posted
Because linx die and some won't follow them anyway I hope the following is both a space saver and readable when zoome.
Essentially a Tishkoff project under Nicky P and D Reich umbrella with a few African teammates in the background. I hope one day Africans will research and report independent population articles but understand health study is more practical and needed focus for now.
I have to examine the data but the sample size 92 and populations 44 are disappointing, and of course effect the findings. How long will Sonhrai continue missing from NiloSaharan analyses? When will Hal Pulaaren be let in? Then there's the Hadza Sandawe San Khoe iinguistic lumping. Where were their ancestral lineages living 200,000 to 14,000 years ago? Also, not denying phylogeny validity it seems far more applicable to charting mutations than ethnic groups who certainly can't be straight lined in origin because of obvious minglings with neighbors and migrants.
What y'all think or did I miss earlier thread on this article.? How does this one compare to previous Tishkoff phylos from years past?
Tyrannohotep Member # 3735
posted
Keep in mind that admixture between groups can affect what these graphs report. As an example, Fulani speak a Niger-Congo language, but have enough admixture from northern African groups to move them closer to most of the Afroasiatic-speakers in Northeast Africa here.
I suspect geographic situation has more influence on these groups' genetic affinities than does language by itself. Linguistic ties can have some influence insofar as certain linguistic phyla originated among people in certain areas of Africa (Afroasiatic in the northeastern corner, Niger-Congo in the west, Nilo-Saharan somewhere in the Sudan, etc.), but once people of one linguistic classification move into a region of Africa far away from that of their ancestors, they seem to absorb significant genetic affinity with their neighbors regardless of what those neighbors speak. That might explain why "Khoisan" Sandawe and Hadza in East Africa appear closer to East African non-Khoisan on this chart than they do other Khoisan-speakers further to the south (although I have seen arguments that the Hadza language at least is technically an isolate rather than being related to southern Khoisan languages at all).
Tukuler Member # 19944
posted
Fan's/Tishkoff's sample sizes are mostly only 2 individuals per pop (never more than 4). Which 2 persons were included? Why? Not saying most results aren't accurate or valid. The TREEMIX and ADMIXTURE seem more reliable than the NJ for the 2 chosen Fulani.
Lumping Khoe Hadza San and Sandawe linguistically is based on similar phonemes. Otherwise these peoples' varying languages are each probably isolates. Hadza seem a primal E Afr group. The ancestry dominant in the 1 Hadza person sampled runs throughout E Afr. See also Schuenemann where 5 out of 18 Hadza samples form their own ancestry at K16 and display no Ju Hoan ancestry (to be fair, no lower K's in Schu).
posted 