posted
I seen this study posted on another site and thought I'd post it here.
First of all the study seems to support the Aryan invasion
quote:The genetic formation of Central and South Asian populations has been unclear because of an absence of ancient DNA. To address this gap, we generated genome-wide data from 362 ancient individuals, including the first from eastern Iran, Turan (Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan), Bronze Age Kazakhstan, and South Asia.
Our data reveal a complex set of genetic sources that ultimately combined to form the ancestry of South Asians today. We document a southward spread of genetic ancestry from the Eurasian Steppe, correlating with the archaeologically known expansion of pastoralist sites from the Steppe to Turan in the Middle Bronze Age (2300-1500 BCE). These Steppe communities mixed genetically with peoples of the Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC) whom they encountered in Turan (primarily descendants of earlier agriculturalists of Iran), but there is no evidence that the main BMAC population contributed genetically to later South Asians. Instead, Steppe communities integrated farther south throughout the 2nd millennium BCE, and we show that they mixed with a more southern population that we document at multiple sites as outlier individuals exhibiting a distinctive mixture of ancestry related to Iranian agriculturalists and South Asian hunter-gathers. We call this group Indus Periphery because they were found at sites in cultural contact with the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) and along its northern fringe, and also because they were genetically similar to post-IVC groups in the Swat Valley of Pakistan. By co-analyzing ancient DNA and genomic data from diverse present-day South Asians, we show that Indus Periphery-related people are the single most important source of ancestry in South Asia — consistent with the idea that the Indus Periphery individuals are providing us with the first direct look at the ancestry of peoples of the IVC — and we develop a model for the formation of present-day South Asians in terms of the temporally and geographically proximate sources of Indus Periphery-related, Steppe, and local South Asian hunter-gatherer-related ancestry.
Our results show how ancestry from the Steppe genetically linked Europe and South Asia in the Bronze Age, and identifies the populations that almost certainly were responsible for spreading Indo-European languages across much of Eurasia
But here's the thing from the study that really caught my attention and where people on the other site were acting dissimulated...
Here we see the iron age samples from South Asia showing some E1b.
We even see one E1a in a sample. What do you guys think this could mean. Could these guys have been AA speakers or no?
PS: No pseudo nonsense will be tolerated like Dravidians being African so don't even bother. And also no off-topic nonsense.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
No AA... It's likely a west or Sahelian African connection of some sort E1a + E-M2.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: No AA... It's likely a west or Sahelian African connection of some sort E1a + E-M2.
I tried asking that certain poster from that certain site on how E1a could've gotten there and of course he couldn't really answer. We just agree-disagree that it may have gotten there indirectly.
However, do you also mean E1b too for the Sahelian African connection?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: No AA... It's likely a west or Sahelian African connection of some sort E1a + E-M2.
I tried asking that certain poster from that certain site on how E1a could've gotten there and of course he couldn't really answer. We just agree-disagree that it may have gotten there indirectly.
However, do you also mean E1b too for the Sahelian African connection?
The E1b samples are E1b1a E-Z6019 & Z6006 <-- Both primarily senegambian These haplogroups and E1a/M33 generally travel together.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Wow. Did NOT see that. Good looking. If this truly is a Sahelian connection then how do you personally think it could have ended up in South Asia? Could it have been indirectly or directly?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
I asked my question to "That poster" a certain way for a reason, right... cuz outside of Ramses these are our only ancient E-M2 samples. The study looked contained but if these samples lack respectable contemporary SSA Affinity we're in for a treat, if they do have SSA affinity then the story is simple Africans were in SW Asia.
The fact that we have BOTH E1a and E1b there, leads me to believe that this was pretty direct. But IDK... maybe Djehuti & Lioness can add historical context
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: I asked my question to "That poster" a certain way for a reason, right... cuz outside of Ramses these are our only ancient E-M2 samples. The study looked contained but if these samples lack respectable contemporary SSA Affinity we're in for a treat, if they do have SSA affinity then the story is simple Africans were in SW Asia.
Yeah, I've seen that post. And also are you saying if there is no contemporary SSA affinity then it would be more like indignous North African affinity? If so, then I can see why we would be in for a big treat. And why those on the anti-African side would have heart issues.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: The fact that we have BOTH E1a and E1b there, leads me to believe that this was pretty direct. But IDK... maybe Djehuti & Lioness can add historical context.
I would like to hear what Djehuti has to say. Because from what I've seen he is pretty knowledgeable on Ancient Asian DNA.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
"The E1b samples are E1b1a E-Z6019 & Z6006 <-- Both primarily senegambian These haplogroups and E1a/M33 generally travel together.with this"
"The study looked contained but if these samples lack respectable contemporary SSA Affinity we're in for a treat, if they do have SSA affinity then the story is simple Africans were in SW Asia.
The fact that we have BOTH E1a and E1b there, leads me to believe that this was pretty direct. But IDK... maybe Djehuti & Lioness can add historical context"
and DNATribes analysis
From DNATribes(April 2014)- quote:: ==== Ancient Eurasian and African Ancestry in Europe Background: New Genomes from Ancient Europe Recently published ancient genomes from Europe, Siberia, and North America have provided new insights about the early migrations that have shaped the genetic structure of Europe. In particular, a new tree analysis of Eurasian population history models modern Europeans as a mixture of at least three ancient populations: Early European Farmers (EEF), Western European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG), Ancient North Eurasians (ANE), and Eastern Non-Africans (ENA).2 Some of these ancient populations (such as WHG hunter-gatherers) did not leave genomic traces outside of Europe; other ancient populations (such as the EEF “First Farmers”) left traces across a wider range of territories in both Europe and the Middle East (illustrated in Figure 1). Within this agricultural zone range, EEF farmers came in contact with other ancient populations: In Europe and West Asia, EEF populations mixed with North Eurasians (including Siberian relatives of WHG hunter-gatherers). In the Arabian Peninsula, EEF farmers mixed with ancestral Sub-Saharan Africans RELATED to modern Nigerian, Gambian, and Botswanan populations. In Armenia and Georgia, EEF farmers mixed with South Asian (Indian Subcontinent) populations.
-------------------- 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
E1b1a has been in the Indian Sub-continent since pre-history and it is still there. It has nothing to do with "slavery".
Admin: We're NOT turning this thread into no ghetto beef spat. Anyways, interesting post.
So If I understand this there are greater than six(6) African haplogroups but these are European migrants? WTF are wrong with you people? The most dominant haplogroup is African and these are "steppes' nomads......wt...
Man! talk about a mind job.
Sage you in on this?
-------------------- 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:While Africa has sometimes been peripheral to accounts of the early Indian Ocean world, studies of food globalisation necessarily place it centre stage. Africa has dispatched and received an extraordinary range of plants, animals and foodstuffs through Indian Ocean trade and other avenues. Here we explore these patterns of food globalisation vis-A -vis Africa, focusing in particular on the arrival of new food crops and domesticated animals in Africa, but also touching on flows from Africa to the broader Indian Ocean world. We look at archaeological evidence, drawing in particular on new datasets emerging through the increasing application of archaeobotanical and zooarchaeological methods in African and Indian Ocean archaeology, and also draw on historical and ethnographic sources. We argue that the evidence points to a broadly Medieval and post-Medieval pattern of introduction, with little evidence for the earlier arrivals or culinary impacts argued by some. We also undertake consideration of questions about how and why new crops, animals, spices, and agricultural and culinary technologies come to be accepted by African societies, issues that are often overlooked in the literature.
I love how they bring up the Indian ocean trade in the article you linked. We forgot that Africans especially in the Eastern part of Africa have been apart of the Indian Ocean trade and have have to South Asia. I do remember a study showing African tin(or something like that) in China around 1400 BC though it could've gotten there indirectly. Not sure if this addresses anything. But the red sea should act as an easy easy to Southern Asia.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Admin. I have this covered. Behar et al has shown African presence (genetically) all the way to Jews in China. OP, on African E1b, This is not surprising. These are not "Jews" in China but remnants of the Neolithics.
The most DOMINANT and populous haplogroup in the IA peoples carry African haplogroup. lol!
Where is Dr Winters?
My Point on DNATribes? Lucas Martin had this figured out 4 years ago!!
-------------------- 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 |
You beat me to it. It goes to show you how far back extensive trade between these regions goes. It makes you wonder what other "unlikely" connections we might discover in the future.
posted
^Like I said I read about African tin being in China around 1400 BC. Its a myth that Africans were always isolated during antiquity.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
The "isolation" of Africans in history primarily started with colonization of Africa. Prior to that things like the Periplus of the Erythrean sea talked about the African trade from East Africa to Asia. Sinbad the Sailor is a legacy of the Arabian maritime trade routes. I have posted about South African finds of trade networks with Asia (which were suppressed by the colonists). There is a lot of "hidden" history from Africa that has been suppressed by the colonists from Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) to South Africa, Kenya and elsewhere. Everybody knows about what the British did in West Africa but the same thing happened in Central, East and South Africa as well.
None of that is a conspiracy BTW. That is historically documented fact.
quote: The Indian Ocean: A Maritime Trade Network History Nearly Forgot Long before the Silk Road or the Roman Empire, the Indian Ocean was awash with commerce.
Home » November » The Indian Ocean: A Maritime Trade Network History Nearly Forgot
FROM THE NOVEMBER 2016 ISSUE The Indian Ocean: A Maritime Trade Network History Nearly Forgot Long before the Silk Road or the Roman Empire, the Indian Ocean was awash with commerce. By Adrianne Daggett|Thursday, October 20, 2016 RELATED TAGS: TRANSPORTATION, ARCHAEOLOGY 112 DSC-OS0916_01 An early 20th century painting captures a dhow sailing along the East African coast. These traditional boats plied the waters of the Indian Ocean for millennia, connecting continents Mary Evans Picture Library
It’s a chapter of history nearly forgotten: Intrepid merchants and explorers traveled thousands of miles, not along storied caravan routes, but across the great blue expanse of the Indian Ocean, exchanging goods and ideas, forming bonds and challenging our notions about the ancient world.
“People think that it must have taken a long time to get anywhere, that it must have been difficult to travel long distances, but that is not true,” says archaeologist Marilee Wood, whose research focuses on the network’s glass bead trade. “This [field of study] is about opening that all up.”
In fact, by the time Marco Polo set out to explore East Asia in the 13th century, communities across Africa, Asia and the Mediterranean had been exchanging their wares for thousands of years in a vast network driven by the monsoon winds of the Indian Ocean.
And many times the reason for the literal "cover up" of this history is because the Europeans were on a crusading voyage following the trade routes of the Muslims. Any "infidel" or non christian kingdom was therefore subject to conquest and plunder. And in place of the actual history of these places that were conquered, they made up fairy tale fantasies of "king Solomon's mines" to justify European expansion to take the gold and resources that were part of the ancient trade routes. Thus the gap in the historical record.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @Admin. I have this covered. Behar et al has shown African presence (genetically) all the way to Jews in China. OP, on African E1b, This is not surprising. These are not "Jews" in China but remnants of the Neolithics.
The most DOMINANT and populous haplogroup in the IA peoples carry African haplogroup. lol!
Where is Dr Winters?
My Point on DNATribes? Lucas Martin had this figured out 4 years ago!!
You're doing a good job. You don't need my help. I have commented numerous times on the Africans in South Asia, and the origins of Dravidians in Africa,
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: @Tukuler also bronze used in some early Chinese bronzewares was speculated to originate from African mines
Yes, ancient Limpopo - Shashe cultures and civilization product and raw materials went east across the Indian Ocean.
@Doug dammit can't find my Periplus map. It's always right there except now i want it. OK da wiki got it Now we supposed to have enough background to use the damn thing.
Yes, ancient Limpopo - Shashe cultures and civilization product and raw materials went east across the Indian Ocean.
@Doug dammit can't find my Periplus map. It's always right there except now i want it. OK da wiki got it Now we supposed to have enough background to use the damn thing.
Yes you and others including myself have talked about the Periplus multiple times here.
Just the tip of the iceberg.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You NEGROS really amaze me!! The elephant in the room.
Quote from the study: "we show that Indus Periphery-related people are the single most important source of ancestry in South Asia — consistent with the idea that the Indus Periphery individuals are providing us with the first direct look at the ancestry of peoples of the IVC — and we develop a model for the formation of present-day South Asians in terms of the temporally and geographically proximate sources of Indus Periphery-related, Steppe, and local South Asian hunter-gatherer-related ancestry. Our results show how ancestry from the Steppe genetically linked Europe and South Asia in the Bronze Age, and identifies the populations that almost certainly were responsible for spreading Indo-European languages across much of Eurasia."
If we take yDNA G and DE as African then that would make it nine(9) AFRICAN yDNA Haplogroup vs one(1) R1b. Yes, I repeat, one R1b. So how the F these are Euroasian Steppes migrants again? lol! What is wrong with you Negros?
There are more Africans in these samples than there are Europeans. So how did they conclude that the Indo-European language was NOT African again? 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
what's this Periplus, Indian Ocean trade, Dravidian crops crap? one of these West African E1b1a1s (from northern Iran) is 10 to 14 000 years old.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: what's this Periplus, Indian Ocean trade, Dravidian crops crap? one of these West African E1b1a1s (from northern Iran) is 10 to 14 000 years old.
I only see one sample that is E1b1a and it seems to be Iron Age. Is there more than one exraction that was E1b1a?
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: what's this Periplus, Indian Ocean trade, Dravidian crops crap? one of these West African E1b1a1s (from northern Iran) is 10 to 14 000 years old.
This quote is dedicated to @EliteDiasporan
If your friends over on the other forum have any sense they would be shitting their pants. and additionally having nightmares if these samples aren't recognizably SSA.
"indigenous North African Affinity" ..eh I guess you can call it that.
But lemme bring some things to your attention... revisit Lazaridis' supp and the plethora of tests ran to uncover a "certain" ancestry in ancient individuals. I know the Natufians were the hot topic but the old Iranians almost always outscored them (*despite being somewhat more drifted away from African populations. -f3/pca)
And then there's this Neanderthal element^ revisited when we got this north African genome.
I though the 80Kya split time cheese was bad enough. only good case scenario for some people is if these results were all errors. It's about to get bad in these streets.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Yes there is E1b all through the xls
So why does make crap out of 1000s of year old Africa & Indian Ocean world relations?
The answer is it doesn't.
I find even later Iron Age Indian Ocean contact with my SeneGambia re agricultural exchange to be intriguing and worthwhile expansion of knowledge. A support for direct demic introductions.
All the IO trade add-on links everybody's been posting declare this material won't be suppressed or swept aside. Wanna learn more about them E-Z60nn guys for example.
Prehistoric Iran E1b can surely be looked at without shitting on related interests. No either this or that. Hit the sto we can get 'em all we dont gotta choose.
Anyweay the authors invite corrections to any of that massive set of data realizing it takes mode one mod one data peeling to catch unintentional errors or omissions.
Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences G. David Poznik1,2,*, Yali Xue3
Of the clades resulting from the four deepest branching events, all but one are exclusive to Africa, and the TMRCA of all non-African lineages (i.e., the TMRCA of haplogroups DE and CF) is ~76 ky. We see a major increase in the number of lineages outside Africa ~50–55 kya, perhaps reflecting the geographic expansion and differentiation of Eurasian populations as they settled the vast expanse of these continents. Consistent with previous proposals13, a parsimonious interpretation of the phylogeny is that the predominant African haplogroup, E, arose outside the continent. This model of geographic segregation within the CT clade requires just one continental haplogroup exchange (E to Africa), rather than three (D, C, and F out of Africa). Furthermore, the timing of this putative return to Africa—between the emergence of E and its differentiation within Africa by 58 kya—is consistent with proposals, based on non-Y data, of abundant gene flow between Africa and nearby regions of Asia 50–80 kya14.
_______
First, in the Americas, we observed expansion of Q1a-M3 at ~15 kya, the time of the initial colonization of the hemisphere18. This correspondence, based on one of the most thoroughly examined dates in human prehistory, attests to the suitability of the calibration we have chosen.Second, in sub-Saharan Africa, two independent E1b-M180 lineages expanded ~5 kya, a period before the numerical and geographical expansions of Bantu-speakers in whom E1b-M180 now predominates. The presence of these lineages in non-Bantu-speakers (e.g., Yoruba, Esan) indicates an expansion pre-dating the Bantu migrations, perhaps triggered by the development of ironworking. Third, in Western Europe, related lineages within R1b- L11 expanded ~4.8–5.9 kya, most markedly around 4.8 and 5.5 kya. The earlier of these times, 5.5 kya, is associated with the origin of the Bronze Age Yamnaya culture. The Yamnaya have been linked by aDNA evidence to a massive migration from the Steppe, which may have replaced much of the previous European population21,22, but the six Yamnaya with informative genotypes did not bear lineages descending from or ancestral to R1b-L11, so a Y-chromosome connection has not been established. The later time, 4.8 kya, coincides with the origins of the Corded Ware (Battle Axe) culture in Eastern Europe and the Bell-Beaker culture in Western Europe
Figure 2 Y-chromosome phylogeny and haplogroup distribution. Branch lengths are drawn proportional to the estimated times between successive splits, with the most ancient division occurring ~190 kya. Colored triangles represent the major clades, and the width of each base is proportional to one less than the corresponding sample size. We modeled expansions within eight of the major haplogroups (circled) (Figure 4), and dotted triangles represent the ages and sample sizes of the expanding lineages. (Inset) World map indicating, for each of the 26 populations, the geographic source, sample size, and haplogroup distribution.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [Q] but the six Yamnaya with informative genotypes did not bear lineages descending from or ancestral to R1b-L11, so a Y-chromosome connection has not been established.
[/Q][/QUOTE]
-------------------- 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 Elite Diasporan: @Swenet
quote:While Africa has sometimes been peripheral to accounts of the early Indian Ocean world, studies of food globalisation necessarily place it centre stage. Africa has dispatched and received an extraordinary range of plants, animals and foodstuffs through Indian Ocean trade and other avenues. Here we explore these patterns of food globalisation vis-A -vis Africa, focusing in particular on the arrival of new food crops and domesticated animals in Africa, but also touching on flows from Africa to the broader Indian Ocean world. We look at archaeological evidence, drawing in particular on new datasets emerging through the increasing application of archaeobotanical and zooarchaeological methods in African and Indian Ocean archaeology, and also draw on historical and ethnographic sources. We argue that the evidence points to a broadly Medieval and post-Medieval pattern of introduction, with little evidence for the earlier arrivals or culinary impacts argued by some. We also undertake consideration of questions about how and why new crops, animals, spices, and agricultural and culinary technologies come to be accepted by African societies, issues that are often overlooked in the literature.
I love how they bring up the Indian ocean trade in the article you linked. We forgot that Africans especially in the Eastern part of Africa have been apart of the Indian Ocean trade and have have to South Asia. I do remember a study showing African tin(or something like that) in China around 1400 BC though it could've gotten there indirectly. Not sure if this addresses anything. But the red sea should act as an easy easy to Southern Asia.
Interesting. When that type of news comes out it's piecemeal so I usually don't pay much attention to that stuff because we're resigned to the pace of academia when it picking up these leads. But I always keep stuff like that in the back of my mind for when it's relevant. Here is another potential example of trans-Indian Ocean contact, albeit one that's much more recent.
Note the dumbed down title (there has always been migration to Australia so there is no need to relate this or "Cap'n Cook" to any 'discovery' of this continent) and how it conveys the politics of the author and his audience.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: You beat me to it. It goes to show you how far back extensive trade between these regions goes. It makes you wonder what other "unlikely" connections we might discover in the future.
Yeah. Two things need to happen, as far as I'm concerned. They need to uncover new connections, some of which are already alluded to by genetic data. Indians have unexplained genetic closeness to Africans. Closeness that goes beyond Basal Eurasian.
Secondly, academics need to pursue the leads that have already been uncovered. For instance, possible Bronze Age skeletal remains of Africans in the Indus Valley:
quote:The human cranium from the Mature Harappan site of Chanhu-daro presents archaeologists with a unique funerary practice by the Indus peoples. While jar burials have been encountered in Early and Mature Harappan sites and continued into the Post-urban Jhukar culture, the Chanhu-daro cranium indicates it was a secondary burial. The cranium is not associated with postcranial bones of the original body. These had been disposed of elsewhere, possibly at a significant time prior to the insertion of the cranium into the jar. Anthropometric and morphological analyses indicate that the cranium belonged to a young female in relatively good health as based upon absence of skeletal and dental markers of a pathological nature. The manner of her death is unknown. The hypothesis that the Chanhu-daro female was of African ancestry is supported by the results of comparative data from ten cranial-bearing from ancient and modern South Asia.
Although I'm not convinced that it's easy to distinguish Indus Valley people from Africans using craniofacial analysis. Any skeletal analysis is not completely convincing IMO, because of that reason.
Either way, there is a lot of room for improvement as you point out.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences G. David Poznik1,2,*, Yali Xue3
Of the clades resulting from the four deepest branching events, all but one are exclusive to Africa, and the TMRCA of all non-African lineages (i.e., the TMRCA of haplogroups DE and CF) is ~76 ky. We see a major increase in the number of lineages outside Africa ~50–55 kya, perhaps reflecting the geographic expansion and differentiation of Eurasian populations as they settled the vast expanse of these continents. Consistent with previous proposals13, a parsimonious interpretation of the phylogeny is that the predominant African haplogroup, E, arose outside the continent. This model of geographic segregation within the CT clade requires just one continental haplogroup exchange (E to Africa), rather than three (D, C, and F out of Africa). Furthermore, the timing of this putative return to Africa—between the emergence of E and its differentiation within Africa by 58 kya—is consistent with proposals, based on non-Y data, of abundant gene flow between Africa and nearby regions of Asia 50–80 kya14.
Even if this were so, this would mean all of Africa, not just north and east Africa are Eurasian or Eurasian admixed. And people living in Africa would still be oldest. This offers no win that I can see. Eurocentrism would have to create a new way to establish genetic Eurasian "identity" outside of OOA migrations. Why would R and U in North Africa make a group of people non-African, but E is allowed to be African? I mean it to would have supposedly arrived from Asia after all.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: This quote is dedicated to @EliteDiasporan
If your friends over on the other forum have any sense they would be shitting their pants. and additionally having nightmares if these samples aren't recognizably SSA.
"indigenous North African Affinity" ..eh I guess you can call it that.
But lemme bring some things to your attention... revisit Lazaridis' supp and the plethora of tests ran to uncover a "certain" ancestry in ancient individuals. I know the Natufians were the hot topic but the old Iranians almost always outscored them (*despite being somewhat more drifted away from African populations. -f3/pca)
And then there's this Neanderthal element^ revisited when we got this north African genome.
I though the 80Kya split time cheese was bad enough. only good case scenario for some people is if these results were all errors. It's about to get bad in these streets.
This is why I need to STOP reading too into things. Now, I really get what you are saying! I remember you kept bringing up the Iranian samples before and mentioning their important. If they do have that "certain" ancestry then it would be like a 1.2 megaton nuke going off in front of them. A direct hit and no survivors. lol.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
I remember that African coin in Australia article years ago. They kept downplaying if Africans themselves went there. But that's a discussion for another time.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't find any reference to Indus Valley E1b1a in the paper. The paper says the six Indus Valley individuals belong to the same macro hg as most of the recent Natufian E carriers (E1b1b1b2).
What I said about Sahelian crops likely doesn't even apply to these samples. I guess that's what I get for speaking before reading the paper.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I can't find any reference to Indus Valley E1b1a in the paper. The paper says the six Indus Valley individuals belong to the same macro hg as most of the Natufians (E1b1b1b2).
posted
^interesting... there are much less E1b1a than I thought idk if it was updated..however the Mesolithic Iranian I2312_d is M2 and I6119 of Turkmenistan.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I can't find any reference to Indus Valley E1b1a in the paper. The paper says the six Indus Valley individuals belong to the same macro hg as most of the Natufians (E1b1b1b2).
Go to Supplementary Data and Tables excel file and filter by haplogroup. Use the ancient tab.
- Belt Cave, Alborz Mountains, near Behshahr - Gonur - Udegram, Babozai tahsil, Swat District , Khyber-Pakhtunkwa Province
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: ^interesting... there are much less E1b1a than I thought idk if it was updated..however the Mesolithic Iranian I2312_d is M2
What were the percents per site present at?
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: ^interesting... there are much less E1b1a than I thought idk if it was updated..however the Mesolithic Iranian I2312_d is M2
What were the percents per site present at?
You want to know the percentage of E1b? I'm not sure what you're asking for here. EliteDiasporan posted a table above with the amount of individuals belonging to which general assignment and from where.
Generally speaking E1a and E-M2 samples of the same time period are too spread out geographically to make any direct inferences. For all we know with a mesolithic individual belonging to E-M2, the bronze age Turkmenistan sample could have retained his haplogrp from the indus region and not directly from Africa.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: [QUOTE]I'm not sure what you're asking for here.
In your post you said: "there are much less E1b1a than I thought".
I'm just asking for the basis to this statement. At one site there was only 1 sample and it was E1b1a. In my mind this would be a lot (100% of the sample size).
There could be a lot or a little. More sampling needs to be done.
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: [QUOTE]I'm not sure what you're asking for here.
In your post you said: "there are much less E1b1a than I thought".
I'm just asking for the basis to this statement. At one site there was only 1 sample and it was E1b1a. In my mind this would be a lot (100% of the sample size).
There could be a lot or a little. More sampling needs to be done.
Oh ok, I see what you mean. I was speaking on out of all the E1b samples. And you right about the mesolithic Iran being 100% assigned to E-M2, that can be significant based on probability alone. however how do we speak about E1a and E1b among bronze age samples. We don't have enough representation as is to hammer any specific explanation.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: [QUOTE]I'm not sure what you're asking for here.
In your post you said: "there are much less E1b1a than I thought".
I'm just asking for the basis to this statement. At one site there was only 1 sample and it was E1b1a. In my mind this would be a lot (100% of the sample size).
There could be a lot or a little. More sampling needs to be done.
Oh ok, I see what you mean. I was speaking on out of all the E1b samples. And you right about the mesolithic Iran being 100% assigned to E-M2, that can be significant based on probability alone. however how do we speak about E1a and E1b among bronze age samples. We don't have enough representation as is to hammer any specific explanation.
Ok. I better understand and we are well aligned. thx
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan: @Swenet this seems to be up your alley.
What I said about Sahelian crops likely doesn't even apply to these samples. I guess that's what I get for speaking before reading the paper.
I thought you meant Iron Age by that map, considering the legend's AD delimited shapes (though the map's primary focus is 2000 BC) and the increase in E1 from Iran/Turan Bronze to South Asia Iron as Elite Diasporan posted
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro:
quote:Originally posted by Elite Diasporan:
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: No AA... It's likely a west or Sahelian African connection of some sort E1a + E-M2.
The E1b samples are E1b1a E-Z6019 & Z6006 <-- Both primarily senegambian These haplogroups and E1a/M33 generally travel together.
.
This Mohenjo Daro statue might represent some one of the is it Indian is it African cranial type found at Chanu Daro. Here the hair lets us know she's not a teenage Nuba, I mean besides the provenance.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [...] Indians have unexplained genetic closeness to Africans. Closeness that goes beyond Basal Eurasian.
... academics need to pursue the leads that have already been uncovered. For instance, possible Bronze Age skeletal remains of Africans in the Indus Valley:
quote:The human cranium from the Mature Harappan site of Chanhu-daro presents archaeologists with a unique funerary practice by the Indus peoples. While jar burials have been encountered in Early and Mature Harappan sites and continued into the Post-urban Jhukar culture, the Chanhu-daro cranium indicates it was a secondary burial. The cranium is not associated with postcranial bones of the original body. These had been disposed of elsewhere, possibly at a significant time prior to the insertion of the cranium into the jar. Anthropometric and morphological analyses indicate that the cranium belonged to a young female in relatively good health as based upon absence of skeletal and dental markers of a pathological nature. The manner of her death is unknown. The hypothesis that the Chanhu-daro female was of African ancestry is supported by the results of comparative data from ten cranial-bearing from ancient and modern South Asia.
Although I'm not convinced that it's easy to distinguish Indus Valley people from Africans using craniofacial analysis. Any skeletal analysis is not completely convincing IMO, because of that reason.
posted
BTW, anyone think it was a coincidence that Lazaridis et al didn't publish Hotu's Y-DNA? Keep in mind that Lazaridis et al used the lack of E in Iran Neolithic (as well as the lower proportion of Basal Eurasian in Natufians compared to Iranian samples) as evidence against an African origin of Basal Eurasian. What a coincidence that the sample their argument hinges partly hinged on, is the same sample that now turns out to be E-M2. Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: I thought you meant Iron Age by that map, considering the legend's AD delimited shapes (though the map's primary focus is 2000 BC) and the increase in E1 from Iran/Turan Bronze to South Asia Iron as Elite Diasporan posted
What do you mean? I see exclusively AD/near AD symbols of Sahelian crops in Egypt and southern Africa. In India and Pakistan I see Bronze Age to AD/near AD symbols.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: BTW, anyone think it was a coincidence that Lazaridis et al didn't publish Hotu's Y-DNA? Keep in mind that Lazaridis et al used the lack of E in Iran Neolithic (as well as the lower proportion of Basal Eurasian in Natufians compared to Iranian samples) as evidence against an African origin of Basal Eurasian. What a coincidence that the sample their argument hinges partly hinged on, is the same sample that now turns out to be E-M2.
Yep I noticed that too which is why Elmaestro's post was such an eye opener.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic