posted
The Euronuts must be sick. One of the few whole-genome samples from Ancient Rome turns out to be an SSA lineage.
"Individual A, albeit at low coverage (Table 1), was found to belong to the Y-chromosome lineage A-M13 (A1b1b2b), a rare lineage absent among ancient individuals from the Italian Peninsula, mainly found in Eastern Africa (~ 40%), but with known occurrences, at much lower frequencies, in the Near East (Turkey, Yemen, Egypt, Palestine, Jordan, Oman and Saudi Arabia) and the Mediterranean islands of Sardinia, Cyprus and Lesbos37,38,39,40. Downstream of A-M13 and restricting the analysis to transversions polymorphisms, the individual can be placed at A-V5880, a sub-haplogroup that contains all A-M13 positive Sardinians from past studies and that has been dated to coalesce around 7.62 (± 0.92) thousands of years ago, using Bayesian analysis."
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: The Euronuts must be sick.
why are you race baiting?
Why don't you call out the real race baiters on this form Antalas & Archeo?
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
why would the "euronuts" be bothered by this ? His clade is sardinian and goes back to the early holocene and that's simply a hg. Genetically he's similar to the other roman imperial samples so roughly a local + east med profile
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: The Euronuts must be sick.
why are you race baiting?
You don't ever seem to have a problem with it when the euronuts do it
Posts: 2499 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: The Euronuts must be sick.
why are you race baiting?
You don't ever seem to have a problem with it when the euronuts do it
it's comedy at this point... you just got to laugh
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: why would the "euronuts" be bothered by this ? His clade is sardinian and goes back to the early holocene and that's simply a hg. Genetically he's similar to the other roman imperial samples so roughly a local + east med profile
A Ancient Roman being so thoroughly Roman and yet having a haplogroup from SSA means that the SSA presence in Southern Europe is old and deep-rooted.
It's a hard pill to swallow for people who don't even want to acknowledge an Ancient African presence in N. Africa, farless S. Europe.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: A Ancient Roman being so thoroughly Roman and yet having a haplogroup from SSA means that the SSA presence in Southern Europe is old and deep-rooted.
It's a hard pill to swallow for people who don't even want to acknowledge an Ancient African presence in N. Africa, farless S. Europe. [/QB]
We have hundreds of samples from ancient europe not even 1% have SSA haplogroups so no it's not "deep-rooted" and yes his autosomal profile is perfectly roman/mediterranean. And again his clade is prehistoric not contemporary.
There is no pill to swallow many modern north africans have ssa haplogroups yet aren't black or genetically similar to SSAs so they can export such lineages in any part of the world it wouldn't mean much. The same way they have found north african lineages in ancient europe and the middle east yet I do not claim there was a strong NA presence there nor that it was "deep-rooted".
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Mediterranean also encompasses parts of Africa,how are you forgetting that?😵💫😵💫😵💫🙄🙄🤔🤔
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
What do you mean by native? There are Africans that you can describe as Black,yes? And North Africa is a region,right? That only makes who is native a time problem. You do acknowledge there are groups that live past Africa that are as dark as Africans? So what makes the northern part of Africa a barrier to dark skin?
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
Haplogroup HV is found mainly in Western Asia, Central Asia, Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and North Africa.
In Africa, the clade peaks among Egyptians inhabiting El-Hayez oasis (14.3%).[5] with the HV0 subclade occurring among Mozabite Berbers (8.24%),[6] Libyans (7.4%),[7] Reguibate Sahrawi (6.48%),[6] Zenata Berbers (5.48%),[6] and Algerians (4.84% total; 2.15%-3.75% in Oran).[6]
In a study published in 2013, haplogroup HV(xHV0, H) was found in great percentages of populations in Afghanistan: 11.0% (14/127) Uzbek (including 1/127 HV2 and 1/127 HV6), 8.2% (12/146) Tajik (including 3/146 HV6 and 1/146 HV2), 8.0% (6/75) Turkmen (including 1/75 HV2), 6.4% (5/78) Hazara, and 5.6% (5/90) Pashtun.[8] Furthermore, haplogroup HV0 was found in 1.4% (2/146) of the sample of Afghanistani Tajiks, but it is unclear whether these belong to the haplogroup V subclade.[8] The subclade HV1a1a has been found in 1.8% (3/169) of Yakuts in one study[9] and 1.2% (5/423) of Yakuts in another study[10] published in 2013.
A 2003 study was published reporting on the mtDNA sequencing of the bones of two 24,000-year-old anatomically modern humans of the Cro-Magnon type from southern Italy. The study showed one was of either haplogroup HV or R0.[11] Haplogroup HV has also been found among ancient Egyptian mummies excavated at the Abusir el-Meleq archaeological site in Middle Egypt, which date from the Pre-Ptolemaic/late New Kingdom, Ptolemaic, and Roman periods.[12]
Haplogroup HV has been found in various fossils that were analysed for ancient DNA, including specimens associated with the Alföld Linear Pottery (HV, Mezőkövesd-Mocsolyás, 1/3 or 33%), Linearbandkeramik (HV0a, Fajsz-Garadomb, 1/2 or 50%), and Germany Middle Neolithic (HV, Quedlinburg, 1/2 or 50%) cultures
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: What do you mean by native? There are Africans that you can describe as Black,yes? And North Africa is a region,right? That only makes who is native a time problem. You do acknowledge there are groups that live past Africa that are as dark as Africans? So what makes the northern part of Africa a barrier to dark skin?
Indigenous north africans who lived along the mediterranean shore in antiquity or the medieval era weren't black they were similar to modern day north africans.
Black populations were found further south.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
If people were making a big deal about R1b in Tutankhamun, it's only fair that they make a similarly big deal about "sub-Saharan" African haplogroups in imperial Romans. Personally, I don't think this is a shocking finding by itself, and of course Y-DNA only says so much about a person's biological affinities, but if we're going to whitewash Tut et al with R1b, then...
posted
Obviously if this person came from North East Africa it shows that Rome had a very wide network of trade and travel across the Mediterranean Africa. Of course nobody in anthropology is shocked at the presence of Africans in the ancient European Mediterranean contrary what some people may believe or how some scholarship may make it seem.
Also this paper says nothing about "North Africans" in this sample and so I don't even know why this is even relevant.
quote: rom the distribution of individuals obtained with our PCA analysis (Fig. 2a), it is also possible to recognize a cline from Morocco_Iberomaurusian to Italy Imperial Roman Age (Italy_IRA) passing through Morocco Neolithic after the Iron Age. The genetic contribution derived from a North African source is already evident in the Italian prehistory. Indeed, admixture of a North African ancestry was recognized in Sardinia since the Chalcolithic48 and in central Italy since the Iron Age (Etruscan)29,66 and continued into the Roman Imperial period29. Nevertheless, we did not identify any North African ancestry contribution in the Pompeian individual using D-statistics (Supplementary Table S6).
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Obviously if this person came from North East Africa it shows that Rome had a very wide network of trade and travel across the Mediterranean Africa. Of course nobody in anthropology is shocked at the presence of Africans in the ancient European Mediterranean contrary what some people may believe or how some scholarship may make it seem.
Also this paper says nothing about "North Africans" in this sample and so I don't even know why this is even relevant.
quote: rom the distribution of individuals obtained with our PCA analysis (Fig. 2a), it is also possible to recognize a cline from Morocco_Iberomaurusian to Italy Imperial Roman Age (Italy_IRA) passing through Morocco Neolithic after the Iron Age. The genetic contribution derived from a North African source is already evident in the Italian prehistory. Indeed, admixture of a North African ancestry was recognized in Sardinia since the Chalcolithic48 and in central Italy since the Iron Age (Etruscan)29,66 and continued into the Roman Imperial period29. Nevertheless, we did not identify any North African ancestry contribution in the Pompeian individual using D-statistics (Supplementary Table S6).
again his clade is sardinian and prehistorical so he didn't come from north east africa + his autosomal profile has nothing to do with africa
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
No one is making a big deal about this because there is no Max Planx Senationalist Titles or Biodiversity Pseudo Scholars pushing it.
Only when it comes to Africans esp. Egyptians do people care.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: If people were making a big deal about R1b in Tutankhamun, it's only fair that they make a similarly big deal about "sub-Saharan" African haplogroups in imperial Romans. Personally, I don't think this is a shocking finding by itself, and of course Y-DNA only says so much about a person's biological affinities, but if we're going to whitewash Tut et al with R1b, then...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: A Ancient Roman being so thoroughly Roman and yet having a haplogroup from SSA means that the SSA presence in Southern Europe is old and deep-rooted.
It's a hard pill to swallow for people who don't even want to acknowledge an Ancient African presence in N. Africa, farless S. Europe.
We have hundreds of samples from ancient europe not even 1% have SSA haplogroups so no it's not "deep-rooted" and yes his autosomal profile is perfectly roman/mediterranean. And again his clade is prehistoric not contemporary.
There is no pill to swallow many modern north africans have ssa haplogroups yet aren't black or genetically similar to SSAs so they can export such lineages in any part of the world it wouldn't mean much. The same way they have found north african lineages in ancient europe and the middle east yet I do not claim there was a strong NA presence there nor that it was "deep-rooted". [/QB]
Nah, we have only a handful of aDNA samples from Ancient Rome and Greece. I am not talking about that backwater known as ancient Western Europe.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Obviously if this person came from North East Africa it shows that Rome had a very wide network of trade and travel across the Mediterranean Africa. Of course nobody in anthropology is shocked at the presence of Africans in the ancient European Mediterranean contrary what some people may believe or how some scholarship may make it seem.
Also this paper says nothing about "North Africans" in this sample and so I don't even know why this is even relevant.
quote: rom the distribution of individuals obtained with our PCA analysis (Fig. 2a), it is also possible to recognize a cline from Morocco_Iberomaurusian to Italy Imperial Roman Age (Italy_IRA) passing through Morocco Neolithic after the Iron Age. The genetic contribution derived from a North African source is already evident in the Italian prehistory. Indeed, admixture of a North African ancestry was recognized in Sardinia since the Chalcolithic48 and in central Italy since the Iron Age (Etruscan)29,66 and continued into the Roman Imperial period29. Nevertheless, we did not identify any North African ancestry contribution in the Pompeian individual using D-statistics (Supplementary Table S6).
again his clade is sardinian and prehistorical so he didn't come from north east africa + his autosomal profile has nothing to do with africa
You are right this individual may not have been African but carried an African DNA lineage. And this really has nothing to do with "North Africa". But I am sure more DNA from these populations will show more 'mixture' because the ultimate point here is that these ancient populations of Mediterranean Europeans are the result of mixture between various waves of ancient Africans, including North Africans and other Eurasian populations as they evolved over time.
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: Nah, we have only a handful of aDNA samples from Ancient Rome and Greece. I am not talking about that backwater known as ancient Western Europe. [/QB]
Why are you lying ? We have hundreds of samples from southern europe. I can post many of those studies if needed.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: Nah, we have only a handful of aDNA samples from Ancient Rome and Greece. I am not talking about that backwater known as ancient Western Europe.
Why are you lying ? We have hundreds of samples from southern europe. I can post many of those studies if needed. [/QB]
Sure. Please post samples and studies from Ancient Rome and Greece. Maybe I am not up to date.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: Nah, we have only a handful of aDNA samples from Ancient Rome and Greece. I am not talking about that backwater known as ancient Western Europe.
Why are you lying ? We have hundreds of samples from southern europe. I can post many of those studies if needed.
Sure. Please post samples and studies from Ancient Rome and Greece. Maybe I am not up to date. [/QB]
and that's just the few I remember but if you need more I can easily find additional studies.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: Nah, we have only a handful of aDNA samples from Ancient Rome and Greece. I am not talking about that backwater known as ancient Western Europe.
Why are you lying ? We have hundreds of samples from southern europe. I can post many of those studies if needed.
Sure. Please post samples and studies from Ancient Rome and Greece. Maybe I am not up to date.
and that's just the few I remember but if you need more I can easily find additional studies. [/QB]
I see some interesting studies here. But please revise to take into account the definition of Ancient Rome: 625 BC to 476 AD. Most of the studies you posted fall short.
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: Nah, we have only a handful of aDNA samples from Ancient Rome and Greece. I am not talking about that backwater known as ancient Western Europe.
Why are you lying ? We have hundreds of samples from southern europe. I can post many of those studies if needed.
Sure. Please post samples and studies from Ancient Rome and Greece. Maybe I am not up to date.
and that's just the few I remember but if you need more I can easily find additional studies.
I see some interesting studies here. But please revise to take into account the definition of Ancient Rome: 625 BC to 476 AD. Most of the studies you posted fall short. [/QB]
you already have enough samples with the roman/greek studies I posted and you can add this one if you want :
posted
Dude, you were posting random shit. Exhibit A from one of your links: "Here, we report genome-wide data in the form of 1.24 million ancestry-informative single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for 136 southern Iberian individuals, covering a time span of 2000 years from the Late Neolithic (LN)/CA (3300 cal BCE) to the LBA (1200/1000 cal BCE"
Posts: 288 | From: Asia | Registered: Mar 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would suggest that we stick to the point, which is that most studies of European DNA shows clearly large scale genetic mixture since the neolithic, much of it from the Levant and the Steppe. Also, that is on top of and in addition to African ancestry as well. This is not new or unknown and a large number of papers state this repeatedly. So it is not shocking to find ancient African lineages in Europe because after all humans originated in Africa to begin with. And I am not sure that anybody really denies this. However, there has been an effort to try and create the same model of genetic mixture for ancient Africa with far less genetic samples and evidence which is where most of the disagreements and arguments arise on this forum and in the wider community around the topic (Haplogroup E being Eurasian is one obvious example).
quote: . Signs of social and economic turnover are particularly marked in the southern half of the Iberian Peninsula (8), where the CA is associated with exceptional demographic growth, a diversity of monumental settlements and funerary structures, widespread copper metallurgy, and a sophisticated, large-scale manufacture and exchange of symbolic goods, among others [e.g., (9, 10)]. Moreover, this period is characterized by a diversity of settlement types, including fortified sites, ditched enclosures, and so-called megasites, some of which exceeded 100 ha in size (e.g., Valencina de la Concepción and Marroquíes Bajos) and all of which were formed at around 3300 to 2800 BCE, therefore predating the Bell Beaker horizon.
This period is also associated with a major increase in interconnectedness and mobility. On the basis of available radiogenic (Sr) isotope studies, the percentage of southern Iberian individuals who were buried in locations other than where they grew up ranges between 8 and 74% (11, 12). Ivory from Africa and the Near East (13–15), amber from Sicily (16), and ostrich eggshells from Africa (17) are indicative of transregional connections. However, evidence of a strong political centralization and economic inequality remains elusive or inconclusive (18–21).
Archaeogenetics has suggested that the remarkable development during the (south) Iberian CA was coupled with a strong population continuity attested since the Neolithic [e.g., (4, 6, 7, 22–27)]. However, the Late CA anthropological and archaeological records from the north and central Iberia show the first individuals carrying “steppe-related ancestry” by ~2400 calibrated (cal) BCE, which are often but not exclusively linked to Bell Beaker–associated artifacts (6, 7). In parallel, African ancestry was also reported in one individual, which suggests discrete movement/mobility of people (7).
Unfortunately because of the limited ancient DNA coverage from Africa, the presence of various 'African' lineages only remain spotty at best in terms of overall understanding of specific population movements.
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: Dude, you were posting random shit. Exhibit A from one of your links: "Here, we report genome-wide data in the form of 1.24 million ancestry-informative single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for 136 southern Iberian individuals, covering a time span of 2000 years from the Late Neolithic (LN)/CA (3300 cal BCE) to the LBA (1200/1000 cal BCE"
Yes because unlike what you claimed there was no "deep-rooted" SSA presence in southern Europe.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I would suggest that we stick to the point, which is that most studies of European DNA shows clearly large scale genetic mixture since the neolithic, much of it from the Levant and the Steppe. Also, that is on top of and in addition to African ancestry as well. This is not new or unknown and a large number of papers state this repeatedly. So it is not shocking to find ancient African lineages in Europe because after all humans originated in Africa to begin with. And I am not sure that anybody really denies this. However, there has been an effort to try and create the same model of genetic mixture for ancient Africa with far less genetic samples and evidence which is where most of the disagreements and arguments arise on this forum and in the wider community around the topic (Haplogroup E being Eurasian is one obvious example).
quote: . Signs of social and economic turnover are particularly marked in the southern half of the Iberian Peninsula (8), where the CA is associated with exceptional demographic growth, a diversity of monumental settlements and funerary structures, widespread copper metallurgy, and a sophisticated, large-scale manufacture and exchange of symbolic goods, among others [e.g., (9, 10)]. Moreover, this period is characterized by a diversity of settlement types, including fortified sites, ditched enclosures, and so-called megasites, some of which exceeded 100 ha in size (e.g., Valencina de la Concepción and Marroquíes Bajos) and all of which were formed at around 3300 to 2800 BCE, therefore predating the Bell Beaker horizon.
This period is also associated with a major increase in interconnectedness and mobility. On the basis of available radiogenic (Sr) isotope studies, the percentage of southern Iberian individuals who were buried in locations other than where they grew up ranges between 8 and 74% (11, 12). Ivory from Africa and the Near East (13–15), amber from Sicily (16), and ostrich eggshells from Africa (17) are indicative of transregional connections. However, evidence of a strong political centralization and economic inequality remains elusive or inconclusive (18–21).
Archaeogenetics has suggested that the remarkable development during the (south) Iberian CA was coupled with a strong population continuity attested since the Neolithic [e.g., (4, 6, 7, 22–27)]. However, the Late CA anthropological and archaeological records from the north and central Iberia show the first individuals carrying “steppe-related ancestry” by ~2400 calibrated (cal) BCE, which are often but not exclusively linked to Bell Beaker–associated artifacts (6, 7). In parallel, African ancestry was also reported in one individual, which suggests discrete movement/mobility of people (7).
Unfortunately because of the limited ancient DNA coverage from Africa, the presence of various 'African' lineages only remain spotty at best in terms of overall understanding of specific population movements.
Actually one of the sample has north african ancestry and a north african Hg and stop saying "african" as if your ancestors were involved in this.
For instance, The ivory that was exported there was from the north african species
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I would suggest that we stick to the point, which is that most studies of European DNA shows clearly large scale genetic mixture since the neolithic, much of it from the Levant and the Steppe. Also, that is on top of and in addition to African ancestry as well. This is not new or unknown and a large number of papers state this repeatedly. So it is not shocking to find ancient African lineages in Europe because after all humans originated in Africa to begin with. And I am not sure that anybody really denies this. However, there has been an effort to try and create the same model of genetic mixture for ancient Africa with far less genetic samples and evidence which is where most of the disagreements and arguments arise on this forum and in the wider community around the topic (Haplogroup E being Eurasian is one obvious example).
quote: . Signs of social and economic turnover are particularly marked in the southern half of the Iberian Peninsula (8), where the CA is associated with exceptional demographic growth, a diversity of monumental settlements and funerary structures, widespread copper metallurgy, and a sophisticated, large-scale manufacture and exchange of symbolic goods, among others [e.g., (9, 10)]. Moreover, this period is characterized by a diversity of settlement types, including fortified sites, ditched enclosures, and so-called megasites, some of which exceeded 100 ha in size (e.g., Valencina de la Concepción and Marroquíes Bajos) and all of which were formed at around 3300 to 2800 BCE, therefore predating the Bell Beaker horizon.
This period is also associated with a major increase in interconnectedness and mobility. On the basis of available radiogenic (Sr) isotope studies, the percentage of southern Iberian individuals who were buried in locations other than where they grew up ranges between 8 and 74% (11, 12). Ivory from Africa and the Near East (13–15), amber from Sicily (16), and ostrich eggshells from Africa (17) are indicative of transregional connections. However, evidence of a strong political centralization and economic inequality remains elusive or inconclusive (18–21).
Archaeogenetics has suggested that the remarkable development during the (south) Iberian CA was coupled with a strong population continuity attested since the Neolithic [e.g., (4, 6, 7, 22–27)]. However, the Late CA anthropological and archaeological records from the north and central Iberia show the first individuals carrying “steppe-related ancestry” by ~2400 calibrated (cal) BCE, which are often but not exclusively linked to Bell Beaker–associated artifacts (6, 7). In parallel, African ancestry was also reported in one individual, which suggests discrete movement/mobility of people (7).
Unfortunately because of the limited ancient DNA coverage from Africa, the presence of various 'African' lineages only remain spotty at best in terms of overall understanding of specific population movements.
Actually one of the sample has north african ancestry and a north african Hg and stop saying "african" as if your ancestors were involved in this.
For instance, The ivory that was exported there was from the north african species
Like I said, these people have to model African ancestry based on distance from Mbuti or as a "Basal Eurasian" population because they don't actually have enough ancient DNA from Africa to provide any more detailed population references. Which goes against this discussion as being in reference to any specific population of Africans as opposed to being a more general discussion of ancient African ancestry in aggregate. So your point is irrelevant as usual. Nobody is talking about any specific African population in this model. In fact your incessant whining about "North African" ancestry being separate from the rest of Africa has been shown numerous times to be false but you keep repeating it. Ancient North African ancestry is not "Eurasian" which is why the quote below and the Iberomaurisan paper are in agreement and goes against your obsession of modelling ancient North Africans as a purely Eurasian derived population which NO SCIENCE actually supports. And the only reason that topic is relevant here is to show that even Africans outside of North Africa have been migrating to Eurasia for thousands of years showing that North Africa was never a barrier to such movements. Almost all your outbursts and rants are pure emotional and non scientific dribble.
quote: The resulting f4-values were consistent with zero, showing that ZAP002 and Almoloya_Argar_Early (the Argar group with the largest number of individuals) are symmetrically related to eastern Mediterranean and African groups. However, we noticed a near-significant positive f4-value with a z score = 2.4 for Morocco Iberomaurusian. The attraction to Mbuti in an analogous f4-test suggests either African ancestry or high levels of Basal Eurasian ancestry shared with Morocco Iberomaurusian and Natufians (table S2.16). We also confirmed a negative deviation from zero in f4(test, EHG; CHG, Mbuti), indicative of either African or Basal Eurasian ancestry. Here, we assume that the split of EHG and CHG groups [Caucasus HG; a basal form of HG ancestry south of the Caucasus (72)] is sufficiently deep to result in negative values for any test population. Following this rationale, the finding of negative values suggests a high amount of shared deep ancestry with Mbuti, which also explains the different f4-value for ZAP002 in Fig. 3B when compared to other El Argar individuals. We observe negative values for ZAP002 (z score = −2.14), as well as Morocco Iberomaurusian and Natufian individuals, who provide additional support for this claim (Fig. 5B, table S2.17, and text S9).
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: In fact your incessant whining about "North African" ancestry being separate from the rest of Africa has been shown numerous times to be false but you keep repeating it. Ancient North African ancestry is not "Eurasian" which is why the quote below and the Iberomaurisan paper are in agreement and goes against your obsession of modelling ancient North Africans as a purely Eurasian derived population which NO SCIENCE actually supports. And the only reason that topic is relevant here is to show that even Africans outside of North Africa have been migrating to Eurasia for thousands of years showing that North Africa was never a barrier to such movements. Almost all your outbursts and rants are pure emotional and non scientific dribble.
No it hasn't been shown to be false you actually avoided all the quotes I posted which explicitely stated that the iberomaurusian samples were very different from any samples from sub-saharan africa whether ancient or modern and who said ancient north africans were purely eurasian ? Not even modern north africans are.
So no your ridiculous and childish vision of black africans travelling wherever they want at any time period isn't supported by any data.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: In fact your incessant whining about "North African" ancestry being separate from the rest of Africa has been shown numerous times to be false but you keep repeating it. Ancient North African ancestry is not "Eurasian" which is why the quote below and the Iberomaurisan paper are in agreement and goes against your obsession of modelling ancient North Africans as a purely Eurasian derived population which NO SCIENCE actually supports. And the only reason that topic is relevant here is to show that even Africans outside of North Africa have been migrating to Eurasia for thousands of years showing that North Africa was never a barrier to such movements. Almost all your outbursts and rants are pure emotional and non scientific dribble.
No it hasn't been shown to be false you actually avoided all the quotes I posted which explicitely stated that the iberomaurusian samples were very different from any samples from sub-saharan africa whether ancient or modern and who said ancient north africans were purely eurasian ? Not even modern north africans are.
So no your ridiculous and childish vision of black africans travelling wherever they want at any time period isn't supported by any data.
The attraction to Mbuti and relationship to Iberomaurisans and Natufians is referring to an unkown and unidentified ANCESTRAL population to both Natufians and Iberomaurisans which was also called out in the Iberoumaurisan study. Which means it is of African origin not Eurasian. And that only makes sense that ancient North Africans derive much of their ancestry from Ancient African populations. But that isn't the point here which is that Africans were never limited in their ability to move around the planet and therefore would show up in the genetics of ancient Europe.
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The attraction to Mbuti and relationship to Iberomaurisans and Natufians is referring to an unkown and unidentified ANCESTRAL population to both Natufians and Iberomaurisans which was also called out in the Iberoumaurisan study. Which means it is of African origin not Eurasian. And that only makes sense that ancient North Africans derive much of their ancestry from Ancient African populations. But that isn't the point here which is that Africans were never limited in their ability to move around the planet and therefore would show up in the genetics of ancient Europe. [/QB]
In contrast to the other european samples, this one shows attraction to mbuti because iberomaurusian ancestry is not fully eurasian. Modern north africans if compared to europeans will show the same attraction.
And yes africans like any other population were limited in their ability to move by multiple factors whether it was because of the environment, social or economic reasons. The ancient and modern south european samples show north african admixture not really SSA as pointed out by many studies :
quote:With the appropriate choice of sample sets, multiple independent analytic approaches converged on the conclusion that a relatively recent North African–specific, rather than Sub-Saharan, admixture has made a significant contribution to the population genomic structure of Europe , with a striking clinal pattern from prominence of such admixture in southwest Europe to vanishing in north and east Europe. With the reassuring exception of the Basque population isolate, the Iberian Peninsula showed the greatest imprint. Specifically, southwestern European populations averaged between 4% and 20% of their genomes assigned to a North African ancestral cluster, whereas this value did not exceed 2% in southeastern European populations.
quote:With respect to Iberian recipients, virtually all cases in the present study included an admixture event between a major European-like source (82.3 ± 6.5% as an average) and an African source. The latter source is best represented by a North African population and not by a sub-Saharan population
Which makes sense since it's the closest part to Europe only afrocentrists would question that.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The attraction to Mbuti and relationship to Iberomaurisans and Natufians is referring to an unkown and unidentified ANCESTRAL population to both Natufians and Iberomaurisans which was also called out in the Iberoumaurisan study. Which means it is of African origin not Eurasian. And that only makes sense that ancient North Africans derive much of their ancestry from Ancient African populations. But that isn't the point here which is that Africans were never limited in their ability to move around the planet and therefore would show up in the genetics of ancient Europe.
In contrast to the other european samples, this one shows attraction to mbuti because iberomaurusian ancestry is not fully eurasian. Modern north africans if compared to europeans will show the same attraction.
And yes africans like any other population were limited in their ability to move by multiple factors whether it was because of the environment, social or economic reasons. The ancient and modern south european samples show north african admixture not really SSA as pointed out by many studies :
quote:With the appropriate choice of sample sets, multiple independent analytic approaches converged on the conclusion that a relatively recent North African–specific, rather than Sub-Saharan, admixture has made a significant contribution to the population genomic structure of Europe , with a striking clinal pattern from prominence of such admixture in southwest Europe to vanishing in north and east Europe. With the reassuring exception of the Basque population isolate, the Iberian Peninsula showed the greatest imprint. Specifically, southwestern European populations averaged between 4% and 20% of their genomes assigned to a North African ancestral cluster, whereas this value did not exceed 2% in southeastern European populations.
quote:With respect to Iberian recipients, virtually all cases in the present study included an admixture event between a major European-like source (82.3 ± 6.5% as an average) and an African source. The latter source is best represented by a North African population and not by a sub-Saharan population
Which makes sense since it's the closest part to Europe only afrocentrists would question that.
The point as I said is that the ancestral population of Iberomaurisans and Natufians was "African". Period. Trying to separate North Africa from the rest of Africa is irrelevant to that point, unless you are claiming that the ancient populations of "North Africa" from 20,000 years ago carried mostly "Eurasian" genes. The point I was making is that those 20,000 year old ancestral populations that had shared ancestry with North Africa and the Levant were AFRICAN in origin and we don't know exactly where that population came from in Africa so calling them "AFRICAN" is sufficient as a likely point of origin. Which disproves this nonsense of Africans being stuck and not able to migrated anywhere. All this back and forth with you is because you want to presume that "North African" means originating in Eurasia as the reason for the relationship which is not what the paper is saying. And we know that Africans from numerous parts of Africa, including North Africa have been migrating to Eurasia since forever. This has never stopped since OOA. Your attempts to say otherwise are contradicted by the facts on the ground, such as the last Saharan wet phase.
But this particular paper and thread is not about rehashing your obsession with separating ancient North Africans from the rest of Africa. It is about the migrations of Africans carrying haplogroup A into the Mediterranean as another line of evidence contradicting your point as Haplogroup A is not "North African".
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
that's what I said : "this one shows attraction to mbuti because iberomaurusian ancestry is not fully eurasian . "
Also this haplogroup A could have been brought in southern europe by north africans not necessarily directly from a Saharan or SSA source.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
that's what I said : "this one shows attraction to mbuti because iberomaurusian ancestry is not fully eurasian . "
Also this haplogroup A could have been brought in southern europe by north africans not necessarily directly from a Saharan or SSA source.
Which north Africans?
no idea (also surprisingly some A can still be found among modern NAs)
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
You might be conflating the A lineages. M13 in North Africa/Southern Europe is a Holocene marker. It has direct ties to Sudanese populations. Other than that, it's not significant as it's been divorced from Africa since the green Sahara.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: You might be conflating the A lineages. M13 in North Africa/Southern Europe is a Holocene marker. It has direct ties to Sudanese populations. Other than that, it's not significant as it's been divorced from Africa since the green Sahara.
I'm aware of that that's why I told mansamusa and dougm that finding such haplo there doesn't mean much and isn't going to bother anyone.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
The point of doing these studies and identifying such lineages is to infer and identify potential ancient historical population movements over time. However, that said, the presence of an ancient lineage originating in Africa in Pompeii doesn't mean that individual was a black African. Similarly the presence of an ancient Eurasian lineage in Africa doesn't mean that a specific person or even group of people is "white Eurasian" either. That is not the intent of these studies even though a lot of people do use them that way and or sometimes these papers give that impression in the way they are written. And unfortunately as we have discussed on this forum many times, these so called conflicts come from contradictions in logic concerning such movements of populations. So if "Eurasians" can move into Africa in ancient times, then why is it a problem for Africans to move into Eurasia before and after that? Thus the existence of this thread and the discussions in it.
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
@DougM one of the few logic post you've posted even though you rarely apply such logic to your thoughts since for you eurasian migrations to Africa never really occured or only occured during roman times...
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: You might be conflating the A lineages. M13 ... it's been divorced from Africa since the green Sahara.
.
I can't figure out what you mean by divorce or which lineages were "divorced"?
I could guess you mean sub-lineages born outside continental African?
I could guess you mean M13 married outside and so is not limited to Africa?
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Interesting. The oldest date of A-M13 derives from a Morocco Souss region sample. That's at the mapped northwestern border of the Sahra-Sudanese Neolithic.
Sidebar: Related post-AHP observations. * Classical Spaniard folklore says Aethiopians inhabited up to Dyris (Atlas Mts). * The Souss is noted for it's darker complexioned population. Of course these are post-AHP classic and current observations. The former occupation was by conquest (again only folklore to explain the martial non-Med coastal phenotype ethnies in Tropical North Africa). The latter population includes forced Gnawa influence on top of any earlier remnants left over from Souss' Neolithic era.
I think this Souss could also be the source of the inner Africa affiliated components of Canary Island samples taken closest to the continent.
Archeology shows inner African looking Pompeii citizens but will leave out the 'Banquet Boy' fresco unless requested for further multiple discipline support for theoretic conflation of MSY and inner African morphology in Pompeii.
quote:Originally posted by Mansamusa: ... a haplogroup from SSA means that the SSA presence in Southern Europe is old and deep-rooted. ... people ... don't even want to acknowledge an Ancient African presence in N. Africa, ... .
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: @DougM one of the few logic post you've posted even though you rarely apply such logic to your thoughts since for you eurasian migrations to Africa never really occured or only occured during roman times...
No, I have never said there were no Eurasian migrations to Africa. What I said was that the so called Eurasian lineages in ancient North Africa does not imply that the populations looked like modern North Africans. There are plenty of black Africans in Africa to this day that carry so called Eurasian lineages to some degree but are still black Africans. And a lineage like U6 is far too old to imply that somehow those ancient populations introduced a dominant white Eurasian phenotype into North Africa over 20,000 years ago. For that to happen it would imply a complete population replacement as opposed to a mixture event. And there is no evidence of population replacement in North Africa over 20,000 years ago. What has been found is evidence of African ancestral lineages from some unknown population that existed in North Africa over 20,000 years ago, plus some ancient Eurasian lineages. That is not proof of population replacement in North Africa 20,000 years ago by migrating Eurasians.
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Doug M the thing is no one said or implied that these paleolithic populations looked like modern North Africans but according to the datas they didn't look like modern sub-saharans either and this type of ancestry peaks among modern north africans not any other african population.
Also I never said there was a population replacement ; I simply said there was apparently an admixture event that involved locals and newcomers who brought new lineages/ancestry and industry.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: @Doug M the thing is no one said or implied that these paleolithic populations looked like modern North Africans but according to the datas they didn't look like modern sub-saharans either and this type of ancestry peaks among modern north africans not any other african population.
Also I never said there was a population replacement ; I simply said there was apparently an admixture event that involved locals and newcomers who brought new lineages/ancestry and industry.
This isn't another thread about "how ancient north Africans looked". It is about genetic lineages in pompeii. If the many of the DNA lineages 20 thousand years ago in Ancient North Africa originated in Africa why would they NOT look like black Africans? The onus is on all of you folks claiming ancient North Africa was somehow less African than the rest of Africa to prove it. None of these studies are supporting what you are saying. Not to mention no ancient pre-natufian remains match metrics with any modern population in the Levant. This obsession over making ancient 20,000 year old North Africans into modern looking North Africans as closely related to ancient 20,000+ year old Levantines is pathetic.
And why are you trolling this thread with your obsession with white skin in 20,000 year old African populations?
Posts: 8893 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic