quote:

---

Abstract
How food production first entered eastern Africa ~5000 years ago and the extent to which people moved with livestock is unclear. We present genome-wide data from 41 individuals associated with Later Stone Age, Pastoral Neolithic (PN), and Iron Age contexts in what are now Kenya and Tanzania to examine the genetic impacts of the spreads of herding and farming. Our results support a multi-phase model in which admixture between northeastern African-related peoples and eastern Africanforagers formed multiple pastoralist groups, including a genetically homogeneous PN cluster. Additional admixture with northeastern and western African-related groups occurred by the Iron Age. These findings support several movements of food producers, while rejecting models of minimal admixture with foragers and of genetic differentiation between makers of distinct PN artifacts

---

40+ ancient sequences from great lakes east Africans....
 

---

Posted by Askia_The_Great (Member # 22000) on :
 
Will read. This looks GOOD.
 

---

Posted by the questioner (Member # 22195) on :
 

Mary E.Prendergast


Mark Lipson


Elizabeth A. Sawchuk


Iñigo Olalde


Nadin Rohland


Kendra Sirak

Nicole Adamsk

Rebecca Bernardos

etc etc
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 
^Pretty much why 40+ ancient African samples aren't more insightful than my experimental runs with a handful of populations. But there's still a lot that can be talked about. IDK why it's crickets everywhere.... I'm trying to be diplomatic and non-controversial or whatever but... Is everyone gonna sit back and act like this study isn't highlighting some BLATANT contradictions in how folks go about viewing African substructure.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
^ Go ahead and bring out the guns. LOL
 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 
Wow!So many African samples taken from African museums and not a single African author! African institutions are dumb for allowing Europeans access to their precious ancient dna material, while having nothing to show for it in terms of their own scholars benefiting.

Well, at least they are sounding less dumb about assuming that related Eurasian ancestry in Africa automatically means direct ancestry or introduction from Eurasia:

quote:

---

Guided by the PCA, we began by using three groups of individuals—present-day Dinka (28), ancient Chalcolithic-period individuals from Israel (25), and the ~4500 BP forager from Mota, southern Ethiopia (24)—to represent distinct components of ancestry plausibly found in ancient and present-day eastern Africans, with present-day western Africans
among the outgroups (21).

We note that the use of these proxy
groups in qpAdm modeling does not imply an assumption that they are directly ancestral to the true sources contributing to the individuals we analyzed. Instead, for a model to be properly formulated, the reference groups only need to be more closely related to the true sources than are the outgroups, without substantially different admixture (35). Thus, for example, ancestry related to the Chalcolithic Israel reference individuals could plausibly have originated anywhere in northeastern Africa or the Levant, and could have been present in northeastern Africa for many thousands of years. We use the Chalcolithic individuals in this study because we lack genetic data from a phylogenetically adjacent reference group from Egypt, Sudan/South Sudan, or the Horn Thus,
for example, ancestry related to the Chalcolithic Israel reference individuals could plausibly have originated anywhere in
northeastern Africa or the Levant, and could have been present in northeastern Africa for many thousands of years. We use the Chalcolithic individuals in this study because we lack genetic data from a phylogenetically adjacent reference group from Egypt, Sudan/South Sudan, or the Horn.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Wow!So many African samples taken from African museums and not a single African author!

---

You act like that is something unusual.


But note, while not authors, several Africans on the research team and also Henry Louis Gates




__________________PLUS several more if you look at the complete list >

.




--------------------------------------------
why I'm needed
 

---

Posted by the questioner (Member # 22195) on :
 

Brendan J. Culleton


Laurie Eccles


Thomas K. Harper


Ann Marie Lawson
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
^ pointless trolling ruining thread
 

---

Posted by the questioner (Member # 22195) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Wow!So many African samples taken from African museums and not a single African author!

---

incorrect



waste of time having to correct the silly photo trolling, somebody doesn't know to hit expand on authors

---

quote:

---

† These authors contributed equally to this work.

---

quote:

---

• Mary E. Prendergast 1,2* †
• Mark Lipson 2* †
• Elizabeth A. Sawchuk 3* †

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Instead of posting photos in this and another thread with no commentary somebody could just have said something like
"I'm suspicious of all these articles on Africa being written by Europeans" and taken responsibility for a political position. Instead distracting picture spam informing us on nothing that we didn't already know, useless

---

quote:

---

Lincoln Theodore Monroe Andrew Perry, better known by the stage name Stepin Fetchit, was an American vaudevillian, comedian and film actor of Jamaican descent, considered to be the first black actor to have a successful film career.


American critic Mel Watkins argued that the character of Stepin Fetchit was not truly lazy or simple-minded, but instead a prankster who deliberately tricked his white employers so that they would do the work instead of him. This technique, which developed during American slavery, was referred to as "putting on old massa," and it was a kind of con art with which black audiences of the time would have been familiar.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Is everyone gonna sit back and act like this study isn't highlighting some BLATANT contradictions in how folks go about viewing African substructure.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
African governments should just put a moratarium on sharing [all] DNA unless they come up with a system that ensures ... African-centered archaeologists and DNA experts [will] be lead authors in these surveys, or do small-scale stuff one step at a time that they are capable of handling and build their capacity from that.

---

.

Africans aren't inferior. We're more than capable.
Remember W Afrs exceed AngloSaxons in academics.

Maybe this journal will eventually solicit
and publish population genomic research
related to origins and flow. For the nonce
continental Africans have other more
immediate concerns (like health).



https://www.journals.elsevier.com/scientific-african

https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/scientific-african/vol/1/suppl/C

https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/scientific-african/vol/2/suppl/C

https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/scientific-african/vol/3/suppl/C


An article in Vol 3 of EgyptSearch interest:


Research article Open access

Facial types and morphology:
A study among Sisaala and Dagaaba adult population in the Upper West Region, Ghana
Raymond Saa-Eru Maalman,
Chrissie Stansie Abaidoo,
Nancy Darkoa Darko,
Joshua Tetteh


Article e00071
Download PDF

quote:

---

Abstract

Craniofacial measurements can be considered to be one of the important tools for determination of the inter-racial and intra-racial morphological characteristics of the head and face.

As such, facial indices serve as prominent identification tools in combination with fingerprint patterns for biometric and forensic purposes in the developed world. However in Ghana, although emphasis is placed on the face in the photographic recognition systems used in the issuance of passports, very little information is available on facial phenotypes and its prevalence with respect to ethnicity and sex. Therefore, the aim of this study was to classify the facial types among the Dagaabas and Sisaalas in the Upper West Region of Ghana.

In the study, a total of 387 healthy individuals (202 females and 185 males), between 18 and 60 years of age were recruited. The study main finding was that, the males had higher facial height and breadth than females.

Facial indices were recorded as 98% and 99% for female and male Dagaabas respectively.
The Sisaala male and female participants’ facial indices recorded 102% and 104% respectively.
Thus as high as 83% and 72% of the Sisaalas and Dagaabas respectively had hyperleptoprosopic facial type.

© 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of African Institute of Mathematical Sciences
/ Next Einstein Initiative.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
...
Well, at least they are sounding less dumb about assuming that related Eurasian ancestry in Africa automatically means direct ancestry or introduction from Eurasia:

quote:

---

Guided by the PCA, we began by using three groups of individuals—present-day Dinka (28), ancient Chalcolithic-period individuals from Israel (25), and the ~4500 BP forager from Mota, southern Ethiopia (24)—to represent distinct components of ancestry plausibly found in ancient and present-day eastern Africans, with present-day western Africans
among the outgroups (21).
...

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
African governments should just put a moratarium on sharing [all] DNA unless they come up with a system that ensures ... African-centered archaeologists and DNA experts [will] be lead authors in these surveys, or do small-scale stuff one step at a time that they are capable of handling and build their capacity from that.

---

.

Africans aren't inferior. We're more than capable.
Remember W Afrs exceed AngloSaxons in academics.

Maybe this journal will eventually solicit
and publish population genomic research
related to origins and flow. For the nonce
continental Africans have other more
immediate concerns (like health).



https://www.journals.elsevier.com/scientific-african

https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/scientific-african/vol/1/suppl/C

https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/scientific-african/vol/2/suppl/C

https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/scientific-african/vol/3/suppl/C


An article in Vol 3 of EgyptSearch interest:


Research article Open access

Facial types and morphology:
A study among Sisaala and Dagaaba adult population in the Upper West Region, Ghana
Raymond Saa-Eru Maalman,
Chrissie Stansie Abaidoo,
Nancy Darkoa Darko,
Joshua Tetteh


Article e00071
Download PDF

quote:

---

Abstract

Craniofacial measurements can be considered to be one of the important tools for determination of the inter-racial and intra-racial morphological characteristics of the head and face.

As such, facial indices serve as prominent identification tools in combination with fingerprint patterns for biometric and forensic purposes in the developed world. However in Ghana, although emphasis is placed on the face in the photographic recognition systems used in the issuance of passports, very little information is available on facial phenotypes and its prevalence with respect to ethnicity and sex. Therefore, the aim of this study was to classify the facial types among the Dagaabas and Sisaalas in the Upper West Region of Ghana.

In the study, a total of 387 healthy individuals (202 females and 185 males), between 18 and 60 years of age were recruited. The study main finding was that, the males had higher facial height and breadth than females.

Facial indices were recorded as 98% and 99% for female and male Dagaabas respectively.
The Sisaala male and female participants’ facial indices recorded 102% and 104% respectively.
Thus as high as 83% and 72% of the Sisaalas and Dagaabas respectively had hyperleptoprosopic facial type.

© 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of African Institute of Mathematical Sciences
/ Next Einstein Initiative.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Is everyone gonna sit back and act like this study isn't highlighting some BLATANT contradictions in how folks go about viewing African substructure.

---

Like what?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Is everyone gonna sit back and act like this study isn't highlighting some BLATANT contradictions in how folks go about viewing African substructure.

---

Like what?

---

tbh, when I posted that I had no idea how much these samples actually exposed... I just ran a few stats and ADMXTURE and I don't really know how to comprehend what I'm seeing. I have to do some more runs and revisions before I post these up... but let's just say that there is a good possibility that the early LSA and "pastoral Neolithic" populations in this study can represent a form of exclusive African possibly Afroasiatic ancestry that's been sitting in east Africa.

In comparison, horners (Oromo, Afar, etc.) Has it at lower levels than the ancient pastoralists but with additional ancestry that peaks in the Dinka and AEgyptian-like ancestry that peaks in the roman individual found in Europe (possibly a migrant from Egypt). The latter ancestry is then found at the highest levels in Copts and Nubians.

Now to put in perspective what I mean by exclusively African; The Non-African population with the highest amount of this PN ancestry are Natufians w/ only ~10% Then PPNB individuals with even less.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
I'm having trouble understanding this. What is an example of a blatant contradiction the article is highlighting?
Do you have a quote of that? I assume you mean the article is showing how previous ideas were contradictory ideas
- rather than you saying the writers of the article are being contradictory themselves [/QB]

---

Have you peeped the data? Don't you see the dates for admixture? did you not read the passage on LP? Didn't you peep the earliest PN samples were E-M75 and more shifted to Eurasians?

Did you not see all modern Cushitic speakers are more shifted to HG and or Darfurians than these early pastoralists

Who was jacking the Idea that Cushitic ancestry was absorbed and locally in the GL/Rift valley for at least 5,000 years? Eurasian ancestry was supposed to be 3500 years old administered through the horn.
 

---

Posted by Fourty2Tribes (Member # 21799) on :
 
^^Me and
"Western-Eurasian-related ancestry is pervasive in eastern Africa today (Pagani et al., 2012, Tishkoff et al., 2009), and the timing of this admixture has been estimated to be ∼3,000 BP on average (Pickrell et al., 2014). We found that the ∼3,100 BP individual (Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP), associated with a Savanna Pastoral Neolithic archeological tradition, could be modeled as having 38% ± 1% of her ancestry related to the nearly 10,000-year-old pre-pottery farmers of the Levant (Lazaridis et al., 2016), and we can exclude source populations related to early farmer populations in Iran and Anatolia. These results could be explained by migration into Africa from descendants of pre-pottery Levantine farmers or alternatively by a scenario in which both pre-pottery Levantine farmers and Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP descend from a common ancestral population that lived thousands of years earlier in Africa or the Near East." PR: Basal Eurasian? "While these findings show that a Levant-Neolithic-related population made a critical contribution to the ancestry of present-day eastern Africans (Lazaridis et al., 2016), present-day Cushitic speakers such as the Somali cannot be fit simply as having Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP ancestry. The best fitting model for the Somali includes Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP ancestry, Dinka-related ancestry, and 16% ± 3% Iranian-Neolithic-related ancestry (p = 0.015). This suggests that ancestry related to the Iranian Neolithic appeared in eastern Africa after earlier gene flow related to Levant Neolithic populations, a scenario that is made more plausible by the genetic evidence of admixture of Iranian-Neolithic-related ancestry throughout the Levant by the time of the Bronze Age (Lazaridis et al., 2016) and in ancient Egypt by the Iron Age (Schuenemann et al., 2017)."


People make a big deal about the Lemnba having southern Euro and Jewish haplogroups but thats meh. What stands out to me is how basal those haplogroups are.
 

---

Posted by Fourty2Tribes (Member # 21799) on :
 


MOD EDIT: large img size reduced & original converted to link format.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D8KBW6SV4AU9Pq4.jpg

[ 03. June 2019, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: Elmaestro ]
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 
^ Lol You guys were at least 2 thousand years short. If you don’t get it, the point is that there probably was Eurasian ancestry post dating these samples. But autosomally we might be seeing ancestry falsely attributed to non Africans for the first time.

What were the coalesced dates for the most frequent non african haplogroup in the lemba?
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
^ Lol You guys were at least 2 thousand years short. If you don’t get it, the point is that there probably was Eurasian ancestry post dating these samples. But autosomally we might be seeing ancestry falsely attributed to non Africans for the first time.

What were the coalesced dates for the most frequent non african haplogroup in the lemba?

---

quote:

---

Genetically,
the two individuals are most similar to those from PN sites,
but they fall outside the range of sampled PN (and presentday) variation and cannot be modeled as directly related to PN. They also have an older date of admixture, and the male individual (I12533) carries a Y chromosome haplogroup (E2; E-M75) not found in any of our sampled PN individuals

---

Outside of ancient and modern variation yet they do very little to investigate. Some of the earliest admixture dates are probably going to be double. Think of how OLD Cushitic is as a language. Matter of fact, Euroclows that claim "Omotic is really Cushitic" shoot themselves in the foot as that would STILL make it one of the oldest forms of Cushitic languages....and if these folk have northerner ancestry....it pushes such migration WAY back. They didn't even use admixture? No treemix? No qpGraph? We get 10 pages from 41 Ancient skeletons? Naw, they dont really want to find out.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
^ Lol You guys were at least 2 thousand years short. If you don’t get it, the point is that there probably was Eurasian ancestry post dating these samples. But autosomally we might be seeing ancestry falsely attributed to non Africans for the first time.

What were the coalesced dates for the most frequent non african haplogroup in the lemba?

---

quote:

---

Ancient DNA reveals a multistep spread of the first herders into sub-Saharan Africa

______________

I12533 Prettejohn's Gully

mtDNA Haplogroup K1a /Y E2(xE2b); E-M75

Uncalibrated years before present (BP)
3670 ± 20

Calibrated years be-fore present (cal BP),
4080-3890
___________________________________

I13980 Gishimangeda Cave

mtDNA Haplogroup HV1b1/ YDNA E1b1b1a1b2; E-V22


Uncalibrated years before present (BP)
2530 ± 20

Calibrated years before present (cal BP),2740-2490

__________________________________

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

Who was jacking the Idea that Cushitic ancestry was absorbed and locally in the GL/Rift valley for at least 5,000 years? Eurasian ancestry was supposed to be 3500 years old administered through the horn.

---

quote:

---

for a model to be properly formulated, the reference groups only need to be more closely related to the true sources than are the out-groups, without substantially different admixture (35). Thus, for example, ancestry related to the Chalcolithic Israel refer-ence individuals could plausibly have originated anywhere in northeastern Africa or the Levant, and could have been pre-sent in northeastern Africa for many thousands of years. We use the Chalcolithic individuals in this study because we lackgenetic data from a phylogenetically adjacent reference group from Egypt, Sudan/South Sudan, or the Horn.....


Our results support a multi-phase model in which admixture between northeastern African-related peoples and eastern Africanforagers formed multiple pastoralist groups, including a genetically homogeneous PN cluster. Additional admixture with northeastern and western African-related groups occurred by the Iron Age.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
^ Lol You guys were at least 2 thousand years short. If you don’t get it, the point is that there probably was Eurasian ancestry post dating these samples. But autosomally we might be seeing ancestry falsely attributed to non Africans for the first time.

What were the coalesced dates for the most frequent non african haplogroup in the lemba?

---

quote:

---

The Lemba T carriers belonged exclusively to T1b, which is rare and was not sampled in indigenous Jews of the Near East or North Africa. T1b has been observed at low frequencies in Ashkenazi Jews as well as in a few Levantine populations.[44]

---

T1b


Don't know when the coalescence age was. Good question.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
^ Lol You guys were at least 2 thousand years short. If you don’t get it, the point is that there probably was Eurasian ancestry post dating these samples. But autosomally we might be seeing ancestry falsely attributed to non Africans for the first time.

What were the coalesced dates for the most frequent non african haplogroup in the lemba?

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemba_people

quote:

---

The Lemba T carriers belonged exclusively to T1b, which is rare and was not sampled in indigenous Jews of the Near East or North Africa. T1b has been observed at low frequencies in Ashkenazi Jews as well as in a few Levantine populations.[44]

---

T1b


Don't know when the coalescence age was. Good question.

---

quote:

---

[44]F.L. Mendez et al., "Increased Resolution of Y Chromosome Haplogroup T Defines Relationships among Populations of the Near East, Europe, and Africa", BioOne Human Biology 83(1):39–53, (2011)

However, Jewish and Lemba T chromosomes tend to fall into different subclades (T1a and T1b, respectively),

---

quote:

---

and STR data show that the closest relationship of Lemba T chromosomes is with a Turk (Figure 2). Of course, it is possible that Y chromosomal lineages that became prevalent in Lemba went extinct in current Jewish populations, or are at low frequency and have not been sampled.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

---

quote:

---

This article isn't focused on Eurasian ancestry and what they do say with uncertainy >

---

quote:

---

for a model to be properly formulated, the reference groups only need to be more closely related to the true sources than are the out-groups, without substantially different admixture (35). Thus, for example, ancestry related to the Chalcolithic Israel refer-ence individuals could plausibly have originated anywhere in northeastern Africa or the Levant, and could have been pre-sent in northeastern Africa for many thousands of years. We use the Chalcolithic individuals in this study because we lackgenetic data from a phylogenetically adjacent reference group from Egypt, Sudan/South Sudan, or the Horn.....


Our results support a multi-phase model in which admixture between northeastern African-related peoples and eastern Africanforagers formed multiple pastoralist groups, including a genetically homogeneous PN cluster. Additional admixture with northeastern and western African-related groups occurred by the Iron Age.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
[QUOTE]This article isn't focused on Eurasian ancestry and what they do say with uncertainty >

---

Why the fuck isn't it,

---

quote:

---

How food production first entered eastern Africa ~5000 years ago and the extent to which people moved with livestock is unclear. We present genome-wide data from 41 individuals associated with Later Stone Age, Pastoral Neolithic (PN), and Iron Age contexts in what are now Kenya and Tanzania to examine the genetic impacts of the spreads of herding and farming. Our results support a multi-phase model in which admixture between northeastern African-related peoples and eastern African foragers formed multiple pastoralist groups, including a genetically homogeneous PN cluster. Additional admixture with northeastern and western African-related groups occurred by the Iron Age. These findings support several movements of food producers, while rejecting models of minimal admixture with foragers and of genetic differentiation between makers of distinct PN artifacts.

---

quote:

---

Conclusions

Genome-wide data from 41 ancient eastern Africans show that archaeological complexity during the spreads of herding and farming is also reflected in genetic patterns, which indi-cate multiple movements of and gene flow among ancestrally distinct groups of people. We identifythree components of ancestry harbored by ancient pastoralists and propose a se-quence of admixture events to explain our observations; fu-ture archaeological and ancient DNA research in the Turkana Basin, the Horn of Africa, and other parts of northeastern Af-rica will be necessary to confirm the earliest stages of the spread of herding into the region. At the other end of our timeframe, we show that multiple admixture events impacted Iron Age groups associated with heterogeneous economic, cultural, and linguistic patterns. This complexity can be fur-ther explored through additional comparisons of genetic and archaeological diversity. Ancient DNA offers a new source of information about eastern African Holocene prehistory, and an important next direction is to integrate this information rigorously with insights provided by the longer-established disciplines of archaeology and linguistics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
[QUOTE]This article isn't focused on Eurasian ancestry and what they do say with uncertainty >

---

Why the fuck isn't it,

---

because when we look at the introductory paragraph

quote:

---

How food production first entered eastern Africa ~5000 years ago and the extent to which people moved with livestock is unclear. We present genome-wide data from 41 individuals associated with Later Stone Age, Pastoral Neolithic (PN), and Iron Age contexts in what are now Kenya and Tanzania to examine the genetic impacts of the spreads of herding and farming. Our results support a multi-phase model in which admixture between northeastern African-related peoples and eastern African foragers formed multiple pastoralist groups, including a genetically homogeneous PN cluster. Additional admixture with northeastern and western African-related groups occurred by the Iron Age. These findings support several movements of food producers, while rejecting models of minimal admixture with foragers and of genetic differentiation between makers of distinct PN artifacts.

---

and the conclusion

quote:

---

Conclusions

Genome-wide data from 41 ancient eastern Africans show that archaeological complexity during the spreads of herding and farming is also reflected in genetic patterns, which indi-cate multiple movements of and gene flow among ancestrally distinct groups of people. We identifythree components of ancestry harbored by ancient pastoralists and propose a se-quence of admixture events to explain our observations; fu-ture archaeological and ancient DNA research in the Turkana Basin, the Horn of Africa, and other parts of northeastern Af-rica will be necessary to confirm the earliest stages of the spread of herding into the region. At the other end of our timeframe, we show that multiple admixture events impacted Iron Age groups associated with heterogeneous economic, cultural, and linguistic patterns. This complexity can be fur-ther explored through additional comparisons of genetic and archaeological diversity. Ancient DNA offers a new source of information about eastern African Holocene prehistory, and an important next direction is to integrate this information rigorously with insights provided by the longer-established disciplines of archaeology and linguistics.

---

They dont mention anything Eurasian in the introduction or conclusion
and in the rest of the article they mention Eurasians just once and Europeans just once

And if we look at the Science Daily article about this journal article they don't mention anything about Eurasia, Europe or the Middle East.
And the same article published in Sci News:


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190530141445.htm

Ancient DNA tells the story of the first herders and farmers in east Africa


_____________________

they don't mention anything about Eurasia, Europe or the Middle East.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:


"How food production first entered eastern Africa ~5000 years ago and the extent to which people moved with livestock is unclear." <-- Was this inquiry made clear by this study? food production

---

quote:

---

Iron-working first entered eastern Africa via the Lake Victoria Basin ~2500 BP and spread toward the coast by 2000 BP (14). This may have brought early IA farmers – thought to have spoken Bantu languages originating in equatorial western Africa....


Livestock ap-pear in northern Ethiopia and Djibouti relatively late, ~4500-4000 BP (3), and are poorly documented elsewhere in the Horn of Africa and in South Sudan. Instead, the earliest known domesticated animals in sub-Saharan Africa are found in Kenya at the beginning of the Pastoral Neolithic (PN; ~5000-1200 BP) era near Lake Turkana,


The young boy buried at Deloraine Farm—the site with the earliest direct evidence of farming in the Rift Valley (Kenya) (32)—shows affinity to western Africans and speakers of Bantu languages (both genome-wide and on the Y chromosome).

I8802 Deloraine Farm
Iron Age

mt Dna
L5b1

Y Dna
E1b1a1a1a1a; E-M5

1160 ± 15
1170-970 (Cal)

---

 

---

Posted by the questioner (Member # 22195) on :
 
Authors of Increased resolution of Y chromosome haplogroup T defines relationships among populations of the Near East, Europe, and Africa.

Fernando L Mendez


Tatiana Karafet


Thomas Krahn

Harry Ostrer, M.D


Himla soodyall

Michael Hammer, PhD
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
^ WTF Cares. Comment on the data.
 

---

Posted by the questioner (Member # 22195) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
^ WTF Cares. Comment on the data.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the questioner:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
^ WTF Cares. Comment on the data.

---

Whose collecting the data is very important too.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the questioner:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
^ WTF Cares. Comment on the data.

---

Whose collecting the data is very important too.

---

In this hobby prepare to read 1000s of pages by those authors and be familiar with them. Who they are is not as important is the data and their interpretation of it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Lioness? Isn't the coalescence age the period of shared ancestry. Frequency doesn't tell us the coalescence age but it does suggest that the Lemba did not get T from Turks or Jews. That doesn't mean they aren't Jewish. Many among them practice Judaism.

Zoom in.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Phylogenetic_T-M184_tree.png T1b is too infrequent outside of the Lemba and basal to have come from the outside at least not with foreign nations. Maybe foreign tribes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemba_people

quote:

---

The Lemba T carriers belonged exclusively to T1b, which is rare and was not sampled in indigenous Jews of the Near East or North Africa. T1b has been observed at low frequencies in Ashkenazi Jews as well as in a few Levantine populations.[44]

---

T1b


Don't know when the coalescence age was. Good question. [/QB]

---

I'm looking at this wikipedia quote and it appears to be wrong "T1b has been observed at low frequencies in Ashkenazi Jews as well as in a few Levantine populations."
Like I showed in the chart I posted earlier the reference article for that [44] says
" the moderately high frequency (∼18%) of T1b* chromosomes in the Lemba of southern Africa supports the hypothesis of a Near Eastern, but not necessarily a Jewish, origin for their paternal line."

The current name of T1b is

T1a2
L131
(15,400 BP)

Here it is on ISSOG

https://isogg.org/tree/HaplogroupT2019.html


(ancestor T1a M70)
____________________________

However from the chart you posted:



^^ Here is a section of the chart you linked. At the bottom the Haplogroup LT
Branching out is Haplogroup T (aka T-M184)
Notice the skull there from the Varna culture of the Black Sea region of northeastern Bulgaria (4400-4100 BC) Scholars often suggest that the ultimate origins of the Bulgar is Turkic. Near to that Gonar Tepe, an ancient site in Turkmenistan also on the chart

Interestingly there was that Bulgarian Jewish sample I posted earlier, same clade of T-M184 that the Lemba are listed for T1a2 / L131


Confusingly they have both the old name T1b and the new name T1a2 / L131 on the same chart.
That is the one from the chart I showed earlier for Lemba. Here it's the upper left dark red oval but not listing any group associated with it.

If you open the ISSOG file you see many more clades listed, they no longer use "B" for T groups.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:

Frequency doesn't tell us the coalescence age but it does suggest that the Lemba did not get T from Turks or Jews.

---

quote:

---

S Afr Med J. 2013 Oct 11;103(12 Suppl 1):1009-13. doi: 10.7196/samj.7297.

Lemba origins revisited: tracing the ancestry of Y chromosomes in South African and Zimbabwean Lemba.

Soodyall H1.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

Previous historical, anthropological and genetic data provided overwhelming support for the Semitic origins of the Lemba, a Bantu-speaking people in southern Africa.
OBJECTIVE:

To revisit the question concerning genetic affinities between the Lemba and Jews.
METHODS:

Y-chromosome variation was examined in two Lemba groups: one from South Africa (SA) and, for the first time, a group from Zimbabwe (Remba), to re-evaluate the previously reported Jewish link.
RESULTS:

A sample of 261 males (76 Lemba, 54 Remba, 43 Venda and 88 SA Jews) was initially analysed for 16 bi-allelic and 6 short tandem repeats (STRs) that resulted in the resolution of 102 STR haplotypes distributed across 13 haplogroups. The non-African component in the Lemba and Remba was estimated to be 73.7% and 79.6%, respectively. In addition, a subset of 91 individuals (35 Lemba, 24 Remba, 32 SA Jews) with haplogroup J were resolved further using 6 additional bi-allelic markers and 12 STRs to screen for the extended Cohen modal haplotype (CMH). Although 24 individuals (10 Lemba and 14 SA Jews) were identified as having the original CMH (six STRs), only one SA Jew harboured the extended CMH.CONCLUSIONS. While it was not possible to trace unequivocally the origins of the non-African Y chromosomes in the Lemba and Remba, this study does not support the earlier claims of their Jewish genetic heritage.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
^^ Is the Israel_C_published sample the Chalcolithic one the article refers to?
At K7 its more PN Tanzanian than Israeli.

---

Yes... I even already criticized their use of those isreali samples already. At about K9 they show dual ancestry from A.Egypt and from Anatolia+other Eurasians.

I'm honestly shocked by all the silence... Even positions I didn't subscribe to are effectively being vindicated by the presence of these samples. Yet no one has anything important to say here on ES.

Noone going to point out EEF populations and Stuttgart and even the ancient Greeks showing marked Egyptian ancestry?
No ones, going to point out basal Eurasian estimates == Egyptian +/-Early "Cushitic" ancestry in near easterners and Europeans?
Noone gonna point out that like the Iraqw early southern pastoralists consistently lock down the cushitic component?
Adding to that^, the elevated levels of dinka-nuer related ancestry in horners might be indicative of multiwave dispersal's from North east Africa, particularly north Sudan?
Noones going to point out that Mota could possibly be dragged closer to Modern population variation by V38? ...Being that he's on the most proximal end of the cline for early east African foragers?

Are we too busy trying to claim Eurasian Haplogroups and posting and complaining about white people leading African studies? Data is data...
 

---

Posted by Fourty2Tribes (Member # 21799) on :
 
Its cuz the lily white study with the Subsahran Israelites also has Subsaharan Neolithics with Euro haplogroups

That reminded me of the Y-chromo haplogroups of the Lemba. The way I saw it was the Lemba weren't ethnically Jewish as much as Jews were ethnically Lemba so its funny to see these African Israelites. We have come full circle.

 

---

Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
 
@Elmaestro

When you're looking at an ADMIXTURE graph (like the one you produced earlier in this thread), is there a way to discern where a component might have originated? For example, would a component be more likely to have originated in a place where it is predominant?
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
@Elmaestro

When you're looking at an ADMIXTURE graph (like the one you produced earlier in this thread), is there a way to discern where a component might have originated? For example, would a component be more likely to have originated in a place where it is predominant?

---

It's hard to answer cuz on one hand the answer to your last question is an unequivocal yes. If a component is predominant among a group, that component itself likely originated with them. However! and more importantly, in theory, the people who carry the largest portion of a component are supposed to represent the donating populations the best. But it's not unusual we get false donors from artificial components. So for example the old cushitic cluster (PN) in the above ADMXITURE chart could be an anomaly caused by homogeneity in the region similar to how the Chenini, Kalash, fulani and new world populations can form their own clusters. In the case that happens the actual direction of geneflow can be obfuscated.

To answer the first part of your question.... Assuming that we're only analyzing an ADMIXTURE chart in an vacuum. You can discern where a component originated using logic most of the time. But in some cases admittedly it's impossible.


Looking at what I presume to be a LK Egyptian component at K11 I can tell immediately that it is composite. Possibly a mixture of NE.African and Near eastern ancestry based on distribution. But what matters is that after the A.English (said to be of Egyptian heritage.) This component peaks in NE.Africa, among copts and Nubians. What ever explanation I have for the forming of this component will have to reconcile with that fact.

However, in the previous case (using the same example; PN cluster) it doesn't really matter. IF you pay attention to the populations that carry this component when the cluster is formed, you see a split between East African foragers and modern Horners, compared to the PN cluster. One group with elevated HG-like ancestry and the other with elevated dinka related ancestry respectively. Any explanation you can come up with regarding it's distribution wont be that far from the truth.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 
So Abusir/British Roman dude (believed to be AE migrant in Britain) and African PN share a component that peaks in British Roman dude.

I guess this validates the origin of the African cattle cultural complex from Nabta Playa. Supposedly, AE came into being after Nubian cattle herding populations migrated from a drying Western desert into the Nile Valley.

They must have dispersed in multiple directions into Sudan, the Horn, and the rest of East Africa.

The presence of that component in ancient Middle Eastern populations means that the old archaeology was correct: The earliest farmers of the Middle East shared some African ancestry via the Nile Valley. The presence of this component in higher proportions in Modern N. African/ Maghrebi populations as opposed to ancient Maghrebi populations (Taforalt) suggests that this component was reintroduced in N. Africa via recent Mideast migrations into N. Africa;viz, the Islamic conquest.

So if the green of Taforalt and Ifr_N_Amr represent indigenous Maghrebi or West N. African ancestry, does that mean the Arabs more or less wiped out a significant chunk of indigenous African ancestry there?
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 
@MansaMusa
I'm not entirely sure how to interpret the North Africans shifting more towards the roman-Egyptian cluster for two reasons.

one: is that both components among north Africans somewhat peak in the same population or person. for example the sahawari, then the Morrocan Ifrane Berbers score the most IAM and Roman-Egyptian among North Africans... that is not the Negative correlation I'd expect if IAM ancestry is being wiped out by the newer invading components.

two: The Roman Egyptian can be modeled just fine as IAM + EEF...

code:

---

chisq	tail prob	Ifri_n_Amr Greece_Peloponnese  England_EMBA Natufian
5.128	0.400465	15.60%	   84.40%	       0.00%	    0.00%
1.373	0.927208	35.70%	   0.00%	       64.30%	    0.00%  BEST

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ase:
What does IAM stand for again?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
@Elmaestro

When you're looking at an ADMIXTURE graph (like the one you produced earlier in this thread), is there a way to discern where a component might have originated? For example, would a component be more likely to have originated in a place where it is predominant?

---

It's hard to answer cuz on one hand the answer to your last question is an unequivocal yes. If a component is predominant among a group, that component itself likely originated with them. However! and more importantly, in theory, the people who carry the largest portion of a component are supposed to represent the donating populations the best. But it's not unusual we get false donors from artificial components. So for example the old cushitic cluster (PN) in the above ADMXITURE chart could be an anomaly caused by homogeneity in the region similar to how the Chenini, Kalash, fulani and new world populations can form their own clusters. In the case that happens the actual direction of geneflow can be obfuscated.

To answer the first part of your question.... Assuming that we're only analyzing an ADMIXTURE chart in an vacuum. You can discern where a component originated using logic most of the time. But in some cases admittedly it's impossible.


Looking at what I presume to be a LK Egyptian component at K11 I can tell immediately that it is composite. Possibly a mixture of NE.African and Near eastern ancestry based on distribution. But what matters is that after the A.English (said to be of Egyptian heritage.) This component peaks in NE.Africa, among copts and Nubians. What ever explanation I have for the forming of this component will have to reconcile with that fact.

However, in the previous case (using the same example; PN cluster) it doesn't really matter. IF you pay attention to the populations that carry this component when the cluster is formed, you see a split between East African foragers and modern Horners, compared to the PN cluster. One group with elevated HG-like ancestry and the other with elevated dinka related ancestry respectively. Any explanation you can come up with regarding it's distribution wont be that far from the truth.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this would mean that Abusir are majority African with a large part of their ancestry being this A. Egyptian component? Same with the Natufians?
 

---

Posted by Fourty2Tribes (Member # 21799) on :
 
The title lost me. Pop gen papers are always shoehorning back migration. A 10K BC Spanyard can kick a few flea bitten goats around and they call them shepherds. The Khoisan can travel around with goats and lions and they are still considered foragers.

This is framed as NE African back migration yet this does not make sense when Dinka related groups herd cattle yet they are barely related to said NE ancestry unless we are including them with NE African ancestry. If we include them, then ok I'll pose the same question with the Nguni tribes. When did they start following cattle? Culturally they are as ancient Egyptian as anyone but they aren't related to Abu Sir or the NE Africans they cluster with... and since when did Abu Sir just quietly decide to cluster with NE Africans and Romans lol? Before that it was Anatolians and Natufians. First you back migrate NE Africa then you back migrate SSA from NE Africa. **Elmaestro** you still don't think Abu Sir is mostly indigenous? Wouldn't you expect lower Egyptians to cluster with the Shaigiya,Beja, Copts, Bataheen, and Halfawieen?

The data substantiates the notion that the Red Sea and the Nile are both genetic beacons and bottlenecks.

 

---

Posted by Ase (Member # 19740) on :
 


Shaigia Khartoum looks a lot like the Abusir sample.





Uhh....huh. Well that's interesting.


I'm aware that they're considered arabized. I just hadn't expected for them to look so genetically similar.
 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
@MansaMusa
I'm not entirely sure how to interpret the North Africans shifting more towards the roman-Egyptian cluster for two reasons.

one: is that both components among north Africans somewhat peak in the same population or person. for example the sahawari, then the Morrocan Ifrane Berbers score the most IAM and Roman-Egyptian among North Africans... that is not the Negative correlation I'd expect if IAM ancestry is being wiped out by the newer invading components.

two: The Roman Egyptian can be modeled just fine as IAM + EEF...

code:

---

chisq	tail prob	Ifri_n_Amr Greece_Peloponnese  England_EMBA Natufian
5.128	0.400465	15.60%	   84.40%	       0.00%	    0.00%
1.373	0.927208	35.70%	   0.00%	       64.30%	    0.00%  BEST

---

So it is likely to me that IAM like ancestry in North Africans are being absorbed by that Roman Egyptian component because of the post-Gasfian EEF ancestry from southern Europe 3-5Kya.

I do find it interesting that Taforalt and IAM form their own cluster entirely though. Those Fst distances were really no joke.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by HabariTess:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
It's hard to answer cuz on one hand the answer to your last question is an unequivocal yes. If a component is predominant among a group, that component itself likely originated with them. However! and more importantly, in theory, the people who carry the largest portion of a component are supposed to represent the donating populations the best. But it's not unusual we get false donors from artificial components. So for example the old cushitic cluster (PN) in the above ADMXITURE chart could be an anomaly caused by homogeneity in the region similar to how the Chenini, Kalash, fulani and new world populations can form their own clusters. In the case that happens the actual direction of geneflow can be obfuscated.

To answer the first part of your question.... Assuming that we're only analyzing an ADMIXTURE chart in an vacuum. You can discern where a component originated using logic most of the time. But in some cases admittedly it's impossible.


-

Looking at what I presume to be a LK Egyptian component at K11 I can tell immediately that it is composite. Possibly a mixture of NE.African and Near eastern ancestry based on distribution. But what matters is that after the A.English (said to be of Egyptian heritage.) This component peaks in NE.Africa, among copts and Nubians. What ever explanation I have for the forming of this component will have to reconcile with that fact.
[...]

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this would mean that Abusir are majority African with a large part of their ancestry being this A. Egyptian component? Same with the Natufians?

---

@HabariTess
Nah because as I said (bolded above), That component is a mixture of what could be Native North East African and Near eastern and it's already less than 50% in the Abusir samples. Ironically the Natufians do look objectively more African than than the Abusir samples in this run but that can be due to age or the possible recent arrival (relative to the age of the Natufians) of E-M35.

@Ase/Oshun
two things..
-The subsructure among Shaigia groups is alarming to me. The metadata from those individuals claimed that they were shaigia from Khartoum which is what I labeled them as, but it could be a mistake by the publishers (lazaridis n co.) Cuz those samples look very typical North African. and the Moroccan Berbers (Ain touta) seem to have the autosomal pattern you'd expect from a more eastern population, so there might be a mislabel.

-Also don't undermine the difference in components that are/aren't shared by the populations you're comparing. Open the full Admixture chart and look at how they(Abusir) cluster at different Ks. particularly K13.

Also Don't forget to compare them to Bronze age Levantines
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Still refining theReDuX. Near best possibilities for given graph.



 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 



These 5 are the only givens w/no Orange ancestry.
• Kenya IA
• S Sudan 'blacks'
• Maghreb Pleistocene

Orange ancestry, per given populations, appears as
spatially northern African & E Med (Nile hi freq),
temporally early Holocene thru current Anthrocene.


Currently 2 Shaigi genomic variants.
Previously on a Shaigi sampling as genomic iMazighen
(disregard erroneous U6 E Eur to N Afr movement)
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=8&t=009911&p=4#000175
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=8&t=009911&p=4#000183
and especially this roundup
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009815;p=2#000051


Speculation:
Anything todo with Berber(sp) so-called 'Berbers'
of ancient/classical Sudan, or taMazight origins
in west Sudan per Behrens in Libya Antiqua?
Secondary U6 east -> west back movements?
Iffy feelers leading to some substance?
 

---

Posted by Ase (Member # 19740) on :
 
The Great Lakes and Sudan have that orange component, some of them have this component at VERY high frequencies. However, looking at the African samples overall (including Sudanese) there are only traces of the Anatolia purple component if any purple at all. Some Sudanese have more orange ancestry than the Natufian, but nearly none of the purple Anatolia Neolithic ancestry. Groups in the Near East have both the orange and purple and/or brown. so how come we don't see much if any of this in Africans with a LOT of orange? If that orange ancestry is African, the non African ancestry in some of these groups could be explained as having existed, but being more or less overstated by previous authors. There may well be a different explanation but I'm not sure yet how to reconcile the absence of other components. I could ignore the groups that barely have that much orange if they were the only ones this trend was seen in. Why don't we see more of the additional components that are from the Near East?
 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 
I think that these complicated admixtures could be explained by the fact that there is very deep, ancient ancestry shared between Nile Valley Africa and the Middle East. A possibility which the authors of the study are themselves open to:

quote:

---

. . . ancestry related to the Chalcolithic Israel reference individuals could plausibly have originated anywhere in northeastern Africa or the Levant, and could have been present in northeastern Africa for many thousands of years. We use the Chalcolithic individuals in this study because we lack genetic data from a phylogenetically adjacent reference group from Egypt, Sudan/South Sudan, or the Horn.

---

quote:

---

From various kinds of evidence it can now be argued that agriculture in Ethiopia and the Horn was quite ancient, originating as much as 7,000 or more years ago, and that its development owed nothing to South Arabian inspiration. Moreover, the inventions of grain cultivation in particular, both in Ethiopia and separately in the Near East, seem rooted in a single, still earlier subsistence invention of North-east Africa, the intensive utilization of wild grains, beginning probably by or before 13,000 b.c. The correlation of linguistic evidence with archaeology suggests that this food-collecting innovation may have been the work of early Afroasiatic-speaking communities and may have constituted the particular economic advantage which gave impetus to the first stages of Afroasiatic expansion into Ethiopia and the Horn, the Sahara and North Africa, and parts of the Near East.

---

quote:

---

Evidence for the African Humid Period

The Early Holocene AHP is one of the most thoroughly documented and well-dated climate change events in the geologic record, and the number and diversity of paleoclimate records is remarkable (COHMAP Members, 1988; deMenocal et al., 2000; Gasse, 2000; Hoelzmann et al., 1998; Jolly, 1998; Kroepelin, 2008; Kuper and Kröpelin, 2006). Through these terrestrial and marine records we can document both the timing and extent of the humid interval.
Geological evidence for past lake basins in the Sahara are commonly found near interdune depressions and other low-lying regions, where ancient lake bed sediment outcrops and shoreline deposits are exposed. Most of the early Holocene paleolakes were small, but numerous and widespread (Figure 2b). Some lake basins in North Africa were exceptionally large, as large as the Caspian Sea today. These so-called megalakes occurred in the North (Megalake Fezzan, Libya), South (Megalake Chad, Chad/Niger/Nigeria), West (Chotts Megalakes, Algeria) and East (Megalakes Turkana and Kenya) (Drake and Bristow, 2006). Based on their stratigraphic records, these must have been permanent, open-basin lakes, indicating that annual moisture supply exceeded evaporation for many millennia during the AHP, even in the driest regions of the modern-day Sahara.

A continent-wide compilation of past lake-level reconstructions (the Oxford Lake Level Database (OLLD) (COHMAP Members, 1988; Street-Perrott et al., 1989)) updated with lake-level reconstructions published in the last twenty years (Tierney et al., 2011) chronicles the changes in lake levels that occurred across Africa as a result of the African Humid Period (Figure 2b). This database classifies lakes as "low" (lake is within 0–15% of its potential volume or dry), "intermediate" (lake is within 15–70% of its potential volume) or "high" (lake is within 70–100% of its potential volume or overflowing) every 1000 years during the late-glacial period and the Holocene. The difference in lake levels at 9000 years — the height of the African Humid Period — relative to the conditions today shows that the extent of the AHP across the continent was vast — extending from the far northern Sahara to as far south as 10˚S in East Africa (Figure 3).


Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.

---

http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/green-sahara-african-humid-periods-paced-by-82884405
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
elmaestro2019 k4-k13 PDF doesn't have Abusir.


The graph w/Abusir & ancient Kenya&Tanzania
is a different work and looks to be @ K=11.
Apparently a snippet of a more complete graph.
It doesn't have Mt Hora but should have it.
The Coptic sample seems from Sudan not Egypt.




Abusir has 7 ancestries.
It's African ancestries are
• ORANGE sudanese
• PINK ancient kenya&tanzania
• FOREST pleistocene maghreb
• KELLY south sudanese

England Roman Middle East has 4 ancestries
It's only African ancestry is the dominant one
• ORANGE sudanese

Egypt has 9 ancestries.
It's African ancestries are
• ORANGE sudanese
• YELLOW kenya iron age (suspected W Afr)
• PINK ancient kenya&tanzania
• FOREST pleistocene maghreb
• GREEN south sudanese

Copt has 7 ancestries.
It's African ancestries are
• ORANGE sudanese
• KELLY south sudanese
• FOREST pleistocene maghreb


They four all share
African ORANGE and
West Eurasian LILAC ARMY RED
ancestries.


In my opinion LILAC is an In&Out of Africa ancestry.
 

---

Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
I think that these complicated admixtures could be explained by the fact that there is very deep, ancient ancestry shared between Nile Valley Africa and the Middle East. A possibility which the authors of the study are themselves open to:

quote:

---

. . . ancestry related to the Chalcolithic Israel reference individuals could plausibly have originated anywhere in northeastern Africa or the Levant, and could have been present in northeastern Africa for many thousands of years. We use the Chalcolithic individuals in this study because we lack genetic data from a phylogenetically adjacent reference group from Egypt, Sudan/South Sudan, or the Horn.

---

Modern North Africans have reduced Taforalt and elevated orange (Abusir) component. I believe that the reduced Taforalt (green) component and elevated orange component in modern N. African populations could represent backmigration of a component that was originally from the Nile Valley but which migrated to the prehistoric Near East and contributed to Natufian ancestry. The medieval Islamic conquest of N. Africa may have introduced it into N. West Africa.

With Abusir, the eleveated orange component would also represent Asiatic migration which could be traced back from the first intermediate period (at the end of the Old Kingdom) and which culminated with the dominace of the Hyksos.

The fact that ancient African pastoralists have this component does not have to represent any kind of Middle Eastern admixture. It may be very deep shared ancestry between the African ancestors of these farmers and the African ancestors of the Natufians, who contributed significantly to prehistoric Israeli/ Palestinian populations.

Rememember, the so called African cattle cultural complex (dominant among Egyptian elites and Nilotes) has been traced back to Nubians of Nabta Playa. I think Ancient Egyptians older than Abusir will show more of the component that peakss in African PN. Abusir which is probably a mixture of Middle Eastern and North East African does have a little bit of it.

---

quote:

---

“North Africa, connecting sub-Saharan Africa and Eurasia, is important for understanding human history. However, the genetic history of modern humans in this region is largely unknown before the introduction of agriculture. After the Last Glacial Maximum modern humans, associated with the Iberomaurusian culture, inhabited a wide area spanning from Morocco to Libya. The Iberomaurusian is part of the early Later Stone Age and characterized by a distinct microlithic bladelet technology, complex hunter-gathering and tooth evulsion.

Here we present genomic data from seven individuals, directly dated to ~15,000-year-ago, from Grotte des Pigeons, Taforalt in Morocco. Uni-parental marker analyses show mitochondrial haplogroup U6a for six individuals and M1b for one individual, and Y-chromosome haplogroup E-M78 (E1b1b1a1) for males. We find a strong genetic affinity of the Taforalt individuals with ancient Near Easterners, best represented by ~12,000 year old Levantine Natufians, that made the transition from complex hunter-gathering to more sedentary food production. This suggests that genetic connections between Africa and the Near East predate the introduction of agriculture in North Africa by several millennia. Notably, we do not find evidence for gene flow from Paleolithic Europeans into the ~15,000 year old North Africans as previously suggested based on archaeological similarities. Finally, the Taforalt individuals derive one third of their ancestry from sub-Saharan Africans, best approximated by a mixture of genetic components preserved in present-day West Africans (Yoruba, Mende) and Africans from Tanzania (Hadza). In contrast, modern North Africans have a much smaller sub-Saharan African component with no apparent link to Hadza. Our results provide the earliest direct evidence for genetic interactions between modern humans across Africa and
Eurasia.”

---

quote:

---

The study on the partial calvarium discovered at Manot Cave, Western Galilee, Israel (dated to 54.7 ± 5.5 kyr BP, Hershkovitz et al. 2015), revealed close morphological affinity with recent African skulls as well as with early Upper Paleolithic European skulls, but less so with earlier anatomically modern humans from the Levant (e.g., Skhul). The ongoing fieldwork at the Manot Cave has resulted in the discovery of several new hominin teeth. These include a lower incisor (I1), a right lower first deciduous molar (dm1), a left upper first deciduous molar (dm1) and an upper second molar (M2) all from area C (>32 kyr) and a right upper second molar (M2) from area E (>36 kyr). The current study presents metric and morphological data on the new Manot Cave teeth. These new data combined with our already existing knowledge on the Manot skull may provide an important insight on the Upper Paleolithic population of the Levant, its origin and dietary habits.

---

~Rachel Sarig ; Ofer Marder ; Omry Barzilai ; Bruce Latimer ; Israel Hershkovitz

The Upper Paleolithic inhabitants of Manot Cave: the dental perspective (Year: 2017)

http://core.tdar.org/document/431657/the-upper-paleolithic-inhabitants-of-manot-cave-the-dental-perspective
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
unfinished redux




Note, Mt Hora Malawi 8200 BP, the
oldest African genome at present
indicates 8 ancestries @ K=13.

• ROSE southern africa
• BLUE southern africa
• KELLY south sudan & west-central sudan
• LAVENDER atlantic west africa
• PUMPKIN eastern africa (south)
• STEEL anatolia
• PINK eastern africa (north)
• ORANGE 'mota'

@ K=7, the best CV, it's
• ROSE southern africa
• KELLY south sudan & west-central Sudan
• LAVENDER atlantic west africa
• PINK eastern africa
• STEEL west eurasia
• FOREST northwest africa

Between K7 & K13 Mt Hora Malawi
lost FOREST and gained ORANGE.
The Eastern Africa ancestry
merely shows south and north
distinction between K7 and K13.
Ditto for Southern Africa ancestry.
 

---

Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
 
...
 

---

Posted by Ase (Member # 19740) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
elmaestro2019 k4-k13 PDF doesn't have Abusir.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Kewl

I never seen that one.
Thx will redux it.
Which K has the best CV?

BTW my interest is in the Africans.
Abusir etc really don't turn me on
but they're somewhat intriguing in
a sidebar kinda way.

EDIT
It'll take genomes of known immigrants
like the Rashaida to sort out what I
called the Sudanese ORANGE earlier
though nryDNA hints at it.

We know the South Sudan KELLY bearers
are famous cattle herders so I doubt
the OP article title premise can be
upheld by human vs cattle evidence.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tukuler:
Thank you.

One quick question.

How many times
over
how many runs
do each graph represent?

Really needed only for
• the best CV
• and the max K,
(understanding the atomization
after exceeding the 'acceptable'
reliability drop).


I consider those 2 graphs the
most informative and essential.


Your independent ADMIXTUREs are a godsend
since I can't build my own dedicated lab
nor know where or how to rent facilities
to perform my own tests.


Not to express myself as the bombastic title
of the Mota report years ago, your work shows
me significant 'Stayed In Africa' admixture into late
Pleistocene & early to mid Holocene West Eurasia.

---

Admixtures algorithm itself assembles a bunch of iterations per graph before giving an output. So CV is calculated without actual repeated runs. I personally ran it only three times for quality control purposes. When looking at CV between runs you'll typically get a nice curve with the inverted peak being the best graph(lowest CV). or sometimes you'll get two peaks. I objectively look for the second peak or for when or for a spike after the lowest CV and end the run there. Which gives me the maximun K's... I do it that way to save time. Note that the lowest amount of possible clusters(K's) are always preferable by algo.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
To get to what I actually asked
if you made 3 runs then any of
your graphs is either 1/3 2/3 or 3/3

What I'm asking is for like this in the left border

where we see 50 runs for each K and
published K2 was identical all 50 runs
whereas K10 yielded 30 identical runs out of 50
K16 produced 23/50 and K18 only 11/50 same outputs.


To further understand run and CV correlation
you'll benefit from where I first learned it
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009083#000034
Botigue 2013 figs S1 & S2
showing 10 runs for K=2-10 and their CVs.




Best fit for per CV
K2 run 10
K3 run 10
K4 run 10
K5 run 10
K6 run 5
K7 run 10
K8 run 6
K9 run 3
Ka run 9
each of which should be used to compile the final product graph.

The more runs you do the better accuracy you get.
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 
I said I only ran it 3 times... I need to actually be able to use my cpu lol.
 

---

Posted by Ase (Member # 19740) on :
 
While that's in the works, anyone care to explain what CV is?
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
BTW

Hollfelder shows an ancestry, BROWN, @ K10
throughout Sudan & Middle Eastern that peaks
in Copts & Bedouin but's near absent in South
Sudan & west-central Sudan. It's also the most
prominent Mzabi ancestry. Mzab being her only
Tropical North African population.

By the atomized K18 graph, Tropical North Africa,
South Sudan, west-central Sudan, Sudan, and Middle
Eastern populations each form distinct compact
clusters with each latter sub-population (and
Copts) having unique identifiable 'profiles'.


 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
A few questions.

Does anyone hypothesize a location where EN1 and EN2 related ancestry mixed?

Does the finding of EN1 ancestry solidify Saharo Sahelian cultural complex or the Saharo-Sudanese Neolithic and its hypothesized affinities with Nilo Saharans?

Any ideas on the high M35 lineages and how they align with the composite ancestry?
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
Anyone have quick reference to the physical affinities of the remains in question?
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
Anyone have quick reference to the physical affinities of the remains in question?

---

Which ones? The OP specimen, Elementieta, etc. Or the Lieterband Saharo Complex populations?

Also at first view The ENP(EN1+EN2) populations look to be akin to A-Group Nubians but that still wouldn't answer the question of where EN1 and EN2 ancestries met.. Also there's some cultural traits that need to be ironed out if the dates for Admixtures are correct.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
What are you looking for that isn't already in the text?

Pg 4 paragraph a lines 6 - 12.
Fig 3 caption lines 2 - 4.


Though Boule & Vallois aren't listed
the Reference and Notes section give
standard archaeology and anthropology
sources from 1931 to the present.
Peruse!


EN1

quote:

---

We know the South Sudan KELLY bearers
are famous cattle herders so I doubt the
OP article title premise can be upheld
[w/o] human [AND] cattle evidence.

---

Rejecting delusionary terminology,
in the last African Humid Period
people from the "Lakes region"
moved northwest following their
expanding savanna/grassland habitat.

In Tropical North Africa
they acquired cattle
they kept and moved
(pending Bir Kiseiba and
Nabta Playa's evidence)
either directly southward,
else back east and southeast
from some as of now undisclosed,
hence imaginary, Tropical North
Africa locale as it desertified.




These people were physically
under the broad term Sudanese
(despite recent docudramas falsely
depicting them as white caucasians.
Prendergast seeks to support the
docudrama with her EN2 and ENP,
premises I heartily dismiss/reject.
Data isn't just data, its a weapon
just like the calipers Sawchuk
proudly displays were used to
divide Hutu and Tutsi and provoke
genocide in Rwanda).

They were Sudanese -- subSaharan -- originating 'Saharans'
distinct from Gafsian -- supraSaharan -- origin 'Saharans'.

In the northern sandstone Nile Valley
(Lower Nubia & southernmost Upper Egypt),
these Sudanese and Gafsians intermingled
during the mid Holocene.

Sometimes peacefully and sometimes not.




Further south of that region,
the Gafsian element petered out
but could be found, to whatever
extent, in the Darfur/Kordofan
area (west-central Sudan) and
in the 'Temehh-land' of AE record.




Some of the African Humid Period
Tropical North Africa Sudanese
modern descendants are today in
South Sudan (NiloSaharan Nilotes/Nilotics).

South Sudan cattle cult birthed
in Bir Kiseiba / Nabta Playa
owes nothing to MidEast/N Afr
folk nor can be found there.
Moral of the story for the unwary!

It's the height of foolishness
to think for even a moment any
Euro authored report/study on
anything this significant
doesn't seek to place them
or their proxy as responsible
for purely African civilization.
 

---

Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
 
Well I responded to your request.
Is it along the lines you're looking
for, is it totally off the rails?
And I did ask what the text lacked
regarding EN1 & 2 identity and phenotypes.

Have you no
comment
critique
criticism?

How do you yourself answer the questions you raised?

Surely you have inferences of your own musing so to speak.
Please share.
 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
I have grappled with the identity of Saharans and the aqualithic for quite a long time. We are going to need more Ancient DNA from the Eastern Sahara to flush things out.

What I expect is a difference between Eastern/central Saharan pastoralsit's Mesolithic and Neolithic ancestors. I am not quite sure how far North Mota/hadza ancestry will be found BUT I would expect the earliest Sudanese to be dominated by what we view as a North African or Southern Saharan Nilotic component. Yes I would argue Nilotic is in essence North African in the context of how it is found below the Sahara. I see Dinka and Nilotics et all as Northern Migrants in Equitorial African, similar to how Cushitic speakers expanded from Northern Africa as well. I havent seen data that places Southern Sudanese herders as parental populations for populations further North Bir Kiseiba / Nabta Playa.....In stead I see the Northerner as an old Nilo Saharan substratum that has persisted in Nilotes. I think this article on Prehistoric Wadi Howar sums it up pretty good.

quote:

---

Thus it became possible to draw
conclusions about the affinities the Wadi Howar material shared with prehistoric as well as modern
populations and to answer questions concerning the diachronic links between the Wadi Howar’s
prehistoric populations. When the Wadi Howar remains were positioned in the context of the selected
prehistoric (Jebel Sahaba/Tushka, A-Group, Malian Sahara) and modern comparative samples
(Southern Sudan, Chad, Mandinka, Somalis, Haya) in this fashion three main findings emerged. Firstly,
the series as a whole displayed very strong affinities with the prehistoric sample from the Malian Sahara
(Hassi el Abiod, Kobadi, Erg Ine Sakane, etc.) and the modern material from Southern Sudan and, to a
lesser extent, Chad. Secondly, the pre-Leiterband and the Leiterband sub-sample were closer to the
prehistoric Malian as well as the modern Southern Sudanese material than they were to each other.
Thirdly, the group of pre-Leiterband individuals approached the Late Pleistocene sample from Jebel
Sahaba/Tushka under certain circumstances. A theory offering explanations for these findings was
developed. According to this theory, the entire prehistoric population of the Wadi Howar belonged to a
Saharo-Nilotic population complex. The Jebel Sahaba/Tushka population constituted an old Nilotic and
the early population of the Malian Sahara a younger Saharan part of this complex. The A-Group, on the
other hand, was not a Saharo-Nilotic population . The pre-Leiterband groups probably colonised the
Wadi Howar from the east, either during or soon after the original Saharo-Nilotic expansion. Consequently, they retained stronger affinities with the Late Pleistocene Jebel Sahaba/Tushka
population from the eastern Saharo-Nilotic periphery. Unlike the pre-Leiterband groups, the Leiterband
people originated somewhere west of the Wadi Howar. They entered the region in the context of a later,
secondary Saharo-Nilotic expansion. In the process, the incoming Leiterband groups absorbed many
members of the Wadi Howar’s older pre-Leiterband population. The increasing aridification of the Wadi
Howar region ultimately forced its prehistoric inhabitants to abandon the wadi. Most of them migrated
south and west. They, or groups closely related to them, were the ancestors of the majority of the Nilo-
Saharan-speaking pastoralists of modern-day Southern Sudan and Eastern Chad.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
I hope I am not alone but does anyone else find it very peculiar there was no regional admixture analysis?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
I hope I am not alone but does anyone else find it very peculiar there was no regional admixture analysis?

---

Which paper are you referring to? I thought the OP paper did examine admixture in the populations it studied. Though I could have misread it.

---

Not really.
We got regional PCA on page 13, and basically a K=2 on page 15. This is totally inconsistent with just about every Ancient DNA study on Eurasians.
 

---

Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
I hope I am not alone but does anyone else find it very peculiar there was no regional admixture analysis?

---

Which paper are you referring to? I thought the OP paper did examine admixture in the populations it studied. Though I could have misread it.

---

Not really.
We got regional PCA on page 13, and basically a K=2 on page 15. This is totally inconsistent with just about every Ancient DNA study on Eurasians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
I hope I am not alone but does anyone else find it very peculiar there was no regional admixture analysis?

---

Which paper are you referring to? I thought the OP paper did examine admixture in the populations it studied. Though I could have misread it.

---

Not really.
We got regional PCA on page 13, and basically a K=2 on page 15. This is totally inconsistent with just about every Ancient DNA study on Eurasians.

---

lmao It wan't even a K2... it was a mere collection QP ADM runs. with two donor populations force fitted. (see methods). It's awe inspiring how underwhelming their data is in respects to what we can and about to expose using these samples.

To me! this strong South Sudanese component in totality is relatively recent



One of the better way's it can be broken down is by looking at Tishkoffs Admixture run in 09.' There's one of two things happening here as it relates to the autosomal components particularly the one boxed and highlighted;

-Either its representative of a more modern distribution of Sudanese ancestry. essentially formed late Holocene.
-Or it represents long standing Ancestry from the east (possibly related to Mesolithic Nubians) who's ancestry was absorbed by incoming Saharans. And ancestry directly related to them was prehistorically more widespread further south.



Nonetheless Pendergast's North East African EN1 as well as Dobon's Green "Nilosahran" component is a recent Sudanese Neolithic Component. One major tell is it's distribution in the face of Late stone age east Africans. Older populations trend more towards Hadza, Mota and LSA East Africans. And we see evidence of Hadza-Mota like autosomal-like ancestry even pouring outside of Africa into the Early Neolithic Near east (Natufian.) This modern Nilosahran component however is persistent in every way in modern nilers, and V32 cushitic populations including horners. The Early cushitic populations (E-M293 carriers) can be modeled fine with minimal S.Sudanese admx in the presence of another PN population or Stone age east Africans. To me, this paints a picture of a proper timeline to which it expanded.


This brings me into ANA and how Taforalt and IAM Exposes the African ancestry that was possibly wide spread early throughout the Sahara exposed by this study.

They determined that West Africans Adopted an intermediate Position between S.Sudanese Nilotic and East African foragers (including Mota and Hadza**)
See Green highlight below.


A good guess is that Loosdrecht's HADZA + Yoruba model for SSA ancestry in Taforalt is indicative of a substructure where ancient Africans without any Eurasian admixture occupied both an intermediate position between East African foragers and West Africans and between West Africans and EN2. The last thing I will point out with this post is how I was able to model Dinka-related ancestry in the past using QPAdm and why it's important. (Posted in the Haplogroup D0 thread.) The Dinka Can be modeled by a mixture of a population downstream from Mota and another population loosely related to Rainforest HG's. Ancestral North African can be modeled as a paragroup to Mota (See edited chart from Lazaridis below). Taforalt while ~45% ANA is only ~33% putative Subsaharan African. This suggest that ANA without any semblance of backmigration is already 27% Near Eastern related. What this suggests to me is that we might see a cline from East African foragers to Non African populations (EN2) IN Africa before and during the holocene and it would encapsulate Mushabeans, Early saharan Herders, A group Nubians, and other similar populations.



Just some abstract food for thought.
 

---

Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
 
@ Elmaestro

In your view, does the ANA component found in Taforalt and IAM represent all ancestry aboriginal to northern Africa? I have only a hunch to go on here, but I was wondering if ANA would be more accurately described as endemic to Northwestern Africa, whereas something like "Basal Eurasian" might be rooted in the eastern part of North Africa (namely, the eastern Sahara). That seems logical to me since BE is still a bit closer to actual Eurasian than is ANA, which would be consistent with OOA leaving Africa through the Levant or Arabia.
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
@ Elmaestro

In your view, does the ANA component found in Taforalt and IAM represent all ancestry aboriginal to northern Africa? I have only a hunch to go on here, but I was wondering if ANA would be more accurately described as endemic to Northwestern Africa, whereas something like "Basal Eurasian" might be rooted in the eastern part of North Africa (namely, the eastern Sahara). That seems logical to me since BE is still a bit closer to actual Eurasian than is ANA, which would be consistent with OOA leaving Africa through the Levant or Arabia.

---

In light of the Shum Laka preprint, I personally don't believe ANA is endemic to Northwestern Africa at the moment. There is little to no cultural or physical overlap with Western Stone age Africans and earliest coastal north African populations to my knowledge. And I also don't believe Aterians harbored West African signals to be passed down to Ibermaurasians. This dampers the possibility of the West African-like signals in Taforalt being developed locally. I believe ANA in Taforalt came with M78.

FMPOV most of the hot topic populations as far as autosomal make up goes were in the east until the green Sahara. Ancestral north African consists of that whole cline from East African foragers to near Easterners.

 

---

Posted by beyoku (Member # 14524) on :
 
Remember the study on Sudanese and the had the Y-DNA raw data file? Could it be re-ran and updated to include V1515 SNPS? I dont remember if they were already there but the info was not easy to read.
 

---

Posted by Elmaestro (Member # 22566) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
Remember the study on Sudanese and the had the Y-DNA raw data file? Could it be re-ran and updated to include V1515 SNPS? I dont remember if they were already there but the info was not easy to read.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
In light of the Shum Laka preprint, I personally don't believe ANA is endemic to Northwestern Africa at the moment. There is little to no cultural or physical overlap with Western Stone age Africans and earliest coastal north African populations to my knowledge. And I also don't believe Aterians harbored West African signals to be passed down to Ibermaurasians. This dampers the possibility of the West African-like signals in Taforalt being developed locally. I believe ANA in Taforalt came with M78.

FMPOV most of the hot topic populations as far as autosomal make up goes were in the east until the green Sahara. Ancestral north African consists of that whole cline from East African foragers to near Easterners.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
In light of the Shum Laka preprint, I personally don't believe ANA is endemic to Northwestern Africa at the moment. There is little to no cultural or physical overlap with Western Stone age Africans and earliest coastal north African populations to my knowledge. And I also don't believe Aterians harbored West African signals to be passed down to Ibermaurasians. This dampers the possibility of the West African-like signals in Taforalt being developed locally. I believe ANA in Taforalt came with M78.

FMPOV most of the hot topic populations as far as autosomal make up goes were in the east until the green Sahara. Ancestral north African consists of that whole cline from East African foragers to near Easterners.

---

I'm confused. What do the Shum Laka remains have to do with ANA populations? I recall that the former had the most affinity with Central African hunter-gatherer groups relative to modern West Africans. And wasn't the supposed "West African"-like ancestry in Taforalt and IAM shown to be part of their ANA anyway?

Where do you think "Basal Eurasian" fits in this whole scheme anyway? Do you disagree with the proposal that it's native to the eastern part of North Africa?

---

I considered the possibility that the tropical forager populations(including A0 carriers) of the Guinea basin etc. would be the source of distinct west African Niger Kordofanian signals. If that were true then maybe contact with these populations during the pleistocene may be responsible for Taforalts/ANA's West African signals... But that seems less likely the case with the news about Shum Laka 3kya. I think the west African signals are in ANA by default given it's proposed phylogenetic position.

In this custom admixture graph East African Foragers would represent Mota/Hadza and LSA East African cline, Late Northern Sudanic are the studies EN1 populations such as Dinka-Nuer, Early Pastoralists are pendergast proposed early Neolithic pastoralists from north east Africa. Basal Eurasian and African geneflow to Near easterners was left out for simplicity.

Descendants of these Ancient Saharans are probably most linked to chadic and NS speakers of Central Africa. who all have heavy west African-like ancestry. This is why I pointed out West African being in between East African Foragers and S.Sudanese Nilotic populations. IF you subtract proposed forager admixture from west Africans, where would they plot on this PCA? probably Between West Africans and East African foragers and slightly closer to EN2 populations which is exactly where ANA (West Af + Hadza + Natufian) would plot..... get it?

To me, Basal Eurasian doesn't fit anywhere lmao. To quote lazaridis the person who coined the term;

quote:

---

"A ghost population can become concrete if its individuals are sampled. But, it can also disappear in a puff of smoke if a better explanation is discovered for its proposed effects."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:
In light of the Shum Laka preprint, I personally don't believe ANA is endemic to Northwestern Africa at the moment. There is little to no cultural or physical overlap with Western Stone age Africans and earliest coastal north African populations to my knowledge. And I also don't believe Aterians harbored West African signals to be passed down to Ibermaurasians. This dampers the possibility of the West African-like signals in Taforalt being developed locally. I believe ANA in Taforalt came with M78.

FMPOV most of the hot topic populations as far as autosomal make up goes were in the east until the green Sahara. Ancestral north African consists of that whole cline from East African foragers to near Easterners.

---

I'm confused. What do the Shum Laka remains have to do with ANA populations? I recall that the former had the most affinity with Central African hunter-gatherer groups relative to modern West Africans. And wasn't the supposed "West African"-like ancestry in Taforalt and IAM shown to be part of their ANA anyway?

Where do you think "Basal Eurasian" fits in this whole scheme anyway? Do you disagree with the proposal that it's native to the eastern part of North Africa?

---

I considered the possibility that the tropical forager populations(including A0 carriers) of the Guinea basin etc. would be the source of distinct west African Niger Kordofanian signals. If that were true then maybe contact with these populations during the pleistocene may be responsible for Taforalts/ANA's West African signals... But that seems less likely the case with the news about Shum Laka 3kya. I think the west African signals are in ANA by default given it's proposed phylogenetic position.

In this custom admixture graph East African Foragers would represent Mota/Hadza and LSA East African cline, Late Northern Sudanic are the studies EN1 populations such as Dinka-Nuer, Early Pastoralists are pendergast proposed early Neolithic pastoralists from north east Africa. Basal Eurasian and African geneflow to Near easterners was left out for simplicity.

Descendants of these Ancient Saharans are probably most linked to chadic and NS speakers of Central Africa. who all have heavy west African-like ancestry. This is why I pointed out West African being in between East African Foragers and S.Sudanese Nilotic populations. IF you subtract proposed forager admixture from west Africans, where would they plot on this PCA? probably Between West Africans and East African foragers and slightly closer to EN2 populations which is exactly where ANA (West Af + Hadza + Natufian) would plot..... get it?

To me, Basal Eurasian doesn't fit anywhere lmao. To quote lazaridis the person who coined the term;

quote:

---

"A ghost population can become concrete if its individuals are sampled. But, it can also disappear in a puff of smoke if a better explanation is discovered for its proposed effects."

---

Now I've been saying repeatedly on many forums that African geneflow OOA wasn't uniform and various degrees of it can be responsible for Basal Eurasian Signatures. But there is a very realistic likelyhood that we can have a Caucus population with very high so called basal Eurasian without adequate Post OOA African genflow. But their dispersal would not and can not be the explanation for Basal Eurasian signals everywhere else. Basal Eurasian as a concept just conceals discoverable African geneflow OOA.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elmaestro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
@ Elmaestro

In your view, does the ANA component found in Taforalt and IAM represent all ancestry aboriginal to northern Africa? I have only a hunch to go on here, but I was wondering if ANA would be more accurately described as endemic to Northwestern Africa, whereas something like "Basal Eurasian" might be rooted in the eastern part of North Africa (namely, the eastern Sahara). That seems logical to me since BE is still a bit closer to actual Eurasian than is ANA, which would be consistent with OOA leaving Africa through the Levant or Arabia.

---

In light of the Shum Laka preprint, I personally don't believe ANA is endemic to Northwestern Africa at the moment. There is little to no cultural or physical overlap with Western Stone age Africans and earliest coastal north African populations to my knowledge. And I also don't believe Aterians harbored West African signals to be passed down to Ibermaurasians. This dampers the possibility of the West African-like signals in Taforalt being developed locally. I believe ANA in Taforalt came with M78.

FMPOV most of the hot topic populations as far as autosomal make up goes were in the east until the green Sahara. Ancestral north African consists of that whole cline from East African foragers to near Easterners.

---

One would assume there was no gene flow in the Sahara region, considering this map.

quote:

---

Eastern and Saharan Africans shared the most alleles absent from other African populations examined (fig. S6D).

---

quote:

---

Y-chromosome haplogroup tree

The Y-chromosome haplogroup tree has been constructed manually following YCC 2008 nomenclature20 with some modifications.35 The tree (Supplementary Figure S1) contains the E haplogroups of Eritrean populations from this study and those reported in the literature.22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 Genotyping results for E-V13, E-V12, E-V22 and E-V32 reported for Eritrean samples and elsewhere23, 27 were retracted to E-M78 haplogroup level. All the analyses in this study were done at the same resolution using the following 17 bi-allelic markers: E-M96, E-M33, E-P2, E-M2, E-M58, E-M191, E-M154, E-M329, E-M215, E-M35, E-M78, E-M81, E-M123, E-M34, E-V6, E-V16/E-M281 and E-M75.

[...]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
So Abusir/British Roman dude (believed to be AE migrant in Britain) and African PN share a component that peaks in British Roman dude.

I guess this validates the origin of the African cattle cultural complex from Nabta Playa. Supposedly, AE came into being after Nubian cattle herding populations migrated from a drying Western desert into the Nile Valley.

They must have dispersed in multiple directions into Sudan, the Horn, and the rest of East Africa.

The presence of that component in ancient Middle Eastern populations means that the old archaeology was correct: The earliest farmers of the Middle East shared some African ancestry via the Nile Valley. The presence of this component in higher proportions in Modern N. African/ Maghrebi populations as opposed to ancient Maghrebi populations (Taforalt) suggests that this component was reintroduced in N. Africa via recent Mideast migrations into N. Africa;viz, the Islamic conquest.

So if the green of Taforalt and Ifr_N_Amr represent indigenous Maghrebi or West N. African ancestry, does that mean the Arabs more or less wiped out a significant chunk of indigenous African ancestry there?

---

quote:

---

Y-CHROMOSOME R1 WAS INTRODUCED TO EURASIA BY KUSHITES


Abstract


The Kushites lived in Africa and Eurasia. Kushites originated in Africa. Researchers have observed that many of the Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG) and early European farmers (EF) populations carried R1a and R1b clades, and cultivated millet, which was not cultivated in Central Asia and the Middle East until 1000s of years after it was cultivated at Nabta Playa in Africa, and in the Ukraine by CHG and EF populations. Interestingly, the CHG carried the R1b1, and R1b1a lineages. Some researchers claim that these clades are " distant relatives " of V88, and that V88 is the result of a back migration from Eurasia to Central Africa. The archaeological evidence, on the other hand, lacks any corroboration of a back migration from Eurasia. Instead, the archaeogenetic evidence indicates that Niger-Congo speaking Africans from North Africa and the Saharo-Sahel, called Kushites in the historical literature early settled Crete, Iberia and Anatolia, and that these Africans introduced R1b, the Bell Beaker and the agro-pastoral cultural traditions into Eurasia during the Neolithic.


https://www.academia.edu/36591534/Y-CHROMOSOME_R1_WAS_INTRODUCED_TO_EURASIA_BY_KUSHITES

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
On a side note, Twitter archaeologists are beginning to roast the big labs for their crackpottery, especially in light of the new Philistine study, claiming European origin for them:

Lazaridis & Pals Roasted

Where were these critics during Abusir.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the questioner:

The lioness why do these pictures upset you so much? Their just pictures of the authors of the article. whats the big fuss?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Wow!So many African samples taken from African museums and not a single African author!

---

You act like that is something unusual.


But note, while not authors, several Africans on the research team and also Henry Louis Gates




__________________PLUS several more if you look at the complete list >


https://images2.imgbox.com/e7/a5/FApj7raV_o.png


--------------------------------------------
why I'm needed

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Djehuti:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the questioner:

The lioness why do these pictures upset you so much? Their just pictures of the authors of the article. whats the big fuss?

---

She's mad because you call her people (whites) into question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
On a side note, Twitter archaeologists are beginning to roast the big labs for their crackpottery, especially in light of the new Philistine study, claiming European origin for them:

Lazaridis & Pals Roasted

Where were these critics during Abusir.

---

quote:

---

The Bible mentions a place called Caphtor, which is probably modern-day Crete. There’s no connection between the ancient Philistines & the modern Palestinians, whose ancestors came from the Arabian Peninsula to the Land of Israel thousands of years later.

---

quote:

---

I am an Ethiopian Orthodox Christian, from one of the oldest churches in the world. Our Bible clearly says ፍልስጥኤም in our ancient language which is Philistene. Philistene is Palestine. Israel is the name of Jacob and not the name of the land.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
On a side note, Twitter archaeologists are beginning to roast the big labs for their crackpottery, especially in light of the new Philistine study, claiming European origin for them:

Lazaridis & Pals Roasted

Where were these critics during Abusir.

---

Benjamin Netanyahu seems to have no problem with this theory.

quote:

---

The Bible mentions a place called Caphtor, which is probably modern-day Crete. There’s no connection between the ancient Philistines & the modern Palestinians, whose ancestors came from the Arabian Peninsula to the Land of Israel thousands of years later.

---

https://mobile.twitter.com/netanyahu/status/1147824702360100864


Tseday (ፀደይ) response:

quote:

---

I am an Ethiopian Orthodox Christian, from one of the oldest churches in the world. Our Bible clearly says ፍልስጥኤም in our ancient language which is Philistene. Philistene is Palestine. Israel is the name of Jacob and not the name of the land.

---

https://mobile.twitter.com/Tseday/status/1147925864694321154


Just read the rest of the conversation.

---

quote:

---

A tentative links between these three groups may be provided by the maritime trade routes connecting Crete (home to the Minoan culture) to the Levant and by the shuffling role played by a horde of nomads who navigated throughout the Mediterranean Sea 3 kya: the Sea People These tribes left traces of their passage both in Crete, in Anatolia, when they fought the Hittite Empire and in Egypt and the Levant, and are told to have settled in the land of Canaan, known also as Palestine
Interestingly, among those tribes that settled in Palestine there were: Denyen, Tjeker and 92 Peleset. Although there are different theories around the origin of each of the tribes, there are suggestions that link the Denyen with the tribe of Dan, from which Jews from Ethiopia have been said to descend and Peleset to their neighboring Philistines . The role of Sea People may therefore be crucial in explaining a temporary presence of a Minoan-like ancestry in the Levant, bringing Anatolian-like components to levels as high as 85%.

A pulse of populations with Anatolian-rich ancestry has just been recently detected in Iron Age Levant, appearing and disappearing from the archaeological record within a range of few centuries .

Our results
offer a solution to this disappearance, given that their signal may have become erased as a consequence of major warfare after 1000 BCE14 100 , bringing these genetic components towards 101 Ethiopia and North Africa

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the questioner:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Wow!So many African samples taken from African museums and not a single African author!

---

incorrect



waste of time having to correct the silly photo trolling, somebody doesn't know to hit expand on authors

---

interesting...
How many African scholars can you highlight on European DNA research articles?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
Wow!So many African samples taken from African museums and not a single African author!

---

You act like that is something unusual.


But note, while not authors, several Africans on the research team and also Henry Louis Gates




__________________PLUS several more if you look at the complete list >

.




why I'm needed

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
It's getting worse. Ethiopians are now descended from Minoans, mudderfucking Minoans and Sea people!

Minoans and Philistines in Ethiopia

---

quote:

---

Early Greek Contact with Africa

The earliest known contact between Greece and Africa occurred in the Bronze Age, during the fourteenth century BCE, when the Minoans began to trade with Egypt. The first narratives mentioning Greek contact with Africa are in the Homeric poems, which date to the eighth century BCE.

[...]

Archaeological finds in Egypt indicate that the Minoan trade network extended to Africa. As early as the Middle Kingdom (2030–1640 BCE), Egypt had pottery decorated in the Minoan style.

[...]

Minoans appear in several Theban tomb paintings from the reigns of Hatshepsut (c. 1479–1458 BCE), Thutmose III (c. 1479–1425 BCE) and Amenhotep II (c. 1428–1397 BCE). The paintings show men labeled as being from Keftiu (see below on this place name) carrying items including metal ingots identical in shape to ingots found on Crete.

---

quote:

---

The Minoan mtDNA haplotypes resembled those of the European populations (Figs 2b, 3a and 4; Supplementary Figs S1–S3). The majority of Minoans were classified in haplogroups H (43.2%) , ... Given that the timing of the first Neolithic inhabitants to reach Crete 9,000 YBP coincides with the migration of Neolithic farmers out of Anatolia, it is highly probable that the same ancestral population that spread to Europe, also spread to Crete and contributed to the founding of the early Minoan civilization.

---

quote:

---

Haplogroup H dominates present-day Western European mitochondrial DNA variability (>40%), yet was less common (~19%) among Early Neolithic farmers (~5450 BC) and virtually absent in Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. Here we investigate this major component of the maternal population history of modern Europeans and sequence 39 complete haplogroup H mitochondrial genomes from ancient human remains. We then compare this 'real-time' genetic data with cultural changes taking place between the Early Neolithic (~5450 BC) and Bronze Age (~2200 BC) in Central Europe. Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC). Dated haplogroup H genomes allow us to reconstruct the recent evolutionary history of haplogroup H and reveal a mutation rate 45% higher than current estimates for human mitochondria.

---

quote:

---

The dates for subhaplogroups H1 and H3 (13,000 and 10,000 years, respectively) in Iberian and North African populations allow for this possibility. Kefi et al.’s (2005)

---

quote:

---

-"Taforalt is 14-15 kya and the YDNA was mainly E-V68, East Africa"

-“So far, three individuals who are in E-V68 but not E-M78 have been reported in Sardinia."

-"E-V1083* Found only in Eritrea (1.1%) and Sardinia (0.3%)"

---

quote:

---

Within E-M35, there are striking parallels between two haplogroups, E-V68 and E-V257. Both contain a lineage which has been frequently observed in Africa (E-M78 and E-M81, respectively) [6], [8], [10], [13]–[16] and a group of undifferentiated chromosomes that are mostly found in southern Europe (Table S2). An expansion of E-M35 carriers, possibly from the Middle East as proposed by other Authors [14], and split into two branches separated by the geographic barrier of the Mediterranean Sea, would explain this geographic pattern. However, the absence of E-V68* and E-V257* in the Middle East (Table S2) makes a maritime spread between northern Africa and southern Europe a more plausible hypothesis. A detailed analysis of the Y chromosomal microsatellite variation associated with E-V68 and E-V257 could help in gaining a better understanding of the likely timing and place of origin of these two haplogroups.

---

quote:

---

1 Previous genome-scale studies of populations living today in Ethiopia have found evidence of
2 recent gene flow from an Eurasian source, dating to the last 3,000 years1,2,3,4. Haplotype1
3 and genotype data based analyses of modern2,4 and ancient data (aDNA)3,5 have considered
4 Sardinia-like proxy2, broadly Levantine1,4 or Neolithic Levantine3 populations as a range of
5 possible sources for this gene flow. Given the ancient nature of this gene flow and the extent
6 of population movements and replacements that affected West Asia in the last 3000 years,
7 aDNA evidence would seem as the best proxy for determining the putative population source.

[...]

Overall, whole-genome sequences of all the Ethiopian populations
48 appear closer to ancient Near Eastern populations such as: Minoans, Natufian, Levant Neolithic
49 and Anatolian Neolithic. On the other hand, their NAF components appear closer to popula-
50 tions with a high Anatolian rather than Levantine (such as Minoans, Sardinians and Anatolia
51 Neolithic) component. The highest genetic affinity to the NAF components was observed among
52 North African (Tunisian, Libyan and Moroccan) Jews (See Figure S6), as already seen in the
53 PCA clustering (See Figures 1, S1-S4).

---

quote:

---

R-V88 has been observed at high frequencies in the central Sahel (northern Cameroon, northern Nigeria, Chad and Niger) and it has also been reported at low frequencies in northwestern Africa [37]. Outside the African continent, two rare R-V88 sub-lineages (R-M18 and R-V35) have been observed in Near East and southern Europe (particularly in Sardinia) [30, 37–39]. Because of its ethno-geographic distribution in the central Sahel, R-V88 has been linked to the spread of the Chadic branch of the Afroasiatic linguistic family [37, 40].

[...]

Indeed, our data suggest a European origin of R-V88 about 12.3 kya, considering both the presence of two Sardinian R-V88 basal clades (R-M18 and R-V35) and that the V88 marker arose in the R-M343 background, which in turn includes Near-Eastern/European lineages [52]. It is worth noting that the arrival of R-V88 in the Sahara seems to have occurred between 8.67 and 7.85 kya (considering as an upper limit the time estimates of the last node including a European-specific lineage, while the lower limit is the coalescence age of all the African-specific lineages), refining the time frame of the trans-Saharan migration proposed in previous studies [37, 56]

---

quote:

---

The isofrequency maps presented by these three groups using the STR M269 (haplogroup R1b1b2 = R-M269) are very similar and correspond to that shown in the present study (Figure 2) concerning the “Basque subclade” (see Figure 3 for the map of Basque words), of the haplogroup M269. The term “Basque subclade” is adopted in this article for the reasons here exposed (in the strict actual sense it could be inadequate). Initial studies (Malaspina et al., 2000; Semino et al., 2000) had suggested that the observed R1b1b2 frequency cline in Europe (from frequencies greater that 70% in Western Europe, decreasing eastward) is due to population expansion from a French-Iberian Ice-Age refugium after the Late Glacial Maximum (LGM), as suggested by the authors. Morelli et al. (2010) calculated the TMRCA (Time to the Most Recent Common Ancestor), based on Sardinian and Anatolian Y chromosomes and employing the “population mutation rate”, estimated the R-M269 lineage to have originated 25,000 - 80,700 years ago. Such a huge variance in the date shows a problem with the calculation methodology. Another calculations (Klyosov, 2012) estimates that haplogroup R1b came to Europe only around 5000 years ago.

It seems to be of great interest to try to understand how the vast majority of Western Europe men (more than 100 million) carry Y chromosomes that belong to the haplogroup R-M269.

The haplogroup R1b1a (R-V88) was found with a frequency of 8% in the village of Al Awaynat. Generally, haplogroup R and its subsets are spread in Eurasia as far as Siberia (Karafet et al., 2008; Chiaroni et al., 2009; Lancaster, 2010). Nevertheless, R1b1a has been observed at high frequencies in Northwest Africa (27% in the Egyptian Berbers), with peaks in the Chadic-speaking populations from Central Africa, ranging from 29 to 96% in Cameroon, and very rarely is found outside Africa (Cruciani et al., 2010a,b). This haplogroup has been proposed to represent the paternal genetic signature of the mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afro-asiatic speakers across the Central Sahara to Lake Chad (Ehret, 2002; Cruciani et al., 2010a); this suggests a link between Chadic speakers and other Afro-Asiatic speakers to the north of the Sahara.

In the eight-microsatellite Network analysis of R1b1a chromosomes from Northern and Central Africa (Fig. S2), the Libyan Tuareg R1b1a Y-chromosomes were found to belong to a branch characterized exclusively by haplotypes from Central Africa, more particularly from the Chad area (Cruciani et al., 2010a).

This may be likely explained by recent introduction through the slavery practices mentioned above.

Nonetheless, the hypothesis that the Libyan Tuareg R1b1a haplotypes may be relics of the migration of Pastoral proto-Chadic speakers, as hypothesized by the ‘‘trans-Saharan’’ hypothesis (Ehret, 2002; Cruciani et al., 2010a), cannot be ruled out

---

quote:

---

The oldest mixture events appear to be between populations related to sub-Saharan Africans and West Europeans occurring ~3800 BCE, followed closely by a mixture of Sardinian and Caucasus-related populations. Later, several mixture events occurred from 3000 to 1200 BCE involving diverse Eurasian populations (Table 1, Figure 3).

Genetic evidence for an origin of the Armenians from Bronze Age mixing of multiple populations

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
I want to see If there are noticable differences in NS subgroups and the presence of A, B and E

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beyoku:
I want to see If there are noticable differences in NS subgroups and the presence of A, B and E

---

Here is another article that has whole genome data for Y SNP info.

Paper.
https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-019-1679-2

Dataset.
https://ega-archive.org/datasets/EGAD00001005019

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
These folks are now all over the place, contradicting themselves left and right. It's starting to look like a circus clown act or a freak show.

Remember how they wrote and claimed the Sardinian contribution in Ethiopians about 3Kya, with the Mota specimen?

I suspect the entire thing was the other way around, and they just flipped it upside down.

DNA from 4,500-year-old Ethiopian reveals surprise about ancestry of Africans


Ancient Tanzanian Pastoralist results... VERY interesting stuff!

quote:

---

1 Previous genome-scale studies of populations living today in Ethiopia have found evidence of
2 recent gene flow from an Eurasian source, dating to the last 3,000 years1,2,3,4. Haplotype1
3 and genotype data based analyses of modern2,4 and ancient data (aDNA)3,5 have considered
4 Sardinia-like proxy2, broadly Levantine1,4 or Neolithic Levantine3 populations as a range of
5 possible sources for this gene flow. Given the ancient nature of this gene flow and the extent
6 of population movements and replacements that affected West Asia in the last 3000 years,
7 aDNA evidence would seem as the best proxy for determining the putative population source.

[...]

Overall, whole-genome sequences of all the Ethiopian populations
48 appear closer to ancient Near Eastern populations such as: Minoans, Natufian, Levant Neolithic
49 and Anatolian Neolithic. On the other hand, their NAF components appear closer to popula-
50 tions with a high Anatolian rather than Levantine (such as Minoans, Sardinians and Anatolia
51 Neolithic) component. The highest genetic affinity to the NAF components was observed among
52 North African (Tunisian, Libyan and Moroccan) Jews (See Figure S6), as already seen in the
53 PCA clustering (See Figures 1, S1-S4).

---

~Ludovica Molinaro, Francesco Montinaro, Toomas Kivisild, Luca Pagani.
West Asian sources of the Eurasian component in Ethiopians: a reassessment

quote:

---

R-V88 has been observed at high frequencies in the central Sahel (northern Cameroon, northern Nigeria, Chad and Niger) and it has also been reported at low frequencies in northwestern Africa [37]. Outside the African continent, two rare R-V88 sub-lineages (R-M18 and R-V35) have been observed in Near East and southern Europe (particularly in Sardinia) [30, 37–39]. Because of its ethno-geographic distribution in the central Sahel, R-V88 has been linked to the spread of the Chadic branch of the Afroasiatic linguistic family [37, 40].

[...]

Indeed, our data suggest a European origin of R-V88 about 12.3 kya, considering both the presence of two Sardinian R-V88 basal clades (R-M18 and R-V35) and that the V88 marker arose in the R-M343 background, which in turn includes Near-Eastern/European lineages [52]. It is worth noting that the arrival of R-V88 in the Sahara seems to have occurred between 8.67 and 7.85 kya (considering as an upper limit the time estimates of the last node including a European-specific lineage, while the lower limit is the coalescence age of all the African-specific lineages), refining the time frame of the trans-Saharan migration proposed in previous studies [37, 56]

---

~D’Atanasio, Trombetta, Bonito, et al., Genome Biology (2018) 19:20.
The peopling of the last Green Sahara revealed by high-coverage resequencing of trans-Saharan patrilineages

quote:

---

The isofrequency maps presented by these three groups using the STR M269 (haplogroup R1b1b2 = R-M269) are very similar and correspond to that shown in the present study (Figure 2) concerning the “Basque subclade” (see Figure 3 for the map of Basque words), of the haplogroup M269. The term “Basque subclade” is adopted in this article for the reasons here exposed (in the strict actual sense it could be inadequate). Initial studies (Malaspina et al., 2000; Semino et al., 2000) had suggested that the observed R1b1b2 frequency cline in Europe (from frequencies greater that 70% in Western Europe, decreasing eastward) is due to population expansion from a French-Iberian Ice-Age refugium after the Late Glacial Maximum (LGM), as suggested by the authors. Morelli et al. (2010) calculated the TMRCA (Time to the Most Recent Common Ancestor), based on Sardinian and Anatolian Y chromosomes and employing the “population mutation rate”, estimated the R-M269 lineage to have originated 25,000 - 80,700 years ago. Such a huge variance in the date shows a problem with the calculation methodology. Another calculations (Klyosov, 2012) estimates that haplogroup R1b came to Europe only around 5000 years ago.

It seems to be of great interest to try to understand how the vast majority of Western Europe men (more than 100 million) carry Y chromosomes that belong to the haplogroup R-M269.

The haplogroup R1b1a (R-V88) was found with a frequency of 8% in the village of Al Awaynat. Generally, haplogroup R and its subsets are spread in Eurasia as far as Siberia (Karafet et al., 2008; Chiaroni et al., 2009; Lancaster, 2010). Nevertheless, R1b1a has been observed at high frequencies in Northwest Africa (27% in the Egyptian Berbers), with peaks in the Chadic-speaking populations from Central Africa, ranging from 29 to 96% in Cameroon, and very rarely is found outside Africa (Cruciani et al., 2010a,b). This haplogroup has been proposed to represent the paternal genetic signature of the mid-Holocene migration of proto-Chadic Afro-asiatic speakers across the Central Sahara to Lake Chad (Ehret, 2002; Cruciani et al., 2010a); this suggests a link between Chadic speakers and other Afro-Asiatic speakers to the north of the Sahara.

In the eight-microsatellite Network analysis of R1b1a chromosomes from Northern and Central Africa (Fig. S2), the Libyan Tuareg R1b1a Y-chromosomes were found to belong to a branch characterized exclusively by haplotypes from Central Africa, more particularly from the Chad area (Cruciani et al., 2010a).

This may be likely explained by recent introduction through the slavery practices mentioned above.

Nonetheless, the hypothesis that the Libyan Tuareg R1b1a haplotypes may be relics of the migration of Pastoral proto-Chadic speakers, as hypothesized by the ‘‘trans-Saharan’’ hypothesis (Ehret, 2002; Cruciani et al., 2010a), cannot be ruled out

---

~Claudio Ottoni, et al. (2011)
Deep Into the Roots of the Libyan Tuareg: A Genetic Survey of Their Paternal Heritage

quote:

---

The oldest mixture events appear to be between populations related to sub-Saharan Africans and West Europeans occurring ~3800 BCE, followed closely by a mixture of Sardinian and Caucasus-related populations. Later, several mixture events occurred from 3000 to 1200 BCE involving diverse Eurasian populations (Table 1, Figure 3).

Genetic evidence for an origin of the Armenians from Bronze Age mixing of multiple populations

---

~Marc Haber et al. European Journal of Human Genetics volume 24, pages 931–936 (2016)
Genetic evidence for an origin of the Armenians from Bronze Age mixing of multiple populations

https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2015206

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:
"Before zebu admixture, ancient southern
Levantine animals occupy a distinctive space
within the PC plot (Fig. 1A, cluster c), toward
modern African cattle and adjacent to a 9000-
yr-B.P. Epipalaeolithic Moroccan aurochs (Th7)." From new cattle paper: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6449/173/tab-pdf.

However, the interpretation as expected does not interpret this as Africa being the source of Levantine cattle:
"Distinct genotypes and phenotypes in B. taurus
cattle native to Africa, such as tolerance of trop-
ical infections, have been attributed to either
local domestication or introgression from Afri-
can aurochs (10, 23). However, ancient Levan-
tine genome affinity with North African aurochs
hints that this distinctiveness may have origins
in the southern Fertile Crescent." They appear to do the opposite! White people!

---

That does seem very strange. Why couldn't these southern Levantine cattle have been introduced from North Africa?
 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 
Let me see how I can post the whole thing so people decide for themselves
 

---

Posted by Mansamusa (Member # 22474) on :
 
So in the PC plot, they provide a graph which shows that a primitive cattle (Bos Primigenius) Known as Th7 from epipaleolithic Morroco clusters with ancient Levant Neolithic and later Levant ancient domesticated cattle (Bos. taurus), while occuppying the same corner of the graph as modern African cattle. These cluster of cattle are closer to modern African cattle than they are to modern near East cattle:



So let me get this straight:

1.) The first farmers of the Middle East in the southern Levant have a genetic component which is older in North Africa (ANA) than in the Levant.

2) The First farmers of the Levan have SSA affinities.

3) The first farmers of the Levant domesticated a breed of cattle whose closest progenitor is from North Africa

Conclusion according to the Eurocentrists:

"Distinct genotypes and phenotypes in B. taurus
cattle native to Africa, such as tolerance of tropical infections, have been attributed to either local domestication or introgression from African aurochs (10, 23). However, ancient Levantine genome affinity with North African aurochs hints that this distinctiveness may have origins in the southern Fertile Crescent." Make it make sense!
 

---

Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
 
Origin and Spread of Bos taurus: New Clues from Mitochondrial Genomes Belonging to Haplogroup T1

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0038601


The Genetic Diversity of the Nguni Breed of African Cattle (Bos spp.): Complete Mitochondrial Genomes of Haplogroup T1

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0071956
 

---

Posted by Ish Gebor (Member # 18264) on :
 
Revisiting a hoary chestnut: the nature of early cattle domestication in North-East Africa
~Michael Brass,
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3783853/


Human Environmental Interrelationships and the Origins of Agriculture in Egypt and Sudan
~Simon Holdaway and Rebecca Phillipps
http://environmentalscience.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.001.0001/acrefore-9780199389414-e-177?rskey=NmcN1e&result=4


"They clearly show that, despite the presence of domesticates, fish predominate in the animal bone assemblages. In this sense, there is continuity with the earlier Holocene occupation from the Fayum, starting ca. 7350 BC. Domesticated plants and animals appear first from approximately 5400 BC. The earliest possible evidence for domesticates in Egypt are the very controversial domesticated cattle from the 9th/8th millennium BC in the Nabta Playa-Bir Kiseiba area."

New Archaeozoological Data from the Fayum “Neolithic” with a Critical Assessment of the Evidence for Early Stock Keeping in Egypt
~Veerle Linseele et al.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4195595/
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

It's getting worse. Ethiopians are now descended from Minoans, mudderfucking Minoans and Sea people!

A tentative links between these three groups may be provided by the maritime trade routes connecting Crete (home to the Minoan culture) to the Levant and by the shuffling role played by a horde of nomads who navigated throughout the Mediterranean Sea 3 kya: the Sea People These tribes left traces of their passage both in Crete, in Anatolia, when they fought the Hittite Empire and in Egypt and the Levant, and are told to have settled in the land of Canaan, known also as Palestine
Interestingly, among those tribes that settled in Palestine there were: Denyen, Tjeker and 92 Peleset. Although there are different theories around the origin of each of the tribes, there are suggestions that link the Denyen with the tribe of Dan, from which Jews from Ethiopia have been said to descend and Peleset to their neighboring Philistines . The role of Sea People may therefore be crucial in explaining a temporary presence of a Minoan-like ancestry in the Levant, bringing Anatolian-like components to levels as high as 85%.

A pulse of populations with Anatolian-rich ancestry has just been recently detected in Iron Age Levant, appearing and disappearing from the archaeological record within a range of few centuries .

Our results
offer a solution to this disappearance, given that their signal may have become erased as a consequence of major warfare after 1000 BCE14 100 , bringing these genetic components towards 101 Ethiopia and North Africa Minoans and Philistines in Ethiopia

---

I have yet to read the paper you cited, but there are two things I find wrong about the claim right off the bat:
First off the Ethiopian Jewish population has ironically the lowest percentage of Eurasian lineages. The majority of Eurasian lineages in Ethiopia are found among the Habesha peoples of the highlands which the Beta Israel are technically not part of but instead hail from the Lake Tana area which is inhabited predominantly by Cushitic (primarily Agau) speakers. In fact, the Beta Israel before adopting Amharic originally spoke an Agau dialect and used Geez for their Jewish rituals and texts instead of Hebrew. Genetically the majority paternal clade is hg A while the E-M35 that they do carry is actually specific for Horn Africans and NOT the Levant! Hg J1-M267 only exists in a small fraction and seems to correspond to Habesha influence which again the Habesha possess the majority of this lineage. Their genetics, physical appearance, and geographic proximity to the Blue Nile support Sudanese scholar Ibrahim Omer's theory that the Beta Israel actually originated from Nubia, and IF they did inherit anything Jewish whether physically/genetically and/or religiously alone it took place along the Nile Valley and not in the Aden coast or Arabia as many believe.
Secondly, I do recall several papers presented in this forum about Sub-Saharan genetic influence on Anatolians dating back from the Eneolithic to Bronze Age period. So if this is the case, one could make the opposite argument of Sea Peoples having African ancestry. Funny how all the genetic African influence in the Mediterranean that has come out in the past decade or two now seems null in void ever since Reich and the 3rd Reichers did their findings on the Abusir mummies.
 

---

Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mansamusa:

So in the PC plot, they provide a graph which shows that a primitive cattle (Bos Primigenius) Known as Th7 from epipaleolithic Morroco clusters with ancient Levant Neolithic and later Levant ancient domesticated cattle (Bos. taurus), while occuppying the same corner of the graph as modern African cattle. These cluster of cattle are closer to modern African cattle than they are to modern near East cattle:



So let me get this straight:

1.) The first farmers of the Middle East in the southern Levant have a genetic component which is older in North Africa (ANA) than in the Levant.

2) The First farmers of the Levan have SSA affinities.

3) The first farmers of the Levant domesticated a breed of cattle whose closest progenitor is from North Africa

Conclusion according to the Eurocentrists:

"Distinct genotypes and phenotypes in B. taurus
cattle native to Africa, such as tolerance of tropical infections, have been attributed to either local domestication or introgression from African aurochs (10, 23). However, ancient Levantine genome affinity with North African aurochs hints that this distinctiveness may have origins in the southern Fertile Crescent." [qb]Make it make sense!

---