Also amazingly looking at the mitogenomes of modern Sudanese, Ethiopians and Somalians there is a extremely high frequency of mtDNA L and its sub-clades. The diversity and frequency of mtDNA L sub-clades is off the charts. But what stands out to me is the presence and frequency of mtDNA L0* in all three populations. This is a very very very old linage age found throughout Africa. Keep in mind mtDNA L was found in 8000year old Neolithics of the Levant(Fernandez et al etc) and pre-historic Iberians.
It is impossible for mtDNA L to “by-pass” Egypt when it was 1000’s of miles away in pre-historic times like the Levant and Iberia.
The researchers are lying or selectively choosing data to publish.
I had my doubts they would do that but I guess they are getting desperate. The aDNA is destroying the myth of a Eurocentric Regional evolution. Now it is time to lie, mis-represent and/or destroy data.
Expect more lies, or falsification of data.
Fortunately they cannot retract what they have already published
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] What is this brown component found in highest Frequency in Abusir, Natufians, Sandawe, all north Africans including Canary Islanders, Onge?, Ethiopians Jews, Yemenis etc but trace amounts in Southern "Europeans" and absent in Basque and Northern Europeans. Highest freuency of brown is found in? Brown = North African?
Name the haplogroups that are Great Lakes but not overlapping with, not common to West African Yoruba
-------------------- 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 capra: hey xyyman this is unsupervised right? with STRs? 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 |
The **oldest** mixture events appear to be between populations related to sub-Saharan Africans and West Europeans occurring ~3,800 BCE, FOLLOWED closely by mixture of Sardinian and Caucasus-related populations. Later, several mixture events occurred from 3,000-1,200 BCE involving diverse Eurasian populations (Table 1, Figure 3). We compared patterns of admixture in Armenians to other regional populations and detected signals of RECENT admixture in most other populations. For example, we find 7.9% (±0.4) East Asian ancestry in Turks from admixture occurring 800 (±170). We also detect sub-Saharan African gene flow 850 (±85) years ago in Syrians, Palestinians and Jordanians
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: After reading this entire study plus the Supps. A few things.
Notice that Iberia and Greece has a higher fraction of West African ancestry(6000bc) which faded out during the subsequent years. There is They admit that R1b probably came from the “south” not from the Steppes. Also admitted that Natufians carried more SSA ancestray which also faded. During the late Bronze age. Now if the Early Greeks had West African Ancestry and the Natufians had SSA ancestry what about the Abusir who lived in Africa? Such a C…
Oh! And they critiqued “supervised” testing and did the same themselves. SMH
-------------------- 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
@XYYMAN. So I see you are making some progress. Are you ready to admit you Fvcked up and the image you thought “Looked Like” K=4 was the full analysis?
And since it WAS the full analysis and you see it included all the populations I mentioned then they were in fact “Part of the analysis” and were “compared”?
You also going to go back and admit you are messing up again with the Onge? The component fixed in the Onge, an adamanese Relic Group, is totally different from that which peaks in the Natufian. How you made this mistake is beyond me.
You can’t sit and say they didn’t include or compare population X with population Z when BOTH of them are all in the same ADMIXTURE analysis. You do know how admixture works right? Tic Toc......where in the article or the supp does it say the ADMIX Run was supervised or unsupervised?
Months ago I gave an analysis oscehst is going on in the admixture run and what I Believe to be it’s faults. Be humble.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a question mark on Onge. Because I wasn't sure on the color for Onge. I told you this is not a pissing contest. You are out of your league
Irregardless, the Kluster Chart shows there was comparison between Great Lakes Africans and Abusir. They are comparing YRI and Abusir.
------------- quote "And since it WAS the full analysis and you see it included all the populations I mentioned then they were in fact “Part of the analysis” and were “compared”? "
lol! Are you a 2year old? Child psychology. They cannot say less SSA when the brown component is found in SSA. Fool! They are "comparing" red and identify red as SSA . Red is a component found most in YRI.
-------------------- 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
Point is Brown ****is***** an African component....found in sub-saharan Africa as far south as South Africa.....and also found in the at high frequency in the Abusir. It is NOT a Eurasian component. Red is Yoruban not Great Lakes. If they isolated a Great Lakes component like they did with YRI Abusir will be 100% SSA. ----
You know you are like a little kid. I said Onge may be brown(?). You pick up on that straw and run with it instead of addressing the brown and my Great Lakes comment. Such a ditz!
It is impossible for the Abusir to anything but African. Geography don't lie. That is why I will ALWAYS be right. Genes mimic geography - Sforza! Always
-------------------- 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
It’s obviousl You don’t know how admixture works. ALL THE POPULATIONS ARE COMPARED WITH EACH OTHER.
Since there were so many non pertinent populations (Amerindians/Pacific islanders, ancient Europeans, East Asians et al) the Many East African clusters that we are familiar with didn’t differentiate. Those K’s got sucked up in worldwide genetic diversity. The only one that did was Hadza. I went over this the first week that the study dropped. Whether the Natufian Brown component is besides the point of you don’t understand how the program works and don’t think the comparison included Nilotes and Horners.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
yes all population are compared with each other BUT FOR **SELECT** SNP's That is why it is SUPERVISED. The Red component is found at highest frequency in YRI. That is what they lebelled SSA...it is a YRI component NOT A SUBSAHARAN COMPONENT!!!!!. Specific to YRI. In other words there are OTHER components that will be found in YRI AND Abusir and maybe not in many other populations. That is how SNPs/AIM work. Just as the Brown component is found throughout North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa and the ABusirs. YES! the Abusir DNA is found as far south as South Africa.
It is impossible for the Abusir to be anything but African. That is why the Brown component is African found in Natufians, Abusir, Bedouins and as far south as the Khoi_sans. WTF is wrong with you?
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: It’s obviousl You don’t know how admixture works. ALL THE POPULATIONS ARE COMPARED WITH EACH OTHER.
Since there were so many non pertinent populations (Amerindians/Pacific islanders, ancient Europeans, East Asians et al) the Many East African clusters that we are familiar with didn’t differentiate. Those K’s got sucked up in worldwide genetic diversity. The only one that did was Hadza. I went over this the first week that the study dropped. Whether the Natufian Brown component is besides the point of you don’t understand how the program works and don’t think the comparison included Nilotes and Horners.
-------------------- 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
Another idiotic statement. Ass, the Brown component IS the point. This is the Abusir MAIN component based upon the AIM chosen for the study(supervised). This is what makes the Abusirs so genetically close to the Natufians. THE BROWN. It looks a like North African component but since it is found in Khoi_San it has to be ANCIENT ie maybe OOA East Africa.
Why do I bother explaining this to you? SMH
You people are focusing on the red not realizing it is YRI and not SSA. Sleight of hands by the researchers. But YOU and others did not see the elephant in the room. Man, Sometimes I think I am teaching "kitty-gardeners". Infants and not grown adults who have been to college...I believe. Siiigh!
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: Whether the Natufian Brown component is besides the point .....
-------------------- 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
Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of ****Yoruban **** ancestry in post-Roman periods - Verena J. Schuenemann
....but an ancient connection between North Africans, Abusirs and Natufians. This connection may be ancient going back to the Khoisan and Great Lakes Africans.
-------------------- 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
Are the "Arabians" the Africanized Bedouins?? There is no note on who these sample population are. Typical Europeans.
Nevertheless the Natufians contain African Ancestry regardless of popular belief. And as can be seen by the Abusir paper cited above. The Brown component is African
-------------------- 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 Fourty2Tribes: ^^ Do you mean, the only one that did not was Hadza?
@Fourty2Tribes - Bad sentence structure. Should have read something like : "The Many East African clusters that we are familiar with didn’t differentiate....The only one that did was Hadza"
So we have no Nilote Cluster, No Sandawe component, No Horner Component, Only Hadza. Shit where was not even a Mahrebi cluster.
@XYYMAN - That they select a panel of SNP's is not what "Supervised" means when in reference to ADMIXTURE. You dont know how ADMIXTURE works.
"Unsupervised" means you put in the K and you let the computer find the maximum likelihood and make its clusters based on the populations sample.
"Supervised" means you CHOOSE the source populations at your own discretion to represent the cluster.
For instance, in the RUN instead of letting many of the cluster get sucked up in European, SE Asian and Amerindian diversity you "Supervise" and tell the program to run it with Dinka, Hadza, Somali , etc as their OWN cluster.
quote: The Red component is found at highest frequency in YRI. That is what they lebelled SSA...it is a YRI component NOT A SUBSAHARAN COMPONENT!!!!!. Specific to YRI. In other words there are OTHER components that will be found in YRI AND Abusir and maybe not in many other populations.
Well NOT AT THE SPECIFIC K IN THE PAPER! Mbuti, Yoruba, Hadza, Khoisan were the 4 Sub Saharan specific clusters that differentiated. These 4 we not found in the Mummies.
You dont have the aptitude to discuss the characteristics of the Brown Natufian component (which is not totally African....its is MIXED with African and a statistical anomaly) because you dont know how ADMXTURE even works. You dont know WHY or how the Brown component is in Southern Africa and you are saying its ancient even when we have Southern African Ancient DNA. First you made a big deal about the paper not comparing Great Lakes and Horn Africans....when that got debunked you switch the goal post to the Brown component because that all of a sudden takes importance over "Deh lack of Great Lakes". Quit playing.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@AstenB.....Mr wannabe. Working overtime to convince himself that he is geneticist. SMH.
AstenB said "I know , you don't know...blah! Blah! Blah! I know, I know I know. Blah blah You don't know. I read. I wannabe a geneticist. I know! I know! blah! I wish I was a genecist! you don't know. I know genecist who fooled me and have not released DNA studies they promised me 2 years ago. I know! I know! blah!". lol! Mr Wannabe.
I admit I focused on No comparison with Great Lakes because I did not pay close attention. But it still stands. They did not identify a Great Lake component is the other study which debunked this one. My Point still stands.
quote:Originally posted by beyoku:
You dont have the aptitude to .....) because you dont know how ADMXTURE even works. ......You dont know WHY or how ............. First you made a big deal a......
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Natufians are "at least" 29% African. The question is what do they define as "Arab" @ 61%. I haven't looked at the Supp in detail but I am guessing Bedouins or Yemen not the Turks who now occupy the region.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
What is this snippet saying? Natufians were between 6 and 61% African?
-------------------- 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
They "re-sequenced" datasets from old/existing studies. In other words the previous researchers lied or misled the public when they said the Natufians contained no SSA ancestry.
I knew they were lying. Why? Geography don't lie. Genes mimic geography. Always had!
If SSA ancestry is found ~5000ya in Armenia and Turkey and Western Europe don't you think it will be found a few hundred miles away in the Levant and it's home land along the Nile.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Hm, so Natufians (the ones that were sequenced) are 29% African... Interesting.
-------------------- 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
Since I've yet to see research establish a distinctly North African genetic component, does "African" here mean SSA?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
it means some ADMIXTURE component which is presumably maximized in some modern Northern Africans. since the preprint does not include the plot for modern populations we cannot tell which ones or how much.
North African centred components (Mozabite is common) come up easily enough, this is not the same as some actual ancient North African ancestry established through ancient DNA, or even a decent ghost population.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you Capra. I might add, the key word here is "Maximize" which is different from "origin". Also as stated many times before and as we have seen recently from many genetic studies, E-M2 is much younger than E-M35. The typical north African branch lineage is much older than the typical sub-saharan male lineage. And as we have seen from Skoglund. The molecular clock may be off as far as dispersal of E-M2. It has not been found in pre-historic SSA(xM-38). In historical times it has been found in Rameses III.
-------------------- 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
Also - The Natufians DNA is broken up into African(29%), which a portion is SSA from East Africa which we knew all along. The real question now is what is "Arabian" vs "West Asian". West Asian is 10% while "Arab" is @ 61%. If the "Arabs" are Bedouins and Yemenis(like Hadrwhat sp?) from the south then we can conclude the Natufians are 90% African geographic labeling aside.
Sometimes we go off on tangent and miss the elephant in the room...many times over. Looking at the chart. THE NATUFIANS HAS NO GENETIC RELATION TO MODERN EUROPEANS !!!!!(North or South) NONE!!!!. I said that many times. Lazaridis also confirms that in his work. Natufians are NOT ancestral to modern Europeans. The Near East is not ancestral to EEF. Basal Eurasian is African with a split taking place in the Sahara with the Nile being "the line of demarcation". That is why the Abusir do NOT carry European mtDNA like H1.
All evidence emerging point to the Nile as a key resource after the desert arrived and expanded. For some reason sub-saharans controlled that corridor. That is why the AEians align with SSA via STR, to the West are the Berbers who are ancestral to the West Europeans seen by mtDNA H1/H3/U5b to the East are the ancient Levantines and East Europeans and South West Asians(Bedoiuns, Brahmins etc NOT Turks) carrying mtDNA H2/U5a etc). DNATribes had it correct. These sub-saharans controlled the Nile right along into Europe. That is why ancient Greeks/Armenians will and do carry sub-saharan DNA.
Geography don't lie!!
Why do you think they haven't analyzed (or publish)aDNA from ancient Greeks...the birthplace of "Western Civilization". So important to them. They did already but they don't like the results. The few that they did the results were never published, even "my sources" can't get hold of the results. It is locked away in Fort Knox. Lol! They need to come up with a spin to explain away SSA in Greeks. This will takle some serious rigging and spin. 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 |
posted
there are already Mycenaean Greek results, as well as Minoan. Classical Greek results have been part of a presentation so likely will be published soon.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
A real in-depth analysis. The Minoans study was discussed here already what little they divulged, Babujani et al? Guess what? African origin. Only thing is Babujani said they came from the "south' like what the F is south of the Greek Islands? Shrugs! Europeans! May be Lioness can dig up that thread where I broke it down. The Nuragic also showed an African affinity. Sage may remember that thread. They have to be careful now. As you can see from this OP. Some Euros are "breaking rank". Lol! Exposing the lies but replacing it with more lies and deception like admitting Natufians carried SSA ancestry but at the same time inserting they were mostly "Arabic" but not telling us what "Arabic" means. SMH.
quote:Originally posted by capra: there are already Mycenaean Greek results, as well as Minoan. Classical Greek results have been part of a presentation so likely will be published soon.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: The Minoans study was discussed here already what little they divulged, Babujani et al?
Laziridis et al (2017) published full genomes, so they 'divulged' everything. what is 'Babujani' supposed to refer to?
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
My bad...I excel at logic but memory I rely on notes...
Race is dead, racial prejudice is not. Barbujani G. details >> Journal contribution (publication in journal)
Origins and evolution of the Etruscans' mtDNA. Ghirotto S Barbujani G.
-------------------- 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
ah, minor spelling error is no problem, the paper having *nothing to do with Minoans* would be why i couldn't find it.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
Not sure what " Race is dead" means. If it means race does not exist then racial prejudice would be prejudice against something that doesn't exist
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scientists did not need to include Central, West Africans or anyone else from Africa. Why? They do not carry Middle Eastern MTDNA.
Posts: 8 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Feb 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brit333: [q] Look on any respected site.
Natufians were not Sub-Saharan Africans, but Basal and West Eurasians. [/qb]
-------------------- 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 |
" February 21, 2018 at 3:29 AM Blogger Davidski said... @All
That Shriner preprint is a bunch of crap.
February 21, 2018 at 3:44 AM"
-------------------- 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
which results doesn't he like xyyman? surprise me by actually recognizing the blindingly obvious.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Davidski's response in the comments section
quote:Hello author,
Unfortunately, there are some major problems with your paper.
For one, you're basing your conclusions about the ancient samples on ADMIXTURE clusters derived from modern-day samples, and thus getting many things backwards.
Have you thought about using ADMIXTOOLS to try and back up your conclusions with formal statistics and models based on formal statistics?
Also, some of your inferences are based on an incomplete knowledge of the current ancient DNA record. For instance, you claim that Northern European R1a derives from the steppe north and east of the Caspian Sea, and that Southern European R1b derives from the steppe north of the Black Sea.
Please note that the oldest recorded instance of R1a-M417, which encompasses more than 90% of modern-day R1a lineages in Europe and Asia, is on the steppe north of the Black Sea: sample Ukraine_Eneolithic ID I6561 from Mathieson et al. 2018.
And the oldest recorded instance of R1b-M269, which encompasses more than 90% of modern-day R1b lineages in the world, is on the steppe north of the Caspian Sea: sample Yamnaya_Samara ID I0429 from Haak et al. 2015.
Do you believe we can still use this study to prove Natufians had SSA ancestry?
Posts: 4 | From: North America | Registered: May 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes because there are multiple ways to replicate ssa signatures in Natufians. Bitching about this Admixture run is a waste of time. Hiding behind Lazaridis' F4 problems is a waste of time.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great, I was hoping that was the case. Seems like people taking Davidski's point of view, discounting this study, are in denial. This continues to back up the evidence of SSA components in ancient North Africa.
Thanks Elmaestro.
Posts: 4 | From: North America | Registered: May 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
it's not that the results are meaningless, it's that they shouldn't be taken literally, because they are modelling ancient individuals as descendants of modern populations. Davidski has found SSA in Natufians himself and posted about it, so i don't know why people are bringing him up. amateurs got this same result by running Natufians through GEDmatch calculators 2 years ago.
another inconsistent result pointing to Natufians having some kind of African ancestry, which is what most people expected in the first place, is not a big help. we would like to know what the ancestry actually *is*.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: we would like to know what the ancestry actually *is*.
theee! brown! theee! brown!
-------------------- 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 capra: it's not that the results are meaningless, it's that they shouldn't be taken literally, because they are modelling ancient individuals as descendants of modern populations. Davidski has found SSA in Natufians himself and posted about it, so i don't know why people are bringing him up. amateurs got this same result by running Natufians through GEDmatch calculators 2 years ago.
another inconsistent result pointing to Natufians having some kind of African ancestry, which is what most people expected in the first place, is not a big help. we would like to know what the ancestry actually *is*.
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa:
" This reanalysis provides evidence against a resurgence of Western hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Middle to Late Neolithic and evidence for a common ancestor of farmers characterized by Western Asian ancestry, a transition of the spread of agriculture from demic to cultural diffusion, at least two migrations between the Pontic-Caspian steppes and Bronze Age Europe, and a sub-Saharan African component in Natufians that localizes to present-day southern Ethiopia " Negroid Natufians
quote:
The Natufian sample consisted of 61.2% Arabian, 21.2% Northern African, 10.9% Western 12 Asian, and 6.8% Omotic ancestry (Figure 1F and Table 1). Previously, no significant sharing of 13 ancestral components with sub-Saharan African populations was found to accompany the 14 presence of E1b1b1b2 Y haplogroups8. E1b1b1b1a-M81, but not E1b1b1b2-Z830, is presently 15 common among Berbers in North Africa14. However, E1b1b1b1a-M81 has a time to most recent 16 common ancestor of only 2,300 (95% confidence interval [1900,2700]) years before present15 17 and therefore was not prevalent in Northern African ancestry during the Epipaleolithic.....
we considered the Early Neolithic samples from Germany, Hungary, and Iberia, collectively referred to early European farmers (EEF) , as well as from Anatolia and Macedonia (Figure 4 1B). These 56 individuals averaged 47.2% Southern European, 31.9% Western Asian, 14.2% 5 Arabian, and 6.8% Northern African ancestries (Table 1).
Is this a mistake? They have this exact same 6.8% number in both The Natufian and EEF
Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
How are they definitively West Asian or Arab to that degree? I thought haplogroup CT was potentially East African. I'm not a geneticist and am not attempting to pretend I don't find this confusing, but I wonder since there's a dispute of it's origins, they're assuming CT is not African?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
the ancestral percentages here are from the autosomes, not based on the haplogroups at all. he is also looking for correlations between the haplogroups and the autosomal ancestry, but that's a separate thing.
high proportion of Arabian and West Asian most likely means modern Arabians and West Asians have a lot of ancestry from relatives of Natufians.
these CTs just mean "some kind of CT" which could be anything under C, D, E, or F. (so yes it can certainly be East African or pretty much anything.) because of the low coverage of the genome the original authors could not determine whether or not it had mutations for those haplogroups. in principle it could also be some unknown CT* that belongs to none of these, but that is not what it is actually saying.
amateurs often look at these genomes using more SNPs and/or less stringent data quality filtres and assign them to more detailed haplogroups (though sometimes not as reliably). in this case genetiker has assigned both of those CT samples to E1b1b like the others, which makes sense.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ My only thoughts to senile gramps message is that he is correct about mtDNA hg L lineages being found in the neolithic levant as well as Arabia and that this is the reason why you have some Euronuts trying to revise the L clade's origins to be "Eurasian" instead of African. I will say that uniparental clades and autosomes can and often do end up being divergent in populations. For example, when it comes to Y DNA lineages, hg R is often associated by Euronuts as a European or West Eurasian clade when it has frequencies around East Asians and Indigenous Americans as well who autosomally differ from Europeans. Similarly though Natufians possessed E1b1b-M34, autosomally they differ E1b1b-M293 eastern Sub-Saharans much more E1b1a carrying western Sub-Saharans. Which is why a population sharing a sibling lineage or even more distant cousin lineage says little about more recent population relationships.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26279 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @AstenB The bottom chart includes the Abusir against "some' Near East populations looks like @K4. WTF. Great Lake Africans are NOT included but one Horner group was included...Somali. .
You say at "K=4" they "include the Somali". If there are only 4 components (K=4) what is the Teal Blue component in the Somali? I am sure you have this all figured out "Tic Toc".
ROTFLMAOH
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26279 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ My only thoughts to senile gramps message is that he is correct about mtDNA hg L lineages being found in the neolithic levant as well as Arabia and that this is the reason why you have some Euronuts trying to revise the L clade's origins to be "Eurasian" instead of African. I will say that uniparental clades and autosomes can and often do end up being divergent in populations. For example, when it comes to Y DNA lineages, hg R is often associated by Euronuts as a European or West Eurasian clade when it has frequencies around East Asians and Indigenous Americans as well who autosomally differ from Europeans. Similarly though Natufians possessed E1b1b-M34, autosomally they differ E1b1b-M293 eastern Sub-Saharans much more E1b1a carrying western Sub-Saharans. Which is why a population sharing a sibling lineage or even more distant cousin lineage says little about more recent population relationships.
Thanks for sharing and good post! I always enjoy hearing your opinion on these studies. And indeed, I too notice Euronuts trying to Eurasianize the many L lineages as of recently.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Shriner leak Ötzi, the Tyrolean Iceman, was admixed with gene flow from outside of Eurasia
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Gad!
Printer-friendly view of this topic