posted
Ancient and recent Middle Eastern maternal genetic contribution to North Africa – Elkamel et al 2018 -Another lie!!
When I read these published studies I am amazed with the concentrated effort to alienate Sub Saharan Africans. The vitriol that is displayed is really alarming. Here is another paper that twist and manipulate data and information to make false claims. To the unsuspecting it is as clear as mud. But to those in the genetic circle it is clear what they are doing. That is why I am entirely convinced I am right. And their commonality in data manipulation is consistently the same that is why I am spot on and I easily see what they are doing. Most of these researchers have a common theme. “Alienate Sub Saharan Africans” and don't include samples that make geographic sense. Predictable?! I Can predict how they will spin the data.
Here is another example. They claim North Africans are from Eurasia but PROVIDE NO GENETIC data. Read the paper!! They provide data that ONLY two Tunisian population carry R0a, T1 and J1b. They also admit Tunisians within the same population carry a high frequency as much as 45% mtDNA L(supposed SSA). They compared haplotype between the two population but did not include modern Near East. none! When that kind of sloppy analysis is that?. It is clear that if Modern Near east population were included the haplotypes will NOT match. That is why Near Easterners weren’t included. Ha! Ha! Ha! They will not have matching haplotypes(Ennafa sp? et al). That is why I am convinced I am always correct. That is why I am convinced and it is undeniable that AEians are Africans, Abusir were Africans, Amarna were Africans two brothers were Africans etc They know it. . Why? Because they do NOT conduct the analysis the right way…why, because if they did it will not support their hypothesis ..and they know it. Instead they play these labeling and sampling gymnastics like removing unwanted samples, not publishing results excluding certain populations when it makes scientific sense to include that same population to prove their point.
Keep in mind the main method to determine origin and ancestry and relatedness is by comparing mtDNA or yDNA subclades on a Phylotree. They did not do that. Or using software which can map autosomal LD or IBD which they did not do. Or using software like TreeMix and possibly genetic GPS which they did not do either.
Some of you may understand what I am getting at others may not.
------- QUOTES: Ancient and recent Middle Eastern maternal genetic contribution to North Africa – Elkamel et al 2018 Lotfi Cherni
Even so, previous studies on Tunisian populations displayed the mosaic structure of the mitochondrial gene pool, which is characterized by an overall high frequency of Eurasian haplogroups ( 70%), followed by Sub-Saharan L lineages ( 25%), and lesser frequencies of North African haplogroups U6 and M1 (5%) (Fadhlaoui-Zid et al., 2004; Frigi et al., 2010; Kefi et al., 2015). However, of these mtDNA, only Fernandes et al. (2015) estimated the recent contribution of Near Eastern sublineages, i.e., K1a1, N1, T, J, R0a, U, and X, suggesting that they arrived around
Genomic DNA was extracted from fresh blood samples donated by 114 unrelated subjects, who originated from two regions of central Tunisia, using the salting out protocol
The location of the two studied regions Kairouan and Wesletia (Oueslatia) is shown in the Supporting Information Figure S1
Considering HVS-I and HVS-II sequences, the number of unique haplotypes found in Kairouan and Wesletia was 45 (90%) and 56 (92%) respectively, along with only three haplotypes being shared between the two populations (Supporting Information Table S2).
By contrast, the population of Kairouan displayed five Middle Eastern subhaplogroups K1a (4%), J1b (2%), T1a (2%), T2c1 (2%), and U1a (2%). Overall, the two populations shared ****only one *****Middle Eastern haplotype T1a [16126C-16163G-16186T-16189C-16294T-73G-263G] considering both HVS-I and HVS-II sequences
Sub-Saharan lineages represented by the branches L0, L1, L2, L3, and L4 were also common, being slightly more frequent in Kairouan (40%) than in Wesletia (31.25%). The two populations displayed 12 Sub-Saharan subhaplogroups (Supporting Information Table S2), and shared two haplotypes from L3e5 and L3f1b4c when considering HVS-I and HVS-II variants.
--------------------------------- They should stop there! lol! Right? They are not Middle Easterners,. They are not! Why even write the paper and publish it??!! Overall, the two populations shared ****only one *****Middle Eastern haplotype T1a [16126C-16163G-16186T-16189C-16294T-73G-263G] considering both HVS-I and HVS-II sequences
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Quote Cont: ------------------ North African specific lineages (U6 and M1) occurred at lower frequencies compared to West Eurasian and Sub- Saharan African lineages. They were more frequent in Wesletia (7.8%) than in Kairouan (4%).
Middle Eastern haplogroup R0a Middle Eastern haplogroup R0a, the most frequent and widespread in the Arabia Peninsula ( Cern y et al., 2011), was observed in Tunisian Arabs (exclusively in Wesletia) and displayed the highest frequency (9.37%) among 36 North African populations studied to date. A total of 314 R0a sequences, with known geographical origins (Supporting Information Table S4), were used to produce a median joining network (Figure 2). The network showed a star-like structure with the ancestral haplotype R0a from which derived different subhaplogroups. The ancestral haplotype R0a, characterized by (16126–16362), was widespread in the Middle East and North Africa (including four samples from Wesletia), and occurred to a lesser extend in Europe, East Africa, West Africa, and Asia. The rest of the R0a haplotypes were scattered in Middle Eastern, Ethiopian, North African, and Eurasian samples. Among R0a lineages, the most abundant subhaplogroup was R0a1a, defined by the additional 16355 transition (Abu-Amero, Gonz alez, Larruga, Bosley, & Cabrera, 2007; Cern y et al., 2009, 2011). The most abundant R0a1a haplotype was overwhelmingly found in the Middle East followed by North Africa (including one sample from
Wesletia), Ethiopia and Europe. The rest of the R0a1a haplotypes were scattered mostly in Middle East but also in North Africans and Ethiopians. The second most abundant subhaplogroup was R0a2c characterized by the 16304 transition ( Cern y et al., 2011). R0a2c occurred frequently in Middle Eastern samples followed by North African (included one sample from Wesletia), Ethiopian and one Mauritanian, while the rest of the R0a2c haplotypes were from the Middle East. The subclade R0a1b, identified by the 16093 and 16189 mutations (Abu-Amero et al., 2007), was mainly represented by various haplotypes from Saudi Arabia. In addition, several minority subclades R0a2b2, R0a2h, R0a2f1b, and R0a2k ( Cern y et al., 2011), appeared mostly in Middle Eastern and Eastern African samples, while subclade R0a2i, defined by 16092– 16278 ( Cern y et al., 2011), was only found in Middle East and North Africa.
-------------
Again! They should stop there! Right? R0a is omnipresent in Africa.. They are not Middle Easterners,. They are not! Why even write the paper and publish it??!! Overall, the two populations shared ****only one *****Middle Eastern haplotype T1a [16126C-16163G-16186T-16189C-16294T-73G-263G] considering both HVS-I and HVS-II sequences
-------------------- 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
Oh! again Sudan has a high prevalence R0a. But why even mention Sudan. That will screw up the hypothesis! lol!
-------------------- 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 |
They mention East and West SSA carrying R0a.. they have a whole schematic basically showing us so, even providing us with Basal African lineages. I find it interesting that Great lakes and these Tunisan branches coalesce around the same time period... what a weird haplogroup.
quote:"The geographical distribution of the two haplogroups R0a and J1b confirmed their Middle Eastern origin, with the highest frequencies being recorded in the Arabian Peninsula (especially in Saudi Arabia). R0a extended into East Africa (mainly in Ethiopia and Nubia) as well as the Western part of North Africa (Reguibate in Algeria) and to Tunisia (Qalaat El Andalous to the North, Wesletia to the Center, and Sned to the South), "
...how does R0a2b even happen?
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
The hypothesis that the indigenous population of North Africa are from the "Middle East" .
Tunisians carry a high frequency of SSA mtDNA L lineage. Highest in All north Africa, their phenotype is very "European" while their autosomal markers carry very little "European" DNA.
And yes Figure 2 clearly show and Africa origin of R0a. I will break it down when I have time and use this as my talking point on R0a origins. In every bad paper there is some useful information. lol!
-------------------- 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 |
-------------------- 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 |
-------------------- 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
Some of you may be puzzled at what you are looking at. Let me break it down.
We know R0a is a subclade of mtDNA N(L3-N). The question is where did the mutation to form R0a took place. Think of mtDNA R0a as the base of a huge tree and each subclade (mutation) is an individual branch which has smaller branches and so on. R0a is the main trunk of that tree(the base). Looking at the diagram, So R0a is found in a wide geographic area like in Africa(Sub-Saharan Africa and North Africa), Europe and Near east. This is an indication of a very early dispersal after the formation of R0a. Next we look at the next main branch from the trunk of that tree. This is where the rubber hits the road!!!!!(frequency means nothing – that is just genetic drift). Looking at the smaller branches or down stream sub-clades of R0a it is clear that by far Africa carry the most next Basal sub-clades branches R0a. Also In fact Europe carry virtual no sub-clade of R0a which is indicative that they were recipients of migrating mtDNA R0a females. Africans especially sub-saharans are mostly at the base-clade of R0a. Most of the clades of the “near East” are found downstream of R0a but some are near the base. This is indicative that there was a higher frequency of migrating sub-clade of R0a towards the near East very early on. In summary the clades of R0a found in Africa are at the root. The Near East carry mostly downstream clades of those found in Africa. Europeans carry virtually no basal clades of R0a. In addition Europeans do not carry downstream clades of those found in the “Near East” which support Lazaridis et al etc that the Natufians are NOT ancestral to modern Europeans
As I said. Within their lie they unknowingly provide the truth.
-------------------- 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
There is no way in hell the AEians are Europeans or modern Near Easterners. They have absolutely no connection to the AEians. Those people in the Near East are mostly Ottoman Turks. This paper ALSO proves that I am correct about that. Look at the PCoA Figure 1. Syrians, Palestinians, Iraqi, etc do NOT cluster with North Africans (Oh! But I don’t have much faith in PCA based upon frequency). However , They are NOT the same people.
We saw the same with the Abusir mummies. Modern Near/middle East do NOT cluster with the Abusir mummies. They do not. Look at the charts in the abusir paper. You need to rethink who is a "middle East" person. The Middle East who the Abusir cluster with is the same people higlighted in this paper(op). YEMEN(Hadarmwat(sp?) of Yemen). (Bedouins and Black Yemenis!!). .
Most Berbers of North Africans are indigenous they are not Turks like those people in the middle East.
Although the Bedouins/Yemenis are migrant Africans they are NOT closely related to North Africans(Henn was correct- dont you get that?). That is why they may carry the same upstream haplogroup as North Africans their sub-haplogroup or haplotype is on a different branch of the tree meaning they have the same ancestors but one is not a subset of the other. Both their ancestral home is Sub-Saharan Africa along the Great Lakes. That is why Africans carry the basal form of R0a.
The data is consistent!!!!!
-------------------- 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 |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic