quote:.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Does mainstream pop genetics recognize any haplogroups as native to North Africa?
quote:
Prehistory, which is commonly defined as the time when the first human settlers arrived, began in West Africa around 12,000 B.C.E. The first settlers are thought to be the Pygmies, who began settling in the region in the thirteenth century B.C.E
-- New World Encyclopedia
quote:I tell you it's so freaking weird. The commonly accepted date for OOA is between 50 000 to 70 000 years. Yet we have haplogroups with TMRCAs older than 50 000 years old being described unequivocally as originating from Eurasia.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Or west Africa for that matter.
I may have read every possible place of origin for every haplogroup and offhand I can't remember one example. The one that stands out is X. X's early branches are heavy in North Africa but the entry doesn't even have a possible place of origin section. It reminds me of what Beyoku said about North African ancestry.
quote:I take it you don't consider Niger and Mali as part of West Africa then.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
North Africa E-M81
West Africa
E-M2
E-M132
L2b, L1b,
R-V88
quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Or west Africa for that matter.
I may have read every possible place of origin for every haplogroup and offhand I can't remember one example. The one that stands out is X. X's early branches are heavy in North Africa but the entry doesn't even have a possible place of origin section. It reminds me of what Beyoku said about North African ancestry.
quote:I consider Niger and Mali as part of West Africa.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
[QB]quote:I take it you don't consider Niger and Mali as part of West Africa then.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[qb] North Africa E-M81
West Africa
E-M2
E-M132
L2b, L1b,
R-V88
quote:^^ he is talking about origin, not a list of countries with people carrying a haplgroup
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
[QB] Or west Africa for that matter.
I may have read every possible place of origin for every haplogroup and offhand I can't remember one example. The one that stands out is X. X's early branches are heavy in North Africa but the entry doesn't even have a possible place of origin section. It reminds me of what Beyoku said about North African ancestry.
quote:Where do those commonly accepted dates come from in the first place, though? Are they actually independent of those haplogroup TMRCAs? I'll be surprised if those estimates are not just approximations of the same TMRCAs.
Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I tell you it's so freaking weird. The commonly accepted date for OOA is between 50 000 to 70 000 years. Yet we have haplogroups with TMRCAs older than 50 000 years old being described unequivocally as originating from Eurasia.
quote:https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12862-018-1211-4
Background
The main unequivocal conclusion after three decades of phylogeographic mtDNA studies is the African origin of all extant modern humans. In addition, a southern coastal route has been argued for to explain the Eurasian colonization of these African pioneers. Based on the age of macrohaplogroup L3, from which all maternal Eurasian and the majority of African lineages originated, the out-of-Africa event has been dated around 60-70 kya. On the opposite side, we have proposed a northern route through Central Asia across the Levant for that expansion and, consistent with the fossil record, we have dated it around 125 kya. To help bridge differences between the molecular and fossil record ages, in this article we assess the possibility that mtDNA macrohaplogroup L3 matured in Eurasia and returned to Africa as basal L3 lineages around 70 kya.
Results
The coalescence ages of all Eurasian (M,N) and African (L3 ) lineages, both around 71 kya, are not significantly different. The oldest M and N Eurasian clades are found in southeastern Asia instead near of Africa as expected by the southern route hypothesis. The split of the Y-chromosome composite DE haplogroup is very similar to the age of mtDNA L3. An Eurasian origin and back migration to Africa has been proposed for the African Y-chromosome haplogroup E. Inside Africa, frequency distributions of maternal L3 and paternal E lineages are positively correlated. This correlation is not fully explained by geographic or ethnic affinities. This correlation rather seems to be the result of a joint and global replacement of the old autochthonous male and female African lineages by the new Eurasian incomers.
quote:I agree, the lower time frame should be entry of early OOA people and the upper time frame the origin of their descendants in Eurasia proper.
Originally posted by capra:
quote:Where do those commonly accepted dates come from in the first place, though? Are they actually independent of those haplogroup TMRCAs? I'll be surprised if those estimates are not just approximations of the same TMRCAs.
Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I tell you it's so freaking weird. The commonly accepted date for OOA is between 50 000 to 70 000 years. Yet we have haplogroups with TMRCAs older than 50 000 years old being described unequivocally as originating from Eurasia.
In that case the approximate number (50 000 years) *comes from* the specific numbers (really they should be quite large intervals). The lower bound of those estimates *is* the TMRCA of the Eurasian haplogroups (M, N and C, D, F). The upper bound is the TMRCA of their parent haplogroups (L3 and CDEF), the logic being that the exit from Africa ought to have occurred between those two points. (That ain't necessarily so, but it is a reasonable hypothesis.)
quote:Getting back to my point all the ancestral clades of Indigenous Americans originated in Asia yet they are native to America. Could not the same situation apply to North Africans?
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Technically speaking he was talking about haplogroups being "native" to an area. Just because something is native or endemic to an area does not necessarily mean they originated there to begin with.
So Fourty2, are you questioning which haplogroups originate from an area??
quote:Besides W, Y, O and a good portion of U I'm not seeing this.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
To answer the thread topic/question Basal N and possibly M might just be Saharan/North African. aDNA of a couple of lybians from 7kya can attest to that, by having a novel early offshoot of N.
However I wouldn’t get my hopes up (too much) about modern N distribution being indigenous as clearly most moder N carriers have downstream variations to previously discovered Eurasian lineages.
quote:They need a sweet spot for the Neanderthal admixture. OOA is pushed to be older so its not just African homosapiens mixing shared Neanderthal ancestry in Africa. But if its too old it predates the homosapien lineages that left.
Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I tell you it's so freaking weird. The commonly accepted date for OOA is between 50 000 to 70 000 years. Yet we have haplogroups with TMRCAs older than 50 000 years old being described unequivocally as originating from Eurasia.
quote:Is E-M81 North African, or Northwest African?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
North Africa E-M81
West Africa
E-M2
E-M132
L2b, L1b,
R-V88
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Is E-M81 North African, or Northwest African?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
North Africa E-M81
West Africa
E-M2
E-M132
L2b, L1b,
R-V88
quote:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-16271-y
| Published: 21 November 2017
Whole Y-chromosome sequences reveal an extremely recent origin of the most common North African paternal lineage E-M183 (M81)
Neus Solé-Morata, Carla García-Fernández, Vadim Urasin, Asmahan Bekada, Karima Fadhlaoui-Zid, Pierre Zalloua, David Comas & Francesc Calafell
Scientific Reportsvolume 7, Article number: 15941 (2017)
Studies based on the Y chromosome have highlighted E-M78 and E-M81 as the most frequent paternal lineages in North Africa, although they showed different distribution patterns. Whereas the frequency of E-M78 declines towards Northwest Africa, E-M81 has been found at high frequencies (71%) in Northwestern Africa and its frequency decreases towards the East; it is found sporadically in S Europe and E Africa, and it is practically absent elsewhere. These evidences suggest that E-M81 must be considered to explore the historical and demographical processes that gave rise to current North African populations. However, little is known about the phylogeographic structure of this haplogroup and its origin and emergence are still very controversial. While some studies pointed to a Palaeolithic origin21, other authors claimed that E-M81 may have a Neolithic origin22. The most likely scenario, as suggested by Fadhlaoui-Zid et al.17, is that the origin of E-M81 is more recent than previously reported.
In the present project, we analyse whole Y chromosome sequences from 32 North African individuals selected by carrying the derived allele at M183. M183 was first described by Karafet et al.5, and appears to be an extremely dominant subclade within E-M81, to the point that E-M81*(xM183) individuals are very rare. Since we found no samples derived for E-M81 and ancestral for E-M183, we selected our individuals on the basis of E-M183....
Finally, surprisingly, Iberian samples showed the highest proportion of E-M183*, with a frequency over E-M183 chromosomes of 20%, whereas in North Africa the frequencies of M183* range from 0 to 7%. However, note that if these frequencies were given over all individuals (and not only over those carrying E-M183), then E-M183* would represent just 0.5% of all Iberian Y chromosomes, but it reaches 7.7% in Libyans....
Moreover, the presence of autochthonous North African E-M81 lineages in the indigenous population of the Canary Islands, strongly points to North Africa as the most probable origin of the Guanche ancestors29. This, together with the fact that the oldest indigenous inviduals have been dated 2210 ± 60 ya, supports a local origin of E-M183 in NW Africa. Within this scenario, it is also worth to mention that the paternal lineage of an early Neolithic Moroccan individual appeared to be distantly related to the typically North African E-M81 haplogroup30, suggesting again a NW African origin of E-M183. A local origin of E-M183 in NW Africa > 2200 ya is supported by our TMRCA estimates, which can be taken as 2,000–3,000, depending on the data, methods, and mutation rates used.
The TMRCA estimates of a certain haplogroup and its subbranches provide some constraints on the times of their origin and spread. Although our time estimates for E-M78 are slightly different depending on the mutation rate used, their confidence intervals overlap and the dates obtained are in agreement with those obtained by Trombetta et al.13 Regarding E-M183, as mentioned above, we cannot discard an expansion from the Near East and, if so, according to our time estimates, it could have been brought by the Islamic expansion on the 7th century, but definitely not with the Neolithic expansion, which appeared in NW Africa ~7400 BP and may have featured a strong Epipaleolithic persistence31. Moreover, such a recent appearance of E-M183 in NW Africa would fit with the patterns observed in the rest of the genome, where an extensive, male-biased Near Eastern admixture event is registered ~1300 ya, coincidental with the Arab expansion20. An alternative hypothesis would involve that E-M183 was originated somewhere in Northwest Africa and then spread through all the region. Our time estimates for the origin of this haplogroup overlap with the end of the third Punic War (146 BCE), when Carthage (in current Tunisia) was defeated and destroyed, which marked the beginning of Roman hegemony of the Mediterranean Sea. About 2,000 ya North Africa was one of the wealthiest Roman provinces and E-M183 may have experienced the resulting population growth.
quote:I forgot about mtdna J. It seems to traject towards Saudi Arabia. There isn’t much research on it.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
I don’t get why you’re collecting haplogroups for Africa. You seem to forget that for the most part they’re defined as they’re discovered. Basal N is no more significant than a L6* for example. It’s concerning that you find N to be less likely african than those haplogroups you mentioned despite it having one of the absolute strongest arguement for an origin in a nearby region unconfirmed.
A’s distribution (as a single late offshoot of N) says nothing about the origin of N. Its the same for all other arbitrary Letter-number combination defining a haplogroup. Basal lineages/early offshoots and diversity are good indicators of an origin nearby. The ancient samples from lybia have a novel mutation at the root of N.
code:I needed source material on who ancient Nile folk were, so I studied African culture and pop genetics.2018 GLOBAL FILM FESTIVAL AWARDS: Honorable Mention
Nyobaywa showcased at filmandscriptshowcase.com
Nyobaywa: An Official Selection at Film Invasion Los Angeles.
Nyobaywa 2018 OFFICIAL SELECTION First10PagesScriptContest
Rebel Seed Studio
Nyobaywa Simi-Finalist at Colorado International Activism Film Festival
Nyobaywa. Bronze award at Royal Wolf Film Awards
Nyobaywa keeps rolling. Honorable mention at the 2018 Urban Media Film Festival
Nyobaywa 2018 winner for Los Angeles Screenplay contest
quote:I thought the commonly accepted dates for OOA were based on archaeoology.
Originally posted by capra:
quote:Where do those commonly accepted dates come from in the first place, though? Are they actually independent of those haplogroup TMRCAs? I'll be surprised if those estimates are not just approximations of the same TMRCAs.
Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I tell you it's so freaking weird. The commonly accepted date for OOA is between 50 000 to 70 000 years. Yet we have haplogroups with TMRCAs older than 50 000 years old being described unequivocally as originating from Eurasia.
In that case the approximate number (50 000 years) *comes from* the specific numbers (really they should be quite large intervals). The lower bound of those estimates *is* the TMRCA of the Eurasian haplogroups (M, N and C, D, F). The upper bound is the TMRCA of their parent haplogroups (L3 and CDEF), the logic being that the exit from Africa ought to have occurred between those two points. (That ain't necessarily so, but it is a reasonable hypothesis.)
quote:https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/earliest-humans-remains-outside-africa-just-discovered-israel-180967952/
Originally posted by Mansamusa:
The commonly accepted date for OOA is between 50 000 to 70 000 years.
quote:I would be careful with Xyyman’s theories. Even if/when he has the right idea, most his supporting evidence is bonkers. He has little fundamental understanding of what he discusses. My issue is that if we want to tackle a problem like classical eurocentricity we can’t do it by creating theories that are just as bad or if not worse than mainstream models.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
So why am I collecting haplogroups for Africa?
FoA
I'm no more claiming African haplogroups than I am verifying the ones that did not originate in or near Africa.
It all started when I was researching ancient history as source material for a pen and paper game. I saw a culture that was untouched by Hollywood with stories never told. Since nobody tells these stories I decided to tell it.
https://filmfreeway.com/42.tribes.338
code:I needed source material on who ancient Nile folk were, so I studied African culture and pop genetics.2018 GLOBAL FILM FESTIVAL AWARDS: Honorable Mention
Nyobaywa showcased at filmandscriptshowcase.com
Nyobaywa: An Official Selection at Film Invasion Los Angeles.
Nyobaywa 2018 OFFICIAL SELECTION First10PagesScriptContest
Rebel Seed Studio
Nyobaywa Simi-Finalist at Colorado International Activism Film Festival
Nyobaywa. Bronze award at Royal Wolf Film Awards
Nyobaywa keeps rolling. Honorable mention at the 2018 Urban Media Film Festival
Nyobaywa 2018 winner for Los Angeles Screenplay contest
I’m a creature of collaborating evidence. So far Xyyman’s recent OoA model syncs with an objective model of Eurasian phylogeny, technology and a consideration for African diversity.
The mainstream model is contrived and shoehorned by comparison. Its so contrived I had a hard time naming one haplogroup that is reported to have originated in North Africa.
According to Wikipedia, North Africa is a big dynastic race back migration. Dna Tribes demonstrated that this was not the case in 2013 and 2014 but they were scrubbed from Wikipedia after the Armana and Ramses iii test. Taforalt was additional evidence.
quote:Maybe? If you can find a source of independent dates from archaeology it'd be useful to cross check with genetic estimates.
Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I thought the commonly accepted dates for OOA were based on archaeoology.
quote:Its more nuanced than collecting haplogroups. I’m factoring how they behave, how they age and the environment that they are in. Id call it a holistic approach which in turn is more scientific. My main weakness is in how they pair/group.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
I would be careful with Xyyman’s theories. Even if/when he has the right idea, most his supporting evidence is bonkers. He has little fundamental understanding of what he discusses. My issue is that if we want to tackle a problem like classical eurocentricity we can’t do it by creating theories that are just as bad or if not worse than mainstream models.
With North Africa you have to look at climate records and habitable land. Despite the majority being wrong about North Africans being Eurasian transplants, assigning origins of anything there will be difficult. You also gotta consider the fact that both Afrocentric and Eurocentrics can’t seem to fathom something as simple as SSA not forming a clean gradient to Eurasian populations. How will most people pick up on evidence that haplogroups we thought were SSA and autosomes we thought were Eurasian were initially North African.
The issue is multilayered, however despite the mainstream bias clues pointing toward the truth will always be hidden in the data. But it starts with understanding what you’re looking at. Collecting haplogroups is a waste of time.
quote:The weakness is that Reich and the Max Plank Institute no longer adhere to archaeogenetics to support their research. Their work can not be supported by archaeology or linguistics so they just throw out dates for haplogroups and hope no one checks the archaeological history of the cultures/populations they associate with the ancient Eurasians/Pseudo Indo-Europeans.
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:Its more nuanced than collecting haplogroups. I’m factoring how they behave, how they age and the environment that they are in. Id call it a holistic approach which in turn is more scientific. My main weakness is in how they pair/group.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
I would be careful with Xyyman’s theories. Even if/when he has the right idea, most his supporting evidence is bonkers. He has little fundamental understanding of what he discusses. My issue is that if we want to tackle a problem like classical eurocentricity we can’t do it by creating theories that are just as bad or if not worse than mainstream models.
With North Africa you have to look at climate records and habitable land. Despite the majority being wrong about North Africans being Eurasian transplants, assigning origins of anything there will be difficult. You also gotta consider the fact that both Afrocentric and Eurocentrics can’t seem to fathom something as simple as SSA not forming a clean gradient to Eurasian populations. How will most people pick up on evidence that haplogroups we thought were SSA and autosomes we thought were Eurasian were initially North African.
The issue is multilayered, however despite the mainstream bias clues pointing toward the truth will always be hidden in the data. But it starts with understanding what you’re looking at. Collecting haplogroups is a waste of time.
quote:The title is incoherent with what the history of Hg E-M81 shows. E-M78 is more suited and coherent.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Studies based on the Y chromosome have highlighted E-M78 and E-M81 as the most frequent paternal lineages in North Africa, although they showed different distribution patterns. Whereas the frequency of E-M78 declines towards Northwest Africa, E-M81 has been found at high frequencies (71%) in Northwestern Africa and its frequency decreases towards the East; it is found sporadically in S Europe and E Africa, and it is practically absent elsewhere. These evidences suggest that E-M81 must be considered to explore the historical and demographical processes that gave rise to current North African populations.