posted
Basal Eurasian which is IMO African is found in Mesolithic Iranians 66±13%, Neolithic Iranians 48±6%, and Epipaleolithic Natufians 44±8% from this study - Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East.
But those middle eastern populations that are said to be the main source of non-African ancestry in the Horn have extensive African ancestry, wouldn't this mean that they simply would have been bringing back African ancestry, or maybe they come up as a source of Horners ancestry due to having common Basal Eurasian ancestry.
Maybe much of the Non-African ancestry found in the Horn is actually North African ancestry found in the Middle East that hasn't been identified as African as the general consensus is that BE is non-African? IDK tbh but this would change the 40-60% figure commonly spouted.
My question is, how much actual non-African ancestry makes up Horners and what is the source of this?
Posts: 161 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
Thanks for that, its very helpful, but was there something wrong with the studies I posted.
Thanks
Posts: 161 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
How much actual non-European ancestry makes up the * Aegean * Ionian * Adriatic * Tyrrhenian * Ligurian * Balaeric north Mediterranean populations and what is the source of it?
Are ol skool Sergi's Mediterranean Race book conclusions supported by current anthropology genomics health data?
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: How much actual non-European ancestry makes up the * Aegean * Ionian * Adriatic * Tyrrhenian * Ligurian * Balaeric north Mediterranean populations and what is the source of it?
Are ol skool Sergi's Mediterranean Race book conclusions supported by current anthropology genomics health data?
Ngl i don't know much about that but i'll try to answer, i can't say a specific figure but looking at haplogroups, E lineages that originated in North East Africa are relatively frequent in the areas you mentioned so i would say it came from North east Africa also U6 and M1 are found in those areas further supporting the idea that their non european ancestry is from North Africa.
Also those haplogroups may have been introduced from the Middle East into southern Europe by immigrant farmers, during the Neolithic expansion who indirectly passed on African ancestry.
I hope that answers it but whats the relevance?
And sorry but i haven't read the book you mentioned
Posts: 161 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
East Africa's "horn" appears to be the primary y chromosome and overall genomic source since the Holocene. HLA seemingly indicates secondary West & West Central Africa sources as do certain pre Holocene mtDNA haplogroups.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: East Africa's "horn" appears to be the primary y chromosome and overall genomic source since the Holocene. HLA seemingly indicates secondary West & West Central Africa sources as do certain pre Holocene mtDNA haplogroups.
Ahh thanks a lot, i didn't notice the correlation lol my bad, thanks again.
Also what does HLA mean? Sorry im still kinda new to this. And when you say West African sources of mtDNA I assume you're reffering to L lineages right? How did these get into Europe from Africa before the Holocene?
Posts: 161 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| 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 |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: How much actual non-European ancestry makes up the * Aegean * Ionian * Adriatic * Tyrrhenian * Ligurian * Balaeric north Mediterranean populations and what is the source of it?
Are ol skool Sergi's Mediterranean Race book conclusions supported by current anthropology genomics health data?
-------------------- 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 Tukuler: How much actual non-European ancestry makes up the * Aegean * Ionian * Adriatic * Tyrrhenian * Ligurian * Balaeric north Mediterranean populations and what is the source of it?
Are ol skool Sergi's Mediterranean Race book conclusions supported by current anthropology genomics health data?
You are correct.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SlimJim: Basal Eurasian which is IMO African is found in Mesolithic Iranians 66±13%, Neolithic Iranians 48±6%, and Epipaleolithic Natufians 44±8% from this study - Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East.
But those middle eastern populations that are said to be the main source of non-African ancestry in the Horn have extensive African ancestry, wouldn't this mean that they simply would have been bringing back African ancestry, or maybe they come up as a source of Horners ancestry due to having common Basal Eurasian ancestry.
Maybe much of the Non-African ancestry found in the Horn is actually North African ancestry found in the Middle East that hasn't been identified as African as the general consensus is that BE is non-African? IDK tbh but this would change the 40-60% figure commonly spouted.
My question is, how much actual non-African ancestry makes up Horners and what is the source of this?
First, you should know why Basal Eurasians are called as such. "Basal Eurasian" it's a component that is Basal to other Eurasian ancestry and found in Eurasian groups today. Basal Eurasians were part of the Out of Africa bottleneck event. What makes BE distinct from other Eurasians is the fact that they lack Neanderthal admixture. There is no population in Africa found that matches the description of the Basal Eurasian lineage.
Posts: 49 | From: Germany | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: How much actual non-European ancestry makes up the * Aegean * Ionian * Adriatic * Tyrrhenian * Ligurian * Balaeric north Mediterranean populations and what is the source of it?
Are ol skool Sergi's Mediterranean Race book conclusions supported by current anthropology genomics health data?
Non- European component? You should be more specific. Who you mean by Non-European population? West Asians, East Asians, North Africans or SSAs? The Non-European compenent is overall not that significant in all listed regions.
Posts: 49 | From: Germany | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: East Africa's "horn" appears to be the primary y chromosome and overall genomic source since the Holocene. HLA seemingly indicates secondary West & West Central Africa sources as do certain pre Holocene mtDNA haplogroups.
Ahh thanks a lot, i didn't notice the correlation lol my bad, thanks again.
Also what does HLA mean? Sorry im still kinda new to this. And when you say West African sources of mtDNA I assume you're reffering to L lineages right? How did these get into Europe from Africa before the Holocene?
U6 is a West Asian mtDNA. Just saying. The origin of the mtDNA M is debated since this hp spans all over continents. There are scientists that argue for the Eurasian origin of M, other think that M rather originated in Africa. Furthermore, M1 is found in the Horn and North Africa at low or moderate frequencies. The highest frequencies worldwide of M are observed in Asia. If M had originated in Africa in the time prior to the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution in the continent. In addition to that M1 that is found in Africa is restricted to Afro-Asiatic speakers from the Horn and North Africa. So the hp M1 likely originated somewhere in South Asia or Southwest Asia and was taken into Africa from a back migration. Besides the oldest mtDNA M1A1 has been found in southeast Turkey and Egypt. Egyptians have compared to Arabs, for example, a pretty high Anatolian admixture.
Posts: 49 | From: Germany | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: East Africa's "horn" appears to be the primary y chromosome and overall genomic source since the Holocene. HLA seemingly indicates secondary West & West Central Africa sources as do certain pre Holocene mtDNA haplogroups.
Ahh thanks a lot, i didn't notice the correlation lol my bad, thanks again.
Also what does HLA mean? Sorry im still kinda new to this. And when you say West African sources of mtDNA I assume you're reffering to L lineages right? How did these get into Europe from Africa before the Holocene?
U6 is a West Asian mtDNA. Just saying. The origin of the mtDNA M is debated since this hp spans all over continents. There are scientists that argue for the Eurasian origin of M, other think that M rather originated in Africa. Furthermore, M1 is found in the Horn and North Africa at low or moderate frequencies. The highest frequencies worldwide of M are observed in Asia. If M had originated in Africa in the time prior to the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution in the continent. In addition to that M1 that is found in Africa is restricted to Afro-Asiatic speakers from the Horn and North Africa. So the hp M1 likely originated somewhere in South Asia or Southwest Asia and was taken into Africa from a back migration. Besides the oldest mtDNA M1A1 has been found in southeast Turkey and Egypt. Egyptians have compared to Arabs, for example, a pretty high Anatolian admixture.
M1 is mainly carried by Dravidians. Dravidians only entered India in the past 3500 years from Africa. As a result, M1 could not have originated in South Asia. Secondly, haplogroup D, is just the Asian name for M1. The archaeological and DNA evidence is clear M1 originated in Africa.
.
Secondly, the only migration supported by archaeological evidence are several migrations of Africans into Anatolia and Western Eurasia. There is no archaeological evidence of a back migration from Eurasia into Africa.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SlimJim: Basal Eurasian which is IMO African is found in Mesolithic Iranians 66±13%, Neolithic Iranians 48±6%, and Epipaleolithic Natufians 44±8% from this study - Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East.
But those middle eastern populations that are said to be the main source of non-African ancestry in the Horn have extensive African ancestry, wouldn't this mean that they simply would have been bringing back African ancestry, or maybe they come up as a source of Horners ancestry due to having common Basal Eurasian ancestry.
Maybe much of the Non-African ancestry found in the Horn is actually North African ancestry found in the Middle East that hasn't been identified as African as the general consensus is that BE is non-African? IDK tbh but this would change the 40-60% figure commonly spouted.
My question is, how much actual non-African ancestry makes up Horners and what is the source of this?
First, you should know why Basal Eurasians are called as such. "Basal Eurasian" it's a component that is Basal to other Eurasian ancestry and found in Eurasian groups today. Basal Eurasians were part of the Out of Africa bottleneck event. What makes BE distinct from other Eurasians is the fact that they lack Neanderthal admixture. There is no population in Africa found that matches the description of the Basal Eurasian lineage.
Basal Eurasian is 80,000 years old... Which is before OOA. And Sub Saharan Africans are the only populations with no Neanderthal admixture so they do fit the description
Posts: 161 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by real expert: U6 is a West Asian mtDNA. Just saying. The origin of the mtDNA M is debated since this hp spans all over continents. There are scientists that argue for the Eurasian origin of M, other think that M rather originated in Africa. Furthermore, M1 is found in the Horn and North Africa at low or moderate frequencies. The highest frequencies worldwide of M are observed in Asia. If M had originated in Africa in the time prior to the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution in the continent. In addition to that M1 that is found in Africa is restricted to Afro-Asiatic speakers from the Horn and North Africa. So the hp M1 likely originated somewhere in South Asia or Southwest Asia and was taken into Africa from a back migration. Besides the oldest mtDNA M1A1 has been found in southeast Turkey and Egypt. Egyptians have compared to Arabs, for example, a pretty high Anatolian admixture.
Hey @real expert; What are your thoughts on the Takarkori N* and the interesting M23 lineages? And why do you think M would have a widespread distribution on the continent, There are many HGs found in Africa but a handful tend to dominate for reasons not immediately obvious. What about M's origin leads you to believe it'd be one of these widespread lineages if it was African?
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Is it?
That arrow falsely indicating Pestera Muierii as U6 mother of downstream U6 clades is just a baldface, shameless, Eurocentric sloppy scholarship lie.
Let's revisit Montse's other more accurate figure with its true facts where she shoots herself in the face. Nonna U6 = 50,000 yrs ago. African Root = 46,000 yrs ago. Rumanian PM1 = 34,000 yrs ago.
African Root U6 is PM1 U6's older big sister. African U6a, technically PM1's great neice, is older than PM1. African U6b'd is younger than great aunt PM1. African U6c is far younger still than her old old aunt PM1. Ein lo significant, >2%, U6 in Europe unless adjacent to northwest Africa.
Levant, Iraq, as well as northern, central, and eastern Arabian Peninsula have no significant U6. Only in the peninsula's southwest across from Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Djibuti, and Somalia is there ~3%, threshold significant U6 levels.
So does West Asian --Oman, Saudi, Kuwait, Iran, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Palestine and Georgia-- U6 indeed go way back to pre- history or is it from Amazigh girls whom one physician ranked the most perfect of concubines?
"The Berber women are from the island of Barbara (sic), which is between the west and the south. Their color is mostly black, though some pale ones can be found among them. If you can find one whose mother is of Kutama, whose father is of Sanhadja, and whose origin is Masmuda, then you will find her naturally inclined to obedience and loyalty in all matters, active in service, suited both to motherhood and to pleasure, for they are the most solicitous in caring for their children. Abu Uthman the slave-dealer says, If it happens that a Berber girl with her racial excellence is imported at the age of nine, spends three years in Medina and three years in Mecca, comes to Iraq at the age of fifteen and is educated in Iraq, and is bought at the age of twenty-five, then she adds to the excellence of her race the roguishness of the Medinans, the languor of the Meccans, and the culture of the women of Iraq. Then she is worthy to be hidden in the eyelid and placed in the eye."
~ ibn Butlān, a Nestorian Christian physician of Baghdad c.1055 CE ~
quote:Originally posted by a Banned Bum: U6 is a West Asian mtDNA.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic