...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Pleistocene North African genomes link Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African human pop
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tukuler: [QB] Where are you guys getting your genetic history? Autosomes are always going to tie to residence. That's why uniparentals are for deep ancestry. There's a relationship but Taforalt didn't seed Natufians. No way getting around U6 migrated from Asia before multifurcation in the Maghreb and movement to the east of Africa and back again to the Maghreb. Considering M1's late coalescence compared to other M subclades, it too is likely to come to the continent from outside unless some L3M sat in E Afr upon thousands of years before coalescing whereas in S Asia L3M had many first step clades way way earlier than M1. Distribution and frequency of Maghreb specific U6 and n&e Afr M1 hardly makes for their pops making a founder migration in the Levant. Compare the E. Levant E is mostly 123. Maghreb E is superyoung 81. It may track language dispersal of Tamazight to the Maghreb with a returning U6 subclade, an interesting parallel to Shaigi and Amazigh genomes at K=10 in Fig. 2. Natufians are E-M123 upstreamers. These males didn't migrate from the Maghreb. Natufians derive from SE Med and NE Afr antecedents. Mushabeans weren't Maghrebi. They were Nile Valley. They were the Natufians' African parentage. The 36% African in Natufian is based on the genome not uniparentals alone. The proposers advise its probably indigenous northern African from a population that roots indigenous W Afrs and indigenous Lakes Africans well before the Neolithic. Maurusian industry started ~20k in the Pleistocene. Natufian culture is Holocene from ~12k. Aterian peoples bled into Maurusian but they were long finished and done before Mushabea or Kebbaran. Uniparentals and archaeology are against a Natufian <- Maurusian <- Source scenario. Nor do uniparentals and archaeology support a Maurusian <- Source -> Natufian scenario. What confirms either of those two proposals, please? Who can run a simple TreeMix on the concerned? Loosbrecht is clear:[i] ... the complex sub-Saharan ancestry in Taforalt makes our individuals an unlikely proxy for the ancestral population of later Natufians who do not harbor sub-Saharan ancestry. [/i] Natufians do have an Omo like component at 6%. Omo river is south of the Sahara but Eurovision often sees Ethiopia and the non-Kenyan Horn as other than sub-Sahara (Kenya's desert be damned). [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3