|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 18, 2014 13:55:05 GMT -5
This is Cruciani’s response to Andrews Lancaster controversial retort to the study on the relationship of R-V88 and the Chadic Language in Western Africa.
What has been disclosed and admitted to by Cruiciani is that R-V88 is found several key locations IN Africa. They are the exit points.
1. Morroco.
2. Algeria/Tunisia
3. Siwa Egypt
It is also found in Regions just outside of Africa eg Bediouns of the Negev, Sardinia and Iberia…and within Afro-Iranians.
What are the plausible scenarios to explain this genetic pattern.?
1. The central source is somewhere in the African Sahel(Chad Basin) with this R-V88 population “fanning” outwards.
2. These Eurasian populations from Iberia, Sardinia and Levant migrated towards the Chadic Basin.
Which makes more sense? We all know R-V88 is older than R-M269.
In addition R-V88 has greater diversity in INNER Africa than in Morocco, Siwa and Algeria.
---------------------------------------------------
Reply to Lancaster by Cruiciani
European Journal of Human Genetics (2010) 18, 1186–1187; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2010.89; published online 23 June 2010
In January 2010, we published in this journal a report1 on the frequency distribution of the Y chromosome haplogroup R1b1a (R-V88) in Africa, where it can be found at frequencies as high as about 90%. This haplogroup (or its ancestor) most likely traces its origins back to Eurasia, but is presently found very rarely outside Africa. In our original publication,1 we described two important(insert-geographic) patterns in the genotyping data. The first observation was that the highest frequencies of the R1b1a haplogroup were found among Afro-Asiatic-speaking populations from the Central Sahel, with Chadic mostly contributing to this pattern. We have NOW extended our analysis to a further 258 unrelated male subjects from northern Cameroon (Table 1). As can be seen from Table 1, the extended data fully confirm the pattern originally observed.
The second observation was regarding a genetic contiguity between the Chadic-speaking peoples from the Central Sahel and several other Afro-Asiatic-speaking groups from North Africa, including
Ouarzazate Berbers from Morocco, Mozabite Berbers from Algeria, Siwa Berbers and several Semitic groups from Egypt, and, possibly, different groups from Algeria,2 Tunisia3 and Egypt,3,4 with R1b1a frequencies ranging from 1 to 3% in Algeria to about 4% in Tunisia, to 26.9% in the Siwa. We interpreted these data by suggesting that they are more compatible with Ehret’s hypothesis, which proposes that Chadic peoples arrived from the North through the Sahara (the ‘trans- Saharan’ hypothesis),5 rather than with Blench’s theory, which states that Chadic-speaking pastoralists reached the Chad Basin through the Sahel from an eastern Sudanic Cushitic-Chadic motherland (the ‘inter-Saharan’ hypothesis).6 Considering the mitochondrial DNA, the populations from the Chad Basin also show some genetic peculiarities when compared with other populations living south of the Sahara. Mitochondrial DNA haplogroups L3f37 and L3e5,8 which are uncommon in the sub- Saharan area, were found to be relatively frequent in the Chad Basin region, with estimated coalescence ages similar to those we obtained for the Y chromosome R1b1a haplogroup. The lineage L3f3 can be traced back over the millennia to L3f,9 and this led the researchers who analyzed L3f3 from the Chad Basin7 to propose ancient links between this haplogroup and Chadic-speaking peoples coming from East or North East Africa. However, the presence in North Africa of the supposedly autochthonous Chad Basin haplogroup L3e58,10 would seem to suggest another possible scenario, which is more compatible with the ‘trans-Saharan’ migration route.
In his Letter, Lancaster11 revisits our original data and provides valuable comments on our paper. Following his own previous review,12 he argues that our interpretation may have been affected by poor population coverage in relevant regions from East and North East Africa. We agree that data from those areas that are particularly important in order to discriminate between the two theories (eg, Eastern Egypt and Sudan) would be very important. As far as we are aware, there are no data for Eastern Egypt. The investigation by Hassan et al13 in Sudan fills in the map of North East Africa, at least in part, by providing Y-chromosome haplogroup data on additional relevant population samples. However, the power of these data is limited by the low level of resolution, as no R1b1 internal markers were analyzed.
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 18, 2014 13:55:39 GMT -5
Furthermore, even if one assumes that all the R1b1 Y chromosomes found in Sudan harbor the V88 mutation, there are little data to support the hypothesis that these chromosomes are the product of an ancient migration from the East. The highest frequencies of R1b1 chromosomes from Sudan were observed in the Hausa, a Chadic-speaking population that has migrated from the West, and in the Copts, a population group that is known to be largely the result of recent migrations from Egypt over the past two centuries.13 By contrast, only two R1b1 chromosomes were found among the Beja in Sudan,13 confirming our previous results that Chadic-speaking populations are distinguished from Cushites, at least at the Y chromosome variation level.1
In summary, currently available genetic evidence seems to favor our previous hypothesis1 that the Y chromosome haplogroup R1b1a is a paternal genetic record of the proposed ‘trans-Saharan’ migration.5 It will be interesting to see how the proposed pattern develops as more detailed information about the phylogeographic structure of this haplogroup and a more refined method to estimate coalescence times become available.
-------
Lancaster A: Chadic languages and Y haplogroups.
Lancaster A: Y haplogroups, archaeological cultures and language families: a review of the possibility of multidisciplinary comparisons using the case of E-M35.
|
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Aug 18, 2014 20:55:34 GMT -5
What has been disclosed and admitted to by Cruiciani is that R-V88 is found several key locations IN Africa. They are the exit points.
1. Morroco.
2. Algeria/Tunisia
3. Siwa Egypt
It is also found in Regions just outside of Africa eg Bediouns of the Negev, Sardinia and Iberia…and within Afro-Iranians.
What are the plausible scenarios to explain this genetic pattern.?
1. The central source is somewhere in the African Sahel(Chad Basin) with this R-V88 population “fanning” outwards.
2. These Eurasian populations from Iberia, Sardinia and Levant migrated towards the Chadic Basin.
Which makes more sense? We all know R-V88 is older than R-M269.
In addition R-V88 has greater diversity in INNER Africa than in Morocco, Siwa and Algeria. Very nice. Appreciate the clear breakdown. --R-V88 is older than R-M269 (mostly European). -- R-V88 has greater diversity in INNER Africa than in Morocco, Siwa and Algeria. Since R-V88 is older than the heavily European R-M269 and has greater diversity in INNER Africa than in areas near the Mediterranean, then it seems clear that any loose talk bout "wandering Caucasoids" flowing into Cameroon or Fulani-land is way off-base. I also like the detail on the Chadic region. Africa does not have neat DNA apartheid lines where different groups "keep to their side" of the line. Chad includes both "sub-Saharan" and supra-Saharan zones. At its all African. What do you make of the following presentation by Hammer on M269 and its arrival into Europe from the Middle East? He seems to be talking about a two step thing- a Neolithic transition from the Middle East, and then a further expansion to give M269 its present form? Is this more or less right? HAMMER ON DNA diversity in Europe www.norwaydna.no/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Hammer_M269_Diversity_in_Europe.pdfAlso recap if you will: What is the alternative argument for the ancestor of R1b1a originating in Africa? Cite a few peeps along with that. I have not read the study/article in full yet but I wonder about the following possibility- that yes- other haplotypes developed outside Africa, but the "root types" or groundation was already in place within Africa before subsequent migrations out. In other words there was indigenous expansion and diversification taking place withn Africa of certain fundamental cores. Migrations out would of course over time bring about other mutations building on the core groundings- since nothing can be expected to sit still for tens of thousands of years out. Eventually a separate label would be slapped on these full-blown mutations. Hence following Bandelt below: "These indicate that the root of L3 gives rise to a multifurcation from a
single haplotype producing a number of distinct subclades... The
simplest explanation for this geographical distribution [haplogroups M
and N], however, is an expansion of the root type within East Africa,
where several independent L3 branches thrive, including a sister group
to L3, christened L4 (Kivisild et al. 2004; Chap. 7), followed by
divergence into haplogroups M and N somewhere between the Horn of
Africa and the Indian subcontinent. Since neither the L3 root type nor
any other descendants survive outside Africa, the root type itself must
have become extinct during a period of genetic drift in the founder
population as it diversified into haplogroups M and N, if the
diversification was outside Africa. If on the other hand the
diversification was indeed within East Africa, then Haplogroups M and
N must have either been carried out of Africa in their entirety or
subsequently have become extinct within Africa, with the singular
exception of the derived M1." - Hans-Jürgen Bandelt et. 2006. EDS. Human Mitochondrial DNA and the Evolution of Homo sapiens. PS: Good work. Keep up the data flow, and keep breaking it down.
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 21, 2014 22:37:25 GMT -5
What is this about, some of you may ask? The answer is simple.
1. Cruiciani(2002?) proposed that R-V88 found is Sub-Saharan West Africans is a result of back-migration FROM the near East.
Later on Lancaster critiqued the study by Cruiciani proposing that R-V88 came from North Africa.
Now, in Cruiciani's (above) reply is now admitting(with Lancaster) that he(Cruiciani) screwed up with the sampling method and agreed that indeed R-V88 may have come through the North of Africa and NOT from the near East.
But he(Cruiciani) is waffling, he is unsure on the "direction" of migration now since R-V88 is found at three key locations in North Africa. In addition he wants to wait on better technology before he comes to a decision.
But guess what, the diversity pattern(better technology) has recently shown that it was FROM central Africa to North Africa. Source cited on ESR
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 22, 2014 9:35:59 GMT -5
To those who learn through pictures. There are two possible scenarios.. 1. R-V88 migrated from Southern Africa and dispersed outwards 2. R-V88 migrated from the North And ALL congregated IN the South. Which makes more sense and what data supports that view?  |
|
|
|
Post by chatoyer on Nov 26, 2016 15:49:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Nov 26, 2016 17:02:47 GMT -5
Interesting. I will get back to you. Haven't seen or read it. My view it is impossible. Why? R-V88 has highest diversity from inner Africa to outer(coastal) Africa. But I will keep an open mind and read and get back to you..... |
|
|
|
Post by chatoyer on Nov 26, 2016 19:01:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by clydewin98 on Nov 27, 2016 0:52:47 GMT -5
Haber, Marc et al. (2016), Chad Genetic Diversity Reveals an African History Marked by Multiple Holocene Eurasian Migrations, The American Journal of Human Genetics , www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(16)30448-7Haber at al speculate that there were several migrations of Eurasians rom Arabia, into Chad beginning around 7200 ya, which led to the origin of R1b-V88, a major y-Chromosome in much of Africa.. These authors wrote: “We detected the earliest Eurasian migrations to Africa in the Laal-speaking people, an isolated language group of fewer than 800 speakers who inhabit southern Chad. We estimate that mixture occurred 4,750–7,200 ya, thus after the Neolithic transition in the Near East, a period characterized by exponential growth in human population size. Environmental changes during this period (which possibly triggered the Neolithic transition) also facilitated human migrations. The African Humid Period, for example, was a humid phase across North Africa that peaked 6,000–9,000 ya37 and biogeographically connected Africa to Eurasia, facilitating human movement across these regions.38 In Chad, we found a Y chromosome lineage (R1b-V88) that we estimate emerged during the same period 5,700–7,300 ya (Figure 3B). The closest related Y chromosome groups today are widespread in Eurasia and have been previously associated with human expansions to Europe.39, 40 We estimate that the Eurasian R1b lineages initially diverged 7,300–9,400 ya, at the time of the Neolithic expansions. However, we found that the African and Eurasian R1b lineages diverged 17,900–23,000 ya, suggesting that genetic structure was already established between the groups who expanded to Europe and Africa. R1b-V88 was previously found in Central and West Africa and was associated with a mid-Holocene migration of Afro-asiatic speakers through the central Sahara into the Lake Chad Basin.8 In the populations we examined, we found R1b in the Toubou and Sara, who speak Nilo-Saharan languages, and also in the Laal people, who speak an unclassified language. This suggests that R1b penetrated Africa independently of the Afro-asiatic language spread or passed to other groups through admixture.” Thusly, according to Haber et al, “Chadian R1b emerged 5,700–7,300 ya, whereas most European R1b haplogroups emerged 7,300–9,400 ya. The African and Eurasian lineages coalesced 17,900–23,000 ya”. This statement is contradictory. How could Chadian R1b-V88 emerge 5,700 ya, and R1b-M269 emerge7,300 ya—but—“the African and Eurasian lineages coalesced 17,900–23,000 ya”. The statement is contradictory because how could V-88 and M-269 coalesce 23,000 ya, when they did not allegedly emerge until 11-13,000 years after their proposed coalesce time. In addition, to an incongruent coalesce time, there is no archaeological evidence for migration back into Africa 7,300 ya. we do see evidence of Africans migrating into the Levant. These Africans were Natufians. By 13,000 BC, according to J.D. Clark said that the Natufians were collecting grasses which later became domesticated crops in Southwest Asia. In Palestine the Natufians established intensive grass collection. Ehret and Wendorf, have observed that the Natufians used the Ibero-Maurusian tool industry and spread agriculture throughout Nubia into the Red Sea. The Natufians practiced evulsion of the incisors the same as Bantu people and inhabitants of the Saharan fringes. The modern civilizations of the Middle East were created by the Natufians. Since the Natufians came from Nubia, they can not be classified as Eurasians. Trenton W. Holliday, tested the hypothesis that if modern Africans had dispersed into the Levant from Africa, "tropically adapted hominids" would be represented in the archaeological history of the Lavant, especially in relation to the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids. This researcher found that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids (20,000-10,000),were assigned to the Sub-Saharan population, along with the Natufians samples (4000 BP). Holliday also found African fauna in the area. Holliday confirmed his hypothesis that the replacement of the Neanderthal people were Sub-Saharan Africans. This shows that there were no Eurasian types in the Middle East between 20,000-4,000ya, when Haber et al speculated Y-chromosomes R-V88 and R-M269 coalesced . Moreover, we clearly see the continuity between African culture from Nubia to the Levant. This view is supported by the Natufians who originated in Africa, and took the Ibero-Maurusian tools into Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. Holliday wrote: "The current study demonstrates African-like affinities in the body shape of the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids. This finding is consistent with craniofacial evidence (Brace 1996) and with zooarchaeological data indicating the presence of African fauna at Qafzeh (Rabinovich and Tchernov 1995; Tchernov 1988, 1992)" (p.64). The continuity in the spread of Sub-Saharan fauna, flora and physical type in the Levant between 4000-23,000 ya, means that R1 more than likely originated in Africa, instead of Eurasia. Haber et al (2016) is invalid and lacks archaeogenetic evidence to support their conclusions. References: J.D. Clark , "The origins of domestication in Ethiopia", Fifth Panafrican Congress of prehistory and quaternary Studies, Nairobi,1977 Christopher Ehret ( "On the antiquity of agriculture in Ethiopia", Jour. Of African History 20, [1979], p.161) Trenton W. Holliday. (2000) "Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia, American Anthropologist,102(1). F. Wendorf, The History of Nubia, Dallas,1968, pp.941-46). |
|
|
|
Post by chatoyer on Nov 27, 2016 8:03:45 GMT -5
Thank you Dr Clyde Winters for you input and assessment of this latest study on V88....
|
|
|
|
Post by asante on Nov 27, 2016 12:10:37 GMT -5
Great analysis Clyde!
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Nov 28, 2016 14:37:03 GMT -5
As usual papers with a Eurocentric spin can be revealing at the same time. What they have done is used LD(autosomal SNP) to estimate time and RELATION between distant geographic populations then used LABELS/FREQUENCY to assign origin. This is nothing new. Achilli(1998ish) back in the early days of population genetics made the foolish assumption the R1b-M269 and mtDNA –H was of Europeans origin because ethey had highest frequency in Iberia. We now know that is not the case. MtDNA-H and R1b-M269 do NOT have an European origin. This paper hasn’t strayed far away from the same model using frequency to assign label then followed that with DIRECTION of migration. It is a silly game some Eutroecentrics researchers play. There is no deny all Africans carry “Eurasian” ancestry, even Sub-Saharan Africans. Even Europeans and Native Americans carry African ancestry. And Native American Ancestry can be found in SSA and native Americans did NOT back-migrate deep into the Kalahari desert population of southern Africa. Lol!
That is why these labels are so retarded and why it is baffling they continue and insist on using it. This paper has updated/tweaked the model and combined it with a mush-mosh science and political labels. Again they used highest frequency to assume origin….. but ignoring the labels there is some fascinating disclosure in this paper here is some.
They started off by assume R1b-V** is “Eurasian”. But provided no data because that is not what the paper is about. They did not do what is most prudent and conclusive which is to compare R1b-V88 through-out Africa and Europe at high resolution to conclude direction of migration.
In other words they did not provide proof of direction of migration. They assumed the high frequency is the point of origin which we now know that is not the case.
But more interesting is they showed that the CONNECTION (LD)between Africa and Europe was NOT the Near East but through the Sahara and Southern Europe. This is what LD shows. CONNECTION not direction of migration.
Again it proves me correct. It is a continuum!!! Stretching from the Equatorial Africa, through the Sahara , coastal Africa unto the southern Europe and northern Europe.
It is a continuum emanating from Africa.
But here are some really fascinating exerts.
-----------------------
Figure S1. Y-chromosome haplogroup distribution. We find in Chad a high frequency of Y-haplogroup R1b in all ethnic groups examined. On the other hand, R1b is absent or rare in
East African populations. We also find the Eurasian haplogroup T in Toubou and Ethiopians with Toubou having a high frequency (31%) of their studied males belonging to this
haplogroup. Interestingly, the ****only***** instances of this haplogroup in examined ancient populations are in the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) population which we found to be the most
significant reference for the Eurasian ancestry in Toubou and the Ethiopians. For more detailed haplogroup definitions see Table S2. Category "Other" contains haplogroups B2b, E,
E2, I2, Q, R1a and R2a.
FigS2 – is interesting
Genetic Structure in Chad Indicates a Complex
Admixture History
We performed an initial exploration of our dataset by using principal-component analysis (PCA).19 The first
component (PC1) captured the genetic differentiation between Africans and Eurasians (Figure 1B). Populations
such as the Near Easterners and North and East Africans fell between the Europeans and sub-Saharan Africans.
The Chadian groups lay near the sub-Saharan Africans: the Sara and Laal speakers clustered tightly with sub-
Saharan Africans, such as the Yoruba, whereas the Toubou were somewhat more distant and appeared drawn toward
East Africans, such as the Ethiopians.
In southern Chad, we detected mixture(EURASIAN) events that were more ancient than those in the
north.
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Nov 28, 2016 14:37:46 GMT -5
Quote:
In southern Chad, we detected mixture(EURASIAN) events that were more ancient than those in the
north.
We found that the Eurasian source populations for the Amhara and Toubou
were highly correlated (r ¼ 0.98; 95% CI ¼ 0.98–0.99; p value < 2.2 3 10
_16) and that the most significant result was for present-day Sardinians. Exceptions to this correlation
were the North African populations (Tunisians, Mozabite, Algerians, and Saharawi), who appeared to
have contributed more ancestry to the Toubou THAN to the Amhara. We repeated the tests by using published
***ancient genomes ***(Table S6) and also found a high correlation of the Eurasian sources for the Amhara and Toubou
(r ¼ 0.98; 95% CI ¼ 0.97–0.99; p value < 2.2 3 10 _16); early Neolithic farmers were the most significant contributors,
as reported previously5 (Figure 4B). When we substituted the Amhara with other Ethiopians (Wolayta and Oromo),
we found similar results (data not shown). In a parallel comparison, we checked whether the sources of the African
ancestry in different Near Eastern populations were also correlated. We tested f3(Lebanese; British, X) and
f3(Yemeni; British, X) and found a lower correlation of the f3 values (r ¼ 0.62; 95% CI ¼ 0.32–0.80), suggesting a more complicated history of gene flow from genetically
different Africans to different populations in the Near East.
We next tested the Toubou, who have ~30% Eurasian ancestry. The Toubou appeared to split from Eurasians ~30,000–40,000 ya, a time more
recent than expected considering the African-Eurasian split 60,000–80,000 ya20 (Figure S6B). We tested other
Africans in our dataset and found that the Sara, Laal speakers, and Yoruba split from Eurasians, as expected,
~70,000–80,000 ya (Figure S6B).
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Nov 28, 2016 14:38:04 GMT -5
the Toubou have ~30% Eurasian ancestry from a population similar to the Greeks, who have 13% derived alleles at rs4988235, suggesting an expectation of ~3.9% of the derived allele
simply from admixture. We similarly found in the Toubou signals at HERC2 (MIM: 605837) rs1129038 a major contributor
to blue eye color in Europeans35 (Toubou derived allele frequency [DAF] ¼ 0.014; Greek DAF ¼ 0.33; Yoruba,
Sara, and Laal DAF ¼ 0), as well as a signal at SLC24A5 (MIM: 609802) rs1834640, a major contributor to pigmentation
36 (Toubou DAF ¼ 0.19; Greek DAF ¼ 0.99; Yoruba, Sara, and Laal DAF ¼ 0–0.04).
In the populations we examined, we found R1b in the Toubou and Sara, who speak Nilo-Saharan
languages, and also in the Laal people, who speak an unclassified language.
The Toubou, despite their Islamic faith, do not show the genetic admixture detected in many Near Eastern
and North African populations around 1,100 ya,41 suggesting conversion without population mixing at this time.
They did, however, receive additional Eurasian ancestry in the past 200 years from a source represented by North
African populations such as Tunisians, Mozabite, Algerians, and Sahrawi (Figure 3C).
|
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Nov 28, 2016 14:50:44 GMT -5
This excerpts prove several things.
1. The migration was through the Sahara. Most likely the green Sahara and NOT the middle East.
2. Islam and it’s culture preceded “Mohammed” like I speculated in several of my post.
3. There was “Eurasian” connection between inner Africa and East Africans by several thousand years.
4. As the chart shows Greeks are a sub-set of Africans at E1b1b*. The paper stated that the “European” population most closely related to the Chadian are Greeks. Greeks carry a sub-set of Eb1b1* Greeks carry similar E1b1b* as Toubou and Sara see Fig S2. We know E1b1b is African so we have to assume the R1b is also African.
5. The so called ‘split’ between Eurasian and African is exaggerated. Why? Because there is no physical evidence of Europe being occupied by AMH prior to 30,000years ago. So the so called split took place WITHIN Africa. More BS by Spencer Wells and his crew. Lol!
6. Looking at Fig S3. It is clear there is a gradient or increase frequency move from inner Africa to Europe. This is consistent with migration and not back migration. Isolation-by-distance. That is how it works..
7. SLC24A5 and HERC is found in inner Africa and increase in frequency outwards. Consistent with IBD. Blue eyes canm be found in inner Africa as well as light skin genes
8.
The paper actually supports the reverse of what it proposes. I expected to see detailed high resolution SNP comparison between R1b in Africa and Europe which it did not provided. Instead there was speculation based upon high frequency in autosomal SNPs which has long been proven outdated. Regarding autosomal SNP they used high frequency and not proven tools like TreeMix. But even their premise makes no sense because they admitted the connection was NOT through Ethiopia via the middle East but across North Africa and the Medit Sea .
|
|
