-V22, which is an old and widespread branch of E-M78 (7200-9800 years old by Y-Full's estimate).
IMHO JK2134 is probably of Semitic descent paternally, and JK2911 might also be.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @Doug - Question
1 - IF you believe the L3N/L3M and M168 migrate out of Africa to Birth all Non-African diversity what issue do you have with mtdna lineages like JT, R0a1, HV, U8, etc being back migrants into the continent?
That was not the point. The point was that there are no African non SSA mtDNA lineages in Africa according to most studies of DNA. Otherwise what are they? What lineages would you expect to find in the Nile Valley that are ancestral to OOA and not L lineages, which science claims are SSA?
This is stupid and self defeatist. We already know about the arguments for and against North Africa being continually populated due to climate.
Here is your North Africa:
The Closest thing to "African non SSA lineages" we have TODAY are going to be M1 and U6 derived lineages. There is no telling what has undergone extinction. Looking at that map...and knowing their diversity....where does it seem like those humans could have went to? You saying "Thats besides the point" is only a weak attempt of you to hide from reality. IF you dont want to answer questions and support your position, why are you on Egyptsearch? O hea, to bitch and moan about why-tee.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Ok. I have read the paper and made my notes. Late to the party but this paper promises but do not deliver.
But speaking about admixture charts. I would of like to see cluster charts from K2 – K20 instead of these snippets published............... Was this deliberate? I think it was.
Yep, they know what they are doing. The most salient part. Its going to be interesting to see these samples in their North African context. I am curious as to their Berber type component. Razib took the supp and has a more defined list of mtdna. As a mentioned to you before, they are probably not going to be as basal as you expect.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I stated before these are indigenous Africans. The haplogroups found in these AEians are exactly where they should be. Indigenous East Africans.
---- Quotes: “In Africa, haplogroup T is primarily found among Afro-Asiatic-speaking populations, including the basal T* clade.[1] Some non-basal T clades are also commonly found among the Niger-Congo-speaking Serer” T in Africa Sudan Sudan Undetermined 3/102 2.94% Datoga Tanzania Nilo-Saharan 1/57 1.75% Beja Sudan Afro-Asiatic > Cushitic 1/48 2.1% mtDNA Basal haplogroup J* is found among the Soqotri (9.2%).[4]
J in Africa In Africa, haplogroup J is concentrated in the northeast. It is found among Algerians (3.23%-14.52%),[10] as well as Copts (10.3% J1a; 10.3% J2),[11] Sudanese Fulani (10.7% J1b),[11] Meseria (6.7% J1b),[11] Arakien (5.9% J1b),[11] Egyptians (5.9%),[12] Mozabite Berbers (3.53%),[10] Sudanese Hausa (2.9% J1b),[11] Zenata Berbers (2.74%),[10] Beja (2.1% J1b),[11] and Reguibate Sahrawi (0.93%).[10]
X1 in Africa Sub-group X1 is much less frequent, and is largely restricted to North Africa, the Horn of Africa and the Near East.
U in Africa U9 -It is interesting that, in Pakistan, U9 occurs frequently only among the so-called Makrani population. In this particular population, lineages specific to parts of Eastern Africa occur as frequently as 39%, which suggests that U9 lineages in Pakistan may have an origin from this area (Quintana-Murci et al. 2004). Regardless of which coast of the Arabian Sea may have been the origin of U9, its Ethiopian–southern Arabian–Indus Basin distribution hints that the subclade's diversification from U4 may have occurred in regions far away from the current area of the highest diversity and frequency of haplogroup U4—East Europe and western Siberia.[96] U6a: subclade is the most widespread, stretching from the Canary Islands and Iberian Peninsula to the Horn of Africa and Near East. The subhaplogroup has its highest diversity in Northeast Africa. Estimated age: 24-27,500 BP. It has one major subclade
W in Africa Haplogroup W is also found in the Maghreb among Algerians (1.08%-3.23%).[5]
K1 in Africa Haplogroup K1 has likewise been observed among specimens at the mainland cemetery in Kulubnarti, Sudan, which date from the Early Christian period (AD 550-800).[20]
-------------------- 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 Mansamusa: By now, is it not obvious that the lack of Sub-Saharan ancestry in Ancient Egyptians and Natufians and other groups expected to be SSA is due to the extinction of the prehistoric groups that gave birth to these ancient people? These are prehistoric and ancient populations, who probably originated from the South of the Sahara, and made a home of the harsh desert. They were small, highly mobile and precarious populations. They probably died out and became dead-end populations. It would not be unique to Africa. In Europe, there is little no relationship between stone age Europeans and modern Europeans. What we need is more ancient DNA from historic and pre-historic African populations.
Makes sense:
quote:Green Sahara: African Humid Periods Paced by Earth's Orbital Changes
Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.
[…]
Figure 3: Distribution map of reconstructed lake levels across Africa, 9,000 years ago relative to today. Data are from the Oxford Lake Level Database (COHMAP members, 1988, Street-Perrott et al., 1989) updated with lake-level reconstructions generated in the last twenty years (Tierney et al., 2011)
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Okay. So how would such a precursor component develop in the Hadza? They seem primarily split between a Khoisan component (e.g. L0d and B2b in Tanzania) and 'northern' ancestry (e.g. E1b1b and L4).
The fine details for what exactly is going on with Hadza genome is beyond me. Whether their Tanzania-san like ancestry hides an earlier HG component more related to OOA populations or if their unique patterns in Structural analysis is due to added Heterogeneity from recent mixture with Afrosan's, I'm not 100% sure yet. But have we considered the possibility that their B-181/m60 is archaic? They're the only group within Africa I know of so far that carry Upstream clades, and as you should know B-181(x112) extends as far as Suadia Arabia. The Sandawe are primarily B-m150 & B-m112 (downstream). We cannot truly Model the Hadza as Sandawe x Horners, the chart by lazaridis that I posted above already shows that by itself. Sandawe & ALL Horners have a negative Z score between Mota & Eurasians, the hadza has the most positive for any East African population. recent Horner Admixture cannot explain the Anomalous clustering within the Hadza genome no matter what.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Okay. So how would such a precursor component develop in the Hadza? They seem primarily split between a Khoisan component (e.g. L0d and B2b in Tanzania) and 'northern' ancestry (e.g. E1b1b and L4).
The fine details for what exactly is going on with Hadza genome is beyond me. Whether their Tanzania-san like ancestry hides an earlier HG component more related to OOA populations or if their unique patterns in Structural analysis is due to added Heterogeneity from recent mixture with Afrosan's, I'm not 100% sure yet. But have we considered the possibility that their B-181/m60 is archaic? They're the only group within Africa I know of so far that carry Upstream clades, and as you should know B-181(x112) extends as far as Suadia Arabia. The Sandawe are primarily B-m150 & B-m112 (downstream). We cannot truly Model the Hadza as Sandawe x Horners, the chart by lazaridis that I posted above already shows that by itself. Sandawe & ALL Horners have a negative Z score between Mota & Eurasians, the hadza has the most positive for any East African population. recent Horner Admixture cannot explain the Anomalous clustering within the Hadza genome no matter what.
Both Sandawe and San have minor Eurasian. This can be seen clearly by their mtDNAs and Y DNAs and has also been demonstrated with their genomes.
How does archaic ancestry in Hadza (or any other ancestry they have, for that matter) develop into a Basal Eurasian precursor? This is why my question is important. Any notion that Hadza have a precursor of Basal Eurasian should be provable with some form of evidence that Hadza have an actual foundation from which that precursor can originate. Do you have evidence that Hadza's archaic ancestry (or any other ancestry they have) has the same genetic properties as Basal Eurasian?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
JK2134 is J1a2b1-P58, probably the J1-YSC234 subclade. Y-Full estimates this clade to be about 5000-6500 years old. This branch is pretty strongly associated with Semitic speakers. Bronze Age Jordanian I1705(~2100 BC) probably belonged to a related branch of J1a2b.
JK2911 is J2b1-M205, which is 4900-7600 years old by Y-Full's estimate. This is a widespread group with a notable frequency on Cyprus today. Bronze Age Jordanian I1730 (~2400 BC) also belonged to this branch.
JK2888 as we already knew is E1b1b1a1b2-V22, which is an old and widespread branch of E-M78 (7200-9800 years old by Y-Full's estimate).
IMHO JK2134 is probably of Semitic descent paternally, and JK2911 might also be.
I post in particular on E-V22 here. Do you think a group like the Fulani would have been a better representative than the Yoruba?
Bahariyya E-V22 score = 21,95%
Mixed Ethiopiansa E-V22 score = 25.00%
—Fulvio Cruciani (2007)
Fulani E-V22 score = 27.2%
E-V22 accounts for 27.2% and its highest frequency appears to be among Fulani, but it is also common in Nilo-Saharan speaking groups.
--Hisham Y. Hassan, Peter A. Underhill, Luca L. Cavalli-Sforza, and Muntaser E. Ibrahim
Y-Chromosome Variation Among Sudanese: Restricted Gene Flow, Concordance With Language, Geography, and History
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rule 1, one should not comprise the forum or thread (with exceedingly large images, on purpose). This leads to immediate ban, no excuses.
In a democracy people have the right to different opinions. But you don't have the right to obstruct and terrorize others.
Therefore I call for immediate and permanent termination of Cass his account (and his multiple accounts).
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Okay. So how would such a precursor component develop in the Hadza? They seem primarily split between a Khoisan component (e.g. L0d and B2b in Tanzania) and 'northern' ancestry (e.g. E1b1b and L4).
The fine details for what exactly is going on with Hadza genome is beyond me. Whether their Tanzania-san like ancestry hides an earlier HG component more related to OOA populations or if their unique patterns in Structural analysis is due to added Heterogeneity from recent mixture with Afrosan's, I'm not 100% sure yet. But have we considered the possibility that their B-181/m60 is archaic? They're the only group within Africa I know of so far that carry Upstream clades, and as you should know B-181(x112) extends as far as Suadia Arabia. The Sandawe are primarily B-m150 & B-m112 (downstream). We cannot truly Model the Hadza as Sandawe x Horners, the chart by lazaridis that I posted above already shows that by itself. Sandawe & ALL Horners have a negative Z score between Mota & Eurasians, the hadza has the most positive for any East African population. recent Horner Admixture cannot explain the Anomalous clustering within the Hadza genome no matter what.
Both Sandawe and San have minor Eurasian. This can be seen clearly by their mtDNAs and Y DNAs and has also been demonstrated with their genomes.
How does archaic ancestry in Hadza (or any other ancestry they have, for that matter) develop into a Basal Eurasian precursor? This is why my question is important. Any notion that Hadza have a precursor of Basal Eurasian should be provable with some form of evidence that Hadza have an actual foundation from which that precursor can originate. Do you have evidence that Hadza's archaic ancestry (or any other ancestry they have) has the same genetic properties as Basal Eurasian?
Well here's the thing, When ever we analyze a number of K's high enough to exceed usual geographic and far isolate clusters the Hadza will consistently form a clade that follows tit for tat the pattern that basal Eurasian does, as seen in kilinc 2016, as seen in Gurdasani 2014, as seen in Haber et al. 2017.
There's really only two ways we can look at this, it's either something or nothing. and though uniparentals don't say everything, Hadza are our sole African B-m181(x m112) carriers. But one thing's for certain, This clustering pattern at high K cannot possibly be of recent Admixture ~2.5kya from northerners.
-gurdasani 2014
Thats like 80% of Hadzas genome in purps following Neolithic population/BE admixture.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic