posted
As I said. They will find “Eurasian” admixture in SSA BEFORE "Eurasians" ever existed.
1. Ju|'hoansi San now has “Eurasian” Admixture. Lol! 2. To get around their BS interpretation they have grouped East Africans as Eurasian to explain Eurasian admixture in stone age Africans. Can’t wait for Malawi LSA results. They need to come up with an outrageous story or interpretation 3. They are ESTIMATING the age of divergence which is BS.
--- Ancient human genomes from Southern Africa (Schlebusch et al. 2017 preprint)
Abstract: Southern Africa is consistently placed as one of the potential regions for the evolution of **** sapiens. To examine the region's human prehistory prior to the arrival of migrants from East and West Africa or Eurasia in the last 1,700 years, we generated and analyzed genome sequence data from seven ancient individuals from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Three Stone Age hunter-gatherers date to ~2,000 years ago, and we show that they were related to current-day southern San groups such as the Karretjie People. Four Iron Age farmers (300-500 years old) have genetic signatures similar to present day Bantu-speakers. The genome sequence (13x coverage) of a juvenile boy from Ballito Bay, who lived ~2,000 years ago, demonstrates that southern African Stone Age hunter-gatherers were not impacted by recent admixture; however, we estimate that all modern-day Khoekhoe and San groups have been influenced by 9-22% genetic admixture from East African/Eurasian pastoralist groups arriving >1,000 years ago, including the Ju|'hoansi San, PREVIUOSLY thought to have very low levels of admixture. Using traditional and new approaches, we estimate the population divergence time between the Ballito Bay boy and other groups to beyond 260,000 years ago. These estimates dramatically increases the deepest divergence amongst modern humans, coincide with the onset of the Middle Stone Age in sub-Saharan Africa, and coincide with anatomical developments of archaic humans into modern humans as represented in the local fossil record. Cumulatively, cross-disciplinary records increasingly point to southern Africa as a potential (not necessarily exclusive) 'hot spot' for the evolution of our species.
-------------------- 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
To those of you who follow this stuff. If you remember in Lazaridis 2014 landmark paper about 3-pop of Europeans. He showed that modern Ju hoansi had ***no**** Eurasian admixture!!! Now this paper is stating the opposite. A 2000year old south African related to Ju Hoansi carried “Eurasian” ancestry. The 4Ws. Know the politics of the researchers. There is a theme to each author. This one was probably chaired by Helena Malstrom. She is somewhat objective. Remember she made it clear that SSA ancestry is found in ancient Swedes and she was one on the forefront to declare modern Europeans are NOT closely related to ancient Europeans. This should be a good read.
Also interesting they are speculating modern humans originates in Southern Africa and NOT East Africa. remember Henna and Tishkoff battled over that theory.
-------------------- 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
This is low key exciting, can't really dissect right now but I'm bumping this.
Eurasians R Us
Btw, the very next qpGraph in the supp will blow your nuts off lol Hmmm, Did I ever mention ancient recombination in west Africa might be the reason why groups like YRI are pulled away from Eurasians & East Africans? Lol
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
"ancient recombination" ? you mean ancient admixture?
I saw Capra ask in another thread , what was JAMA and BMJ. I wa staken aback by that question.
What is ancient recombination?
-------------------- 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
I noticed they have coined a new term throughout this study …. “Eurasian back-admixture”. Notice YRI and most other Africans carry “non-African ancestry”. ”Eurasian back-admixture”? lol!
Any read the papers. I could not tell how many SNP’s they are using for comparison. They stated the standard is about 200,000 but did not state how many they used for this study. Whether it was supervised or not?
-------------------- 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
Basically, when you read that term used in a paper (recombination) and the Author isn't talking about the lab method (recombinant DNA/genes etc.) they're basically saying a subset of a parent group mixed with the parent group. This can make daughter groups of the first siblings incredibly distant.
Imagine Dadpop has 7 ancestral variants and gave four(of any to both sibpops), both siblings will have at least 1 ancestral variant in common, and can share any of the 3 derived variants. Sibling 2 in isolation eventually gives rise to a young population with only two ancestral variants. Sibling 1 recombined with Dadpop, before the latter went extinct. Sibling 1s daughter, yungpop1, will retain a minimum of 4 ancestral and will have a extremely lower chance of sharing any derived variants. Statistically speaking, both young pops will be very distant as a result.
EDIT: @xyyman Based on the data sets they're comparing these samples to, the SNP count varies... But a safe bet is 1.4million according to them for most of the comparative analysis.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Posters on here who are familiar with geographic assignments WITHIN Africa can help out for A1b1b2 and mtDNA L0d2c1, L0d2a1, L0d2 , L0d2a1a, L3e3b1, L3e1b2, L3e2b1a2
Are these Bantu’s? I think not. No mtDNA L2a1* and no E1b1a. So I would say , no, yDNA E is definitely not West African. I predicted this a long time ago. yDNA E1b1a will NOT be found in aDNA in West Africa beyond 2000BC. Hell it looks like it is not part of the supposed Bantu Expansion. And not even in Africans in South Africa ONLY 2000years 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 |
posted
I am not too knowledgeable about inter African lineage...only at a high level.
-------------------- 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
No time to read paper yet, looks fascinating. Please let's not get obsessed with the very minor Eurasian ancestry in Khoisan, which is old news (from 2013) and irrelevant to basically anything.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Interestingly no yDNA E was found.
Posters on here who are familiar with geographic assignments WITHIN Africa can help out for A1b1b2 and mtDNA L0d2c1, L0d2a1, L0d2 , L0d2a1a, L3e3b1, L3e1b2, L3e2b1a2
Are these Bantu’s? I think not. No mtDNA L2a1* and no E1b1a.
The Iron Age samples are all female, so of course they don't have E1b1a or any other Y DNA. They are around 500 years old or less, I'm pretty sure even the most absurd theory can accomodate them being Bantu.
Hundreds of Khoisan full Y sequences have turned up no ancient native E lineages. If they ever did exist one would hardly expect to find them in a sample of 2.
A1b1b2 is probably A1b1b2a-M51, the most common native Khoisan haplogroup, exclusive to Southern Africa.
L0d is the majority Khoisan mito haplogroup, almost restricted to Southern Africa though a wee bit can be found in East Africa. L0d2 is a common subclade.
quote:Hell it looks like it is not part of the supposed Bantu Expansion. And not even in Africans in South Africa ONLY 2000years ago!!!!!
Really man, can't you see that it's *your* theory that predicts E1b1a being present that early, not the mainstream?
PS references (sorry Tukuler):
Barbieri et al 2015, "Refining the Y chromosome phylogeny with southern African sequences" Schelbusch et al 2009, "SNaPshot minisequencing to resolve mitochondrial macro-haplogroups found in Africa" Naidoo et al 2010, "Development of a single base extension method to resolve Y chromosome haplogroups in sub-Saharan African populations" Naidoo 2014 (thesis), "Phylogeography of Y chromosome haplogroups A & B in Africa" Barbieri et al 2013, "Ancient substructure in early mtDNA lineages of Southern Africa"
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also the OP is worrying too much. Who cares about "Eurasian admixture" because this part to me is way more interesting. From reading the study they find significant East African ancestry in West Africans(we knew that and posters like Swenet told me that a long time ago plus L3 and Y-DNA E) but also this!
quote:We tried to add Yoruba as a simple split off from any internal node of the model or by adding internal nodes from which Yoruba would split off, but none of these models were consistent with the data with |Z|<3. Furthermore, models assuming Yoruba as a two-way admixture between any of the internal nodes failed. A model which did fit the data is where Yoruba are modeled as a two-way admixture of two additional nodes: one Basal African node above the split between ancient East Africans and ancient southern Africans and a second group, which is a sister group to the East African population that gave rise to the out-of-Africa groups. The drift between the Basal African node and the population that splits into Eastern and southern Africans is small compared to the rest of the graph, but it appears to provide a better fit to the data. We did not further investigate the population history of Yoruba as the focus of our analyses is southern Africa.
Basel African in West Africa? Am I stretching it?
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
OK we all know the f4 stat for (Natufian, Other Ancient; African, chimp) provided no evidence that Natufians bear special relationship with Mbuti, Yoruba, Ju hoan, or Mota.
But is that being hyped beyond what it reveals?
To uncover Basal Eurasian admixture proportions Laz uaed Mota as proxy genome. See the qpAdm table below.
quote:Originally posted April 17, 2017 by Tukuler:
Supplementary Information The genetic structure of the world's first farmers SI 4 -- Pervasive Basal Eurasian ancestry in the ancient Near East
These NEF and EEF have Mota (Basal Eurasian) ancestry * Anatolia_N * Armenia_Chl * Europe_MNChl * Iberia_BA * Iran_LN (She Gabi) * Iran_Hotu3b * Iran_N (Ganj Dareh) * Levant_BA (Jordan) * Levant_N (PPNB/C) * Natufian (E1b1)
Peer reviewed published title: Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East
Exactly how this ties in with Schlebusch's qpGraph I don't know. But in tandem they make for ties all along the length of the Great Rift or Indian Ocean - Red Sea - the Gulf shores.
posted
LOL. The data in this article is interesting but interpretation of the data is a joke.
The authors claim that " all modern-day Khoekhoe and San groups have been influenced by 9-22% genetic admixture from East African/Eurasian pastoralist groups arriving >1,000 years ago, including the Ju|'hoansi San, previously thought to have very low levels of admixture ". This is ludicrous, there is no archaeological evidence, presented by these researchers of East Africans migrating into south Africa, we only have the Bantu speakers expanding into Southern Africa during the Iron Age. As I note in my Protocols to Evaluate genetics articles the absence of archaeological support is a clear sign the paper lacks any validity (web page).
Schlebusch has it backwards. The so-called Eurasian admixture among the Khoisan is the result of the spread of khoisan into Eurasia, as the Cro-Magnon carriers of the Aurignacian civilization. Boule, M., H V Vallois in Fossil Man link the San people and the Aurignacians who are labled today Cro-Magnon.
The Khoisan formerly occupied an area from South Africa to North. This would explain the Khoisan domesticated cattle being of North African rather than Bantu type. The most archaic AMH remains come from Florished, South Africa; they date between 190-330 kya. Other ancient fossil evidence of AMH in South Africa come from Broken Hill (c.110kya) and the Klasis River caves (c. 65-105kya). The Khoisan early migrated into North Africa. As a result, we see shared cultural and behavioral traditions between 200-40kya among South Africans and Moroccans.
KHOISAN
The Khoisan carry haplogroups L3(M,N). Before they reached Iberia, they probably stopped in West Africa. Granted L3 and L2 are not as old as LOd, but Gonder et al (2006)provides very early dates for this mtDNA e.g., L3(M,N) 94.3; the South African Khoisan (SAK) carry L1c, L1,L2,L3(M,N) dates to 142.3kya; the Hadza are L2a, L2, L3(M,N), dates to 96.7kya. The dates for L1,L2,L3, M,N are old enough for the Khoisan to have taken N to West Africa, where we find L3, L2 and LOd and thence to Iberia as I suggested in my paper (Winters,2011). It is interesting to note that LO haplogroups are primarily found among Khoisan and West Africans. This shows that at some point in prehistory the Khoisan had migrated into West Africa on their way to Morocco. The basal L3(M) motiff in West Africa is characterized by the Ddel site np 10394 and Alul site np 10397 associated with AF-24. This supports my contention that Khoisan speakers early settled West Africa on their way to Iberia. The Khoisan may have introduced the L haplogroup to Iberia. The SAK populations carry haplogroups L2, and L3. Dominguez (2005) ,noted that much of the ancient mtDNA found in Iberia has no relationship to the people presently living in Iberia today and correspond to African mtDNA haplogroups . The SAK carry haplogroups L1c, L1,L2,L3 M,N and dates to 142.3kya; the Hadza are L2a, L2, L3, M,N, and dates to 96.7kya. The dates for L1,L2,L3(M,N) are old enough for the Khoisan to have taken N to West Africa and thence Iberia. Dominguez (2005) found that the lineages recovered from ancient Iberian skeletons are the African lineages L1b,L2 and L3. Almost 50% of the lineages from the Abauntz Chalcolithic deposits and Tres Montes, in Navarre are the Sub-Saharan lineages L1b,L2 and L3. The appearance of phylogenetically related sequences of hg L3 present in many ancient Iberian skeletons suggest that this haplogroup may have a long history in Iberia. This would support the possibility that SAK populations early settled ancient Iberia.
The Neanderthal used Mousterian tools. These tools were also being used in Africa as early 130kya. This places Neanderthalers in North Africa. The human types associated with the Neanderthal tools found at Jebel Ighoud and Haua Fteah resemble contemporaneous European Neanderthaler tools. The presence of Mousterian tools suggest that Neanderthalers mixed with Africans because we know that anatomically modern humans were living in the area at the time.
The African Neanderthal people used the common Levoiso-Mousterian tool kit originally discovered in Europe. The Nenderthal skeletons have come from Djebel Irhoud and El Guettar in Morocco (Ki-Zerbo,1981). Later Neanderthal people used the Aterian tool kit. It was probably in Morocco that Neanderthal and Khoisan interacted. An exception to this norm are the Khoisan who share a phylogenic relationship with Altai Neanderthals (Prufer, et al, 2013). Many researchers claim that Africans have no relationship to the Neanderthals.But Prufer et al (2013) share more alleles with Altaic Neanderthal than Denisova. In the Supplemental section of Prufer et al (2013) there is considerable discussion of the relationship between Neanderthal and Khoisan. In relation to the Altaic Neanderthal the non-Africans have a lower divergence rate than Africans between 10-20%. Prufer et al (2013) note little statistical difference between non-African and African divergence. Researchers have observered a relationship between the Neanderthals, the Khoisan and Yoruba. Prufer et al (2013) detected a relationship between the Neanderthal and Mandekan. It is interesting to note that Yoruba traditions place them in Mande-speaking areas (Prufer et al,2013). There is interesting information in Figure S7.1. In Figure S7.1 the maximum likelihood tree of bonobo, Denisova and Neanderthal, the closest present-day hmans are Africans, not Europeans. Reading the Tree Chart Graph, the neighbor joining tree of archaic and present day human individuals has the Khoisan following the Denisova. An interesting finding of Prufer et al (2013) was that Altaic Neanderthal and Denisova are estimated to have similar split times. The divergence estimate for African Khoisan-Mandekan and Altaic is younger than the split between Africans and Denisova archaic individuals and modern African individuals. The split times between the Khoisan and Mandekan may be explained by the presence of AF-24 haplotype in West Africa. The major problem with the paper is that the Prufer et al (2013)believe that there was a back-to-Africa migration of Eurasian genomes among West Africans people. This back migration probably did not occur. What we do know is that the ancient Kushite people belonged to the C-Group. The C-Group people spoke Niger-Congo and Dravidian languages. The Kushites founded many civilizations in Eurasia including the Sumerian and Elamite civilizations. The Kushites may have spread L3(M) and y-chromosome R haplogroup in Eurasia. This suggest that so-called Eurasian genomes are the result of admixtures of Europeans and Kushites. In summary the Khoisan early settled Morocco. From here they interacted with Neanderthal populations. Later the Khoisan migrated into Iberia an deposited many genomes of the L clade and L3(N) macrohaplogroup.
The Khoisan took the Aurignacian culture to Europe from North Africa.
The craniofacial evidence makes it clear that the Aurignacian people came from Africa . The Aurignacian people are called Grimaldi Or Cro-Magnon.
Boule and Vallois, note that "To sum up, in the most ancient skeletons from the Grotte des Enfants we have a human type which is readily comparable to modern types and especially to the Negritic or Negroid type" (p.289). They continue, "Two Neolithic individuals from Chamblandes in Switzerland are Negroid not only as regards their skulls but also in the proportions of their limbs. Several Ligurian and Lombard tombs of the Metal Ages have also yielded evidences of a Negroid element.
Since the publication of Verneau's memoir, discoveries of other Negroid skeletons in Neolithic levels in Illyria and the Balkans have been announced. The prehistoric statues, dating from the Copper Age, from Sultan Selo in Bulgaria are also thought to portray Negroids.
In 1928 Rene Bailly found in one of the caverns of Moniat, near Dinant in Belgium, a human skeleton of whose age it is difficult to be certain, but seems definitely prehistoric. It is remarkable for its Negroid characters, which give it a reseblance to the skeletons from both Grimaldi and Asselar (p.291).
Boule and Vallois, note that "We know now that the ethnography of South African tribes presents many striking similarities with the ethnography of our populations of the Reindeer Age. Not to speak of their stone implements which, as we shall see later , exhibit great similarities, Peringuey has told us that in certain burials on the South African coast 'associated with the Aurignacian or Solutrean type industry...."(p.318-319). They add, that in relation to Bushman art " This almost uninterrupted series leads us to regard the African continent as a centre of important migrations which at certain times may have played a great part in the stocking of Southern Europe. Finally, we must not forget that the Grimaldi Negroid skeletons sho many points of resemblance with the Bushman skeletons". They bear no less a resemblance to that of the fossil Man discovered at Asslar in mid-Sahara, whose characters led us to class him with the Hottentot-Bushman group."
in conclusion, the Khoisan carry Eurasian genes, not because of admixture. They carry Eurasian genes because they were the first Eurasians.
Sources:
Boule, M., HV Vallois . (1957). Fossil Man . Dryden Press New York
Barral,L. & Charles,R.P. (1963) Nouvelles donnees anthropometriques et precision sue les affinities systematiques des negroides de Grimaldi, Bulletin du Musee d’anthropologie prehistorique de Monaco, No.10:123-139. Reference:
de Domínguez E.F. Polimorfismos de DNA mitocondrial en poblaciones antiguas de la cuenca mediterránea. Universitat de Barcelona. Departament Biologia Animal, 2005 (PhD thesis).
Gonder MK, Mortensen HM, Reed FA, de Sousa A, Tishkoff SA. (2006). Whole mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages. Mol Biol Evol. 2006 Dec 28.
Ki-Zerbo,J. (1981). Unesco General History of Africa Vol. 1: Methodology and African Prehistory (1981), pg.572.
Pruler,K, Racimo,F.,Patterson,N et al. (2014). The complete genome sequences of Neanderthal from the Altai, Mountains. Nature , 505/7481: 43-9. doi .10.1038/ Nature 12881.Epub.2013.Dec.18.
Scozzari, R, Massaia,A, Trombatta,B. et al.(2014). An unbiased resource of novel SNP markers provides a new chronology for human Y-chromosome and reveals a deep phylogenetic structure in Africa. Genome Research, January 6,2014, doi: 10.1101/gr./60785.113.
Verneaux,R: Les Origines de l’humanite. Paris: F. Riedder & Cie, 1926.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I noticed they have coined a new term throughout this study …. “Eurasian back-admixture”. Notice YRI and most other Africans carry “non-African ancestry”. ”Eurasian back-admixture”? lol!
Any read the papers. I could not tell how many SNP’s they are using for comparison. They stated the standard is about 200,000 but did not state how many they used for this study. Whether it was supervised or not?
The idea of "Eurasian back admixture" is bs. As in the case of the Mota article, Reich will probably attempt to get Schlebusch et al to modify their findings of East African/Eurasian ancestry proportions in Africans from the East African extended dataset.
Reich will want the frequencies modified or removed from Schlebusch et al, (1) there is no way to prove archaeologically prove Eurasians were in Africa at that time. (2)They can't use the slavery explanation either, because if the "admixture" was due to slavery how did the slaves get back to East Africa, to mix with the East Africans?
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
So they have dropped the old term "back-migration" and came up with "back-admixture".
@Capra. The point I am making is, Yes, the sample size is small but considering the high frequency of E1b1a in south Africa with the purported arrival 1000years ago. I would expect to see at least one E1b1a in the sample set. Also yes the iron Age were females but the supposed Bantu female line is L2a1*.
In other words the pattern emerging is, again, different to what is being taught in academia. Of course more data is needed.
-------------------- 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 BlessedbyHorus: Again you people are worrying about the less interesting ****.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't want a pussy telling me what is interesting or not.
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: WTF. Get a life!!
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: Again you people are worrying about the less interesting ****.
You should take your own advice. Read the study again.
-------------------- 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
Thanks for the link(s) on detailed sub-clades within Africa. In the past I was only interested in clades between Africa and Eurasia. I believe Beyoku is more familiar with the different sub-clades WITHIN African sub-populations
quote:Originally posted by capra: No time to read paper yet, looks fascinating. Please let's not get obsessed with the very minor Eurasian ancestry in Khoisan, which is old news (from 2013) and irrelevant to basically anything.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Interestingly no yDNA E was found.
Posters on here who are familiar with geographic assignments WITHIN Africa can help out for A1b1b2 and mtDNA L0d2c1, L0d2a1, L0d2 , L0d2a1a, L3e3b1, L3e1b2, L3e2b1a2
Are these Bantu’s? I think not. No mtDNA L2a1* and no E1b1a.
The Iron Age samples are all female, so of course they don't have E1b1a or any other Y DNA. They are around 500 years old or less, I'm pretty sure even the most absurd theory can accomodate them being Bantu.
Hundreds of Khoisan full Y sequences have turned up no ancient native E lineages. If they ever did exist one would hardly expect to find them in a sample of 2.
A1b1b2 is probably A1b1b2a-M51, the most common native Khoisan haplogroup, exclusive to Southern Africa.
L0d is the majority Khoisan mito haplogroup, almost restricted to Southern Africa though a wee bit can be found in East Africa. L0d2 is a common subclade.
quote:Hell it looks like it is not part of the supposed Bantu Expansion. And not even in Africans in South Africa ONLY 2000years ago!!!!!
Really man, can't you see that it's *your* theory that predicts E1b1a being present that early, not the mainstream?
PS references (sorry Tukuler):
Barbieri et al 2015, "Refining the Y chromosome phylogeny with southern African sequences" Schelbusch et al 2009, "SNaPshot minisequencing to resolve mitochondrial macro-haplogroups found in Africa" Naidoo et al 2010, "Development of a single base extension method to resolve Y chromosome haplogroups in sub-Saharan African populations" Naidoo 2014 (thesis), "Phylogeography of Y chromosome haplogroups A & B in Africa" Barbieri et al 2013, "Ancient substructure in early mtDNA lineages of Southern Africa"
-------------------- 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
Looking at the location of these samples some observations.
1. This is more Eastern Africa and not South Africa. These samples are extreme long distnaces from “West” Africa. 2. The Iron Age samples are L3e* except one which was L0d2* which is very specific 3. All the Stone age, I am not sure if “stone age” is a correct label, this is only 2000years ago!!! Anyways, all are L0d2*.
What is the story here? As Dr Winters pointed out, interpretation or misinterpretation of the data. The data is the data. What the data means is the issue. Of course these researchers either skew the data or leave data out to bias or lead the reader in one direction or the other.
But I have learnt from experience even when they present bias data there are good information and clues. Eg the Cluster Chart shows, again, at K2 YRI and other sub-saharana carry “non-African or Eurasian” ancestry. But that was NOT the point the authors wanted to make.
-------------------- 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 |
First lose it with the insults(thats your first warning) especially considering I deleted my own thread of this for this one to stay.
Second read the study again. They're not saying there was Eurasian back migration. But instead that Khoisan people got their Eurasian admixture through Cushities. This NOT being new and that time WAS around when Eurasians existed.
Yeah lets be paranoid and focuse on Eurasian admixture(which is NOTHING NEW) instead the human tree not only being pushed back but West Africa potentially being the place for basel Africa...
Im asking PR if I can recreate my one...
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Newbies Looking at L3 – The author is saying here that OOA was less than 70ka but in the OP the author is stating “deep” divergence close to 300ka. Implication? So were these L3e* Iron Age individuals really part of the Bantus expansion? Did they migrate FROM West Africa. What this author is stating is that the TIMING of expansion of L3 was similar to the Bantu expansion time frame NOT that they are genetically connected to the supposed Bantu expansion.
Abstract Although fossil remains show that anatomically modern humans dispersed out of Africa into the Near East ∼100 to 130 ka, genetic evidence from extant populations has suggested that non-Africans descend primarily from a single successful later migration. Within the human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) tree, haplogroup L3 encompasses not only many sub-Saharan Africans but also all ancient non-African lineages, and its age therefore provides an upper bound for the dispersal out of Africa. An analysis of 369 complete African L3 sequences places this maximum at ∼70 ka, virtually ruling out a successful exit before 74 ka, the date of the Toba volcanic supereruption in Sumatra. The similarity of the age of L3 to its two non-African daughter haplogroups, M and N, suggests that the same process was likely responsible for both the L3 expansion in Eastern Africa and the dispersal of a small group of modern humans out of Africa to settle the rest of the world. The timing of the expansion of L3 suggests a link to improved climatic conditions after ∼70 ka in Eastern and Central Africa rather than to symbolically mediated behavior, which evidently arose considerably earlier. The L3 mtDNA pool within Africa suggests a migration from Eastern Africa to Central Africa ∼60 to 35 ka and major migrations in the immediate postglacial again linked to climate. The largest population size increase seen in the L3 data is 3–4 ka in Central Africa, corresponding to Bantu expansions, leading diverse L3 lineages to spread into Eastern and Southern Africa in the last 3–2 ka.
Mod edit Cool it!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ newbies. I am trying to do a deep analysis of L3e* found in Iron Age (Bantu?) South East Africans as presented by the OP. Who were these people and are they West African Migrants. Ignore the pussy above who is making mis-guided comments. These punks who don't know what the ..they are doing. Swenet can you reign him in? lol!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Mensa Mind All things in their time Doesn't take an Einstein to see Now's time for a lil diplomacy.
How is it BS when studies BEFORE this one have said the same thing?? We already KNOW there were Khoisan like people in Southeast Africa. This is exactly what I mean with "nothing new."
PS: I told you to stop but you didn't listen. I see PR has taken care of it.
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Clyde "The Khoisan formerly occupied an area from South Africa to North. This would explain the Khoisan domesticated cattle being of North African rather than Bantu type."
Can you post a fillow up link(s) for the above statements?
And between xyyman and BBH, the interest/issue's in the same realm. Every modern African population is being pushed towards Eurasian, our first contemporary African could have indeed been west African aswell.
I'm interested in finding out about the coastal route along the Atlantic during the dryer phase's of Saharan history, as I pointed out in another thread we do have various clades (currently) within E1a in Europe, it could be a clue to help pin point the origin of E.
@tukuler For now, I think it's fine what Lazaridis did, Mota is the best population for that job; Identifying a potential intermediate between SSA and Eurasians. The position Mota holds on schlebusch's graphs are still at a "basal" position to all OOA populations.
Does anyone have any comments on the qpGraphs that I didn't post?
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Khoisan dominated much of Africa. We know that the Aurignacian and Solutrean cultures originated in Southern Africa , and was taken to Iberia by the Khoisan geginning around 44kya.
The Megalakes made communication between North Africa and South Africa.
Add to this Lake Makagadigadi, that formerly existed in the Kalahari Desert of Botswana, make it clear the Khoisan could have sailed from Southern Africa to North Africa.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
@ elMaestro & all
I'm unsuccessfully puzzling the qpAdm vs f4 discrepancy re Natufians. I mean either they got super-significant ancestral Mota-like SSA or it's negligible.
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: @Clyde "The Khoisan formerly occupied an area from South Africa to North. This would explain the Khoisan domesticated cattle being of North African rather than Bantu type."
Can you post a fillow up link(s) for the above statements?
And between xyyman and BBH, the interest/issue's in the same realm. Every modern African population is being pushed towards Eurasian, our first contemporary African could have indeed been west African aswell.
I'm interested in finding out about the coastal route along the Atlantic during the dryer phase's of Saharan history, as I pointed out in another thread we do have various clades (currently) within E1a in Europe, it could be a clue to help pin point the origin of E.
@tukuler For now, I think it's fine what Lazaridis did, Mota is the best population for that job; Identifying a potential intermediate between SSA and Eurasians. The position Mota holds on schlebusch's graphs are still at a "basal" position to all OOA populations.
Does anyone have any comments on the qpGraphs that I didn't post?
. The Nguni cattle is an ancient African breed of cattle. There are rock paintings from Libya and the Sahara of Nguni cattle that are 8000 years old. This highlights the antiquity of Khoisan cattle herding.
It is interesting to note that the Khoisan rode cattle into battle, like horses when they battled Portuguese explorers. In addition, the Bantu and Afrikaner adopted Khoisan cattle skills and husbandry techniques. See: http://zulucattle.com/history_of_nguni_cattle.htm
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: As I said. They will find “Eurasian” admixture in SSA BEFORE "Eurasians" ever existed.
".... however, we estimate that all modern-day Khoekhoe and San groups have been influenced by 9-22% genetic admixture from East African/Eurasian pastoralist groups arriving >1,000 years ago, including the Ju|'hoansi San, PREVIUOSLY thought to have very low levels of admixture."
Msybe I'm not reading this properly. Is he arguing that there was nobody living in "Eurasia" 1,000 years ago?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: Also the OP is worrying too much. Who cares about "Eurasian admixture" because this part to me is way more interesting. From reading the study they find significant East African ancestry in West Africans(we knew that and posters like Swenet told me that a long time ago plus L3 and Y-DNA E) but also this!
quote:We tried to add Yoruba as a simple split off from any internal node of the model or by adding internal nodes from which Yoruba would split off, but none of these models were consistent with the data with |Z|<3. Furthermore, models assuming Yoruba as a two-way admixture between any of the internal nodes failed. A model which did fit the data is where Yoruba are modeled as a two-way admixture of two additional nodes: one Basal African node above the split between ancient East Africans and ancient southern Africans and a second group, which is a sister group to the East African population that gave rise to the out-of-Africa groups. The drift between the Basal African node and the population that splits into Eastern and southern Africans is small compared to the rest of the graph, but it appears to provide a better fit to the data. We did not further investigate the population history of Yoruba as the focus of our analyses is southern Africa.
Basel African in West Africa? Am I stretching it?
^ahh so you peeped lol
Boy oh boy, ESers were ahead of their time weren't they... I'm trying to figure out why it's so quiet around here after 3 nukes dropped in the Anthro community, what is everyone speechless or do we need bloggers to make up our minds for us?
@Tukuler Above, *East Africa2* that's you're keystone, in the F4 charts you have above its Mota, x, vs 2 Eurasian HGs. mota better constitutes for Basal Eurasian (in any sense of the word not only the "hidden population") than any EHG. Mota is a sibling to a population from which near easterners diverged from TWICE in route OOA.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
I DEFINITELY peeped it which is why I was annoyed some posters were focusing on less revelent stuff that we already knew like minor Eurasian admixture in Khoisan people.
I was thinking about making a thread solely on this but you showed me that Xyyman already made one on this study.
Imagine... The so called "true negroid land" aka West Africa being the birthplace of freaking humanity!!! I would be rolling on the floor laughing.
Not only that but Tukuler's and Beyoku's recent discussions on Hap A also made this more realistic. We already know that West Africans carry the OLDEST clades of Hap A.
As for this place being quiet... We should promote this site as we have mods, rebuilding and registrations are completely open(no email verification from Sam).
Posts: 1891 | From: NY | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: As I said. They will find “Eurasian” admixture in SSA BEFORE "Eurasians" ever existed.
".... however, we estimate that all modern-day Khoekhoe and San groups have been influenced by 9-22% genetic admixture from East African/Eurasian pastoralist groups arriving >1,000 years ago, including the Ju|'hoansi San, PREVIUOSLY thought to have very low levels of admixture."
Msybe I'm not reading this properly. Is he arguing that there was nobody living in "Eurasia" 1,000 years ago?
I believe similar to Clyde he's insinuating that the date for the inferred Eurasian Admixture isn't corroborated by anthropology or is in agreement with known history. basically at the end of the day it's about interpenetration, Some feel like there are old African elements being called/labeled Eurasian. And these guys might be right, cuz everyone down to Mota is Eurasian in this piece.
...to quote the great tyrant, Eurasians, R. Us.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I see Schlebusch's EAfricaEurasian as a possible Laz Basal Eurasian because they're both post OOA. (Of course, Laz's BE is between OOA and LBK in Schlebusch.)
I think her model A&B Mota are in actuality ancestral proto Mota-like, since 45K is BE's last likely date of split.
Laz's qpAdm used Mota to calculate BE percentages where f4 failed to find significant Mota in an ancient.
Could continuity be static over a 41K span of time? It may be when considering how life is today in the Omo valley.
@ BBH ? Maybe a sticky called Come on in the water's fine
posted
"I see Schlebusch's EAfricaEurasian as a possible Laz Basal Eurasian because they're both post OOA. (Of course, Laz's BE is between OOA and LBK in Schlebusch.)" - Tukuler
I see what you're saying but Laz has OOA between the root African population (*Basal Human* in schunemann) and the Eurasian HG's. That whole non African clade contains Africans, he didn't Assign YRI a terminal in any of his qpGraphs... It would look much different if he did just look at BBH's quote above. We aren't sure if Basal Eurasian is completely post bottleneck, or just a population Affected by almost 50k years of drift and other OOA admixture...
Mota is Mota, the sibling to A population for which Eurasians diverged from twice lol, We won't find strong 4.5kyo mota-Eurasian connections via Fstats as Eurasian populations deviate from SSA via ~45k years of drift.
The qpgraph that I posted Above... Is exactly why YORUBANS are closer to neolithic populations than MOTA, for example. Partially explaining whats going on behind the Mota -> OOA disparity.
Tukuler, do you see that there might be a connection here to what we've been talking about in the North African thread. I've been looking at some of Clydes posts about a San-like pan-African presence and while it seems "out there," there might be truth to what he's saying. Globetrotter brings up these san-like, HG signals in west Africa, Maybe a related population, closer to OOA populations Occupied N/west Africa.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Glad to see somebody else picked up on Laz's 'non-African' in fact must include continental Africans.
I dunno but when I look at this I seem to see like 16-68% 'Mota' connection on Eurasians. What is it I'm missing?
Going off α, 'Mota' took the southern route to the Zagros where 68% BE went north to the Caucasus. Finally, the Levant's BE could be from either or both of the mountaineers.
The NA San idea is something I remember from Rogers, Briggs, and Coon. I don't own Boule and Vallois (sp) anymore but I think they leaned that way too
Look to the climate map over ages and compare people's industry and economy for suited regions.
Excellent observation on the Yoruba factor's significance.
Uh, dya think u cld hit the nextline key ever once a while?
posted
"Originally posted by Tukuler: I dunno but when I look at this I seem to see like 16-68% 'Mota' connection on Eurasians. What is it I'm missing?"
You aren't missing anything, for you and the possible lurkers...
...once again,
Mota, is a sibling to an African population(s), from which Eurasians aka OOA's...
...Diverged from,
twice. (or once but the second group separated very early)
the first time gave you the Eurasian HGs(Kostenki, Malta, Ogne, etc.)
The second time, Basal Eurasians.
Lazaridis used mota to account for the second group^ because Mota occupies the most basal position to Eurasians. AND lacks Eurasian Admixture.
HotuIII for example is 60% unrelated to Eurasian HGs (group1) so in relation to Mota, his alpha will be >.6 in qpAdm. This is not just distance measured by variants, it's comparative.
Originally posted by Tukuler: "Going off α, 'Mota' took the southern route to the Zagros where 68% BE went north to the Caucasus. Finally, the Levant's BE could be from either or both of the mountaineers."
Not 'Mota' ..."EastAfrican2" then the rest... probably happened how you suggested it. The southern route OOA, could possibly better exlplain the lack of Archaic introgression.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
"Going off α, 'Mota' " is only about Laz' research on his alpha (donor %age) by Mota contributor. I put Mota in single quotes because I doubt any of them were around between the initial successful OoA event and Ust Ishim, a requirement for his BE. They kinda like to BE what Sardines are to EEF.
By 'Mota' I meant 'ancestral proto Mota-like'.
Schlebusch's EAfrica2 is Laz' non_African.
Her OOA is his main_Eurasian.
For Basal Eurasian it gets tricky. Here there's no 1:1 correspondence. I project a node back connecting line86 (LBK) and dash31/38% (EAfricaEurasian). For me, that projected node best fits into Schlebusch qpgraph a bit after her OOA.
quote: Breton et al. analyze lactase persistence variants and genome-wide SNPs among southern African groups and show that Khoe pastoralists have partial East African ancestry. This finding suggests that an East African group migrated south, brought pastoralism to southern Africa, and admixed with local hunter-gatherers to form the ancestors of Khoe.
--Gwenna Breton et al.
Lactase Persistence Alleles Reveal Partial East African Ancestry of Southern African Khoe Pastoralists
Received: November 26, 2013; Received in revised form: December 20, 2013; Accepted: February 15, 2014; Published Online: April 03, 2014 Published: April 3, 2014 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.02.041
quote:Originally posted by BlessedbyHorus: From reading the study they find significant East African ancestry in West Africans(we knew that and posters like Swenet told me that a long time ago plus L3 and Y-DNA E) but also this!
Well, I'm glad someone remembers that this is nothing new and that this was pointed out when it wasn't popular to do so. Apparantly silence on some posters' part is misinterpreted as some sort of "admission of defeat".
And in Charlie Bass thread people were on my neck for pointing out substantial migrations into SSA that included North African ancestry. They were also up in arms when I explaned DNA Tribes' Amarna results as partly influenced by these migrations. I just hope lurkers are seeing the shenanigans and blatant hypocrisy.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic