|
Post by anastasiaescrava on Aug 19, 2014 5:56:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 8:28:13 GMT -5
QUOTE Rosenberge et al 2002 based upon SNP/Ancestral Informative Markers(AIM) Admixture?? These geneticist know there is no admixture or back-migration. They had known this for a long time. If “I” know this , they know it also.Rosenberge et al 2002 ---------- Fig. 1 and table S2). In several populations, individuals had partial membership in multiple clusters, with similar membership coefficients for most individuals. These populations might reflect CONTINUOUS GRADATIONS IN ALLELE FREQUENCIES ACROSS REGIONS *****or *****admixture of neighboring groups. Read more: egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/1684/desperation-end-racialism-racism-dnatribes?page=4#ixzz3AqMVaUvj--- The presence of similar genes within two populations can be interpreted as admixture OR drift away from Africa. ie purification. Many genes show this same continuous gradation pattern. The recent trend - “basal Eurasian” is seen in tropical Bantus with increasing frequency in Europeans. Similarly SLC24A5 the “white gene” is seen with increase frequency going from Bantus, North Africans to Europe. ALL genes have an African origin. I can provide a litany of examples like that. Including the now discovered Neanderthal genes in Bantus. Another one, LCT 13910, the lactose tolerance, increased presence from Bantus to North Africans to Europeans.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 8:30:27 GMT -5
When you start off reading these papers one of the things you must first check is the DATE and author/co-authors. It may be outdated and therefore more up-to-date information will be available. I also like to see a reputable author pen his name or co-author the paper There are a few here although the paper is outdated. Semino, Hammer, Quintana. They are all popular now so I guess they were starters when they wrote this piece.
First off they use the term Caucasoid which is no longer used in the racial context. Currently even said authors no longer use those terms. Caucasoid can be misleading since it sometimes equate to an European origin. Haplogroups - X and H does not have a European origin. Although hg-H has high frequency IN Europe. The jury is out on whether hg-H has an African or Arabian/Yemeni origin. This paper also analyze enzymes within Yemenis and East Ethiopians which is also an outdated method.
But, nevertheless, undoubtedly there exist strong genetic links between Yemen and Eastern Africa. The question is, what is the predominant DIRECTION of gene flow. In other words did African pass the genes on to Yemenis or the Yeminis pass the gene on to Africans?. Most reputable geneticist has concluded that African pass the genes unto Arabians as supported by the archeological data. Irregardeless Yemenis/Southern Arabia is predominantly African. I quoted by DNATribes cited many times before.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 8:30:56 GMT -5
-------
Different genetic components in the Ethiopian population, identified by mtDNA and Y-chromosome polymorphisms.(1998)
Passarino G1, Semino O, Quintana-Murci L, Excoffier L, Hammer M, Santachiara-Benerecetti AS. Author information 1Dipartimento di Genetica e Microbiologia, "A. Buzzati Traverso," Universita di Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Abstract Seventy-seven Ethiopians were investigated for mtDNA and Y chromosome-specific variations, in order to (1) define the different maternal and paternal components of the Ethiopian gene pool, (2) infer the origins of these maternal and paternal lineages and estimate their relative contributions, and (3) obtain information about ancient populations living in Ethiopia. The mtDNA was studied for the RFLPs relative to the six classical enzymes (HpaI, BamHI, HaeII, MspI, AvaII, and HincII) that identify the African haplogroup L and the Caucasoid haplogroups I and T. The sample was also examined at restriction sites that define the other Caucasoid haplogroups (H, U, V, W, X, J, and K) and for the simultaneous presence of the DdeI10394 and AluI10397 sites, which defines the Asian haplogroup M. Four polymorphic systems were examined on the Y chromosome: the TaqI/12f2 and the 49a,f RFLPs, the Y Alu polymorphic element (DYS287), and the sY81-A/G (DYS271) polymorphism. For comparison, the last two Y polymorphisms were also examined in 87 Senegalese previously classified for the two TaqI RFLPs. Results from these markers led to the hypothesis that the Ethiopian population (1) experienced Caucasoid gene flow mainly through males, (2) contains African components ascribable to Bantu migrations and to an in situ differentiation process from an ancestral African gene pool, and (3) exhibits some Y-chromosome affinities with the Tsumkwe San (a very ancient African group). Our finding of a high (20%) frequency of the "Asian" DdeI10394AluI10397 (++) mtDNA haplotype in Ethiopia is discussed in terms of the "out of Africa" model.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 8:32:39 GMT -5
There is no point arguing OUTDATED Studies using enzymes and blood groups.
There are far more sophisticated analytical techniques currently
|
|
rivertemz
Scribe
The thirst for Knowledge is strong in this one
Posts: 211
|
Post by rivertemz on Aug 19, 2014 8:39:59 GMT -5
I'd try and break down what I got from this research, I'm guessing djoser-xyyman would be a better intersector. But First and foremost, it helps to focus on the "Abstract" subsection of this article only, to give you what the author gathered from the analysis. It starts of with the history of Ethiopia, it's ethnic group demographics, it's geographical trade with the rest of the world and genetic relations to Southern Arabia i.e. Yemen. I would attempt to highlight the conclusive areas of the research (without it's citations) and give my 2cents on it. Im not sure what the bold sentence was inditing or the point to it, but I'm guessing it's to recognize the limitations of identifying distinct genetic groups instead of a broader one. These suggestions are used excessively to assume Slavery was the sole and Only trade mark to Horn-African history and relations with the Arabian peninsular. Even in the focused eras such as the timeline from 9th-3rd B.C mentioned in the research. They assume slavery was the sole purpose of back migration from in and out of Ethiopia to the outside nations. The citations of these parts of the article are even older than genetic research itself. The author would state the recent, ongoing research on the genetic linkages between Ethiopia and Most of Yemen. Then gives their own revised suggestions about what historical context could explain their maternal hereditary (slavery), next to it citated with sources from the 1980s & 90s. Then the abstract ends with this; Yes there has been research under the genetic affiliation with the Yemenis demographics and Sub-Saharan Africa, which remarks on the idea that trade routes and historical emigration between East-Africa and Southern parts of Arabia were not in most eras, driven by Slavery. That had both paternal and maternal linkages with a suggestion of East African conquest and rule within that region. djoser-xyyman has a thread on this area, but avoids discussing the historical context behind this research, since the research alone is enough to give a valued idea, rather than a lack of evidence on the "historical" context. ( djoser-xyyman, correct me if im wrong) Which we are well aware of in this thread, but secular academia still write articles on updated research. STILL having old and weak suggestions in these historical context.
|
|
rivertemz
Scribe
The thirst for Knowledge is strong in this one
Posts: 211
|
Post by rivertemz on Aug 19, 2014 8:40:44 GMT -5
There is no point arguing OUTDATED Studies using enzymes and blood groups. There are far more sophisticated analytical techniques currently Damn! You beat me to it LOOL
|
|
rivertemz
Scribe
The thirst for Knowledge is strong in this one
Posts: 211
|
Post by rivertemz on Aug 19, 2014 8:42:03 GMT -5
Damn I just noticed the date to it (2004). I normally ignore articles like these that are that old, since there would be updated versions of it instead
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 9:11:12 GMT -5
This paper basically corroborates what Lazaridis et al, DNATribies and a few new papers dataset has shown. Sub-Saharans has always existed IN Southerm Arabia(and there still exist pockets of SSA IN the northern section(Levant). What Kivisild has showed is that Yeminis are much closer genetically to Mozambiquean than they are to Ethiopians.
-------- Abstract - Gate of tears ++Kivisild 2004
.Approximately 10 miles separate the Horn of Africa from the Arabian Peninsula at Bab-el-Mandeb (the Gate of Tears). Both historic and archaeological evidence indicate tight cultural connections, over millennia, between these two regions. High-resolution phylogenetic analysis of 270 Ethiopian and 115 Yemeni mitochondrial DNAs was performed in a worldwide context, to explore gene flow across the Red and Arabian Seas. Nine distinct subclades, including three newly defined ones, were found to characterize entirely the variation of Ethiopian and Yemeni L3 lineages. Both Ethiopians and Yemenis contain an almost-equal proportion of Eurasian-specific M and N and African-specific lineages and therefore cluster together in a multidimensional scaling plot between Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African populations. Phylogeographic identification of potential founder haplotypes revealed that approximately one-half of haplogroup L0–L5 lineages in Yemenis have close or matching counterparts in southeastern Africans, COMPARED with a ***MINOR*** share in Ethiopians. Newly defined clade L6, the most frequent haplogroup in Yemenis, showed no close matches among 3,000 African samples. These RESULTS highlight the complexity of Ethiopian and Yemeni genetic heritage and are consistent with the INTRODUCTION of maternal lineages INTO the South Arabian gene pool from different source populations of East Africa. A high proportion of Ethiopian lineages, significantly more abundant in the northeast of that country, trace their western Eurasian origin in haplogroup N through assorted gene flow at different times and involving different source populations
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 10:17:43 GMT -5
more...
What are they saying here?? Simple. That Yeminis and Southern East Africans (eg Mozambique/Tanzania) are genetically much closer than to Ethiopians. However, both(Yemeni/Mozambique) are NOT ancestral to each other because they do NOT share similar haplotypes. Meaning…the “parent” has not been sampled;there is another source population that has NOT been sampled to this point. It also supports DNATribes view of EEF(from North Africa) encountering pre-Bantu populations IN Arabia. So the AIM data support the lineage dataset from this study.
-----
Quote : - However, Yemeni sequences, IN CONTRAST to their clustering together with Ethiopian and Egyptian populations in the MDS plot (fig. 3), show GREATER AFFILIATION to haplotypes detected in Mozambique. The haplotype sharing with Mozambique accounts for 23% of the total and 49% of haplogroup L0–L5 lineages among Yemenis. The lack of M and N lineages in the Mozambique sample is the ONLY apparent factor that separates it from Yemenis in the MDS plot. It should be noted here that the percentage of shared lineages between Yemeni and Mozambique mtDNAs cannot be taken as a measure of actual admixture proportion, because there is a substantial fraction of uninformative haplotypes in both samples. These include either matches or the lack of matches, both in northeastern and southeastern African populations, that probably reflect the incomplete sampling of Africa. Compared with Bantu speakers from southeastern Africa, the Ethiopian contribution to the Yemeni mtDNA pool can be considered relatively minor, since the shared haplotypes account for just 9% of the total variation.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 10:46:17 GMT -5
As with everything else. On the surface it looks like there is a stronger genetic connection between Ethiopia and Yemen. But when you dig deeper the stronger connection is between Mozambique/Kenya/Tanzania and Yemen. It is all on how the data is presented and manipulated.
“The devil is in the details”
This is borne out with the discussion I had with Sage on origin of mtDNA hg-H. hg-H has highest frequency IN Europe but when you dig deeper, Ennafaa et al, it quickly becomes apprarent that Southern Arabia and North Africa do NOT share similar haplotypes for mtDNA hg-H. Which means they are similar, yes, but their source population has NOT been sampled to this point. European hg-H haplotype is a sub-set of African, so the source is NOT Europe. On the other hand North Africans and Southern Arabians are NOT ancestral to each other.
This is exactly the same type of analysis done in the paper you cited(above). They concluded that Mozambiqueans and Yemenis are NOT ancestral to each other based upon the haplotype analysis. And both are distinct from Ethiopians although they all share African genetic material.
Any more questions…hit me up!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 10:51:41 GMT -5
BTW - Glad you brought this up. It has been awhile I looked at that "Gate of Tears" paper. I have a much better grasp now than when I first read it. I will cite this some more.
I forgot all about it.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 12:25:00 GMT -5
replace Tanzania with Mozambique which is even further south..... corrected!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Aug 19, 2014 12:47:09 GMT -5
The more I re-read the paper the more it reveals stuff I missed when I read it several years ago. As I said, I have a much better grasp of genetics now.
Continuing on the point of haplotypes. This paper is amazing.
Discussing mtDNA hg-M---pg762 .
What the authors are also speculating is that the “source” population for M1 has not been sampled also. Again I missed this first time around. Sub-clades of M1* are found in BOTH East Africa and North West Africa BUT the sub-clades are DIFFERENT and do not intersect. Meaning. The M1 found in Berbers are not migrants from East Africa as initilly thought. M1 is NOT found in Yemen. What does it all mean?
Same as the above. M1(North Africa and East Africa) are not ancestral to each other. The source population has not been sampled yet. Since M1 is not found In Yemen it is means hg-M is not of Asian origin. That is why the author dicussed Asian M3. To rule out back-migration from the Indian sub-continent.
Rivertemz – you do realize I ignore historical documents about sleavery?. No disrespect. But as you can see the author is also trying to verify the slavery thing. And concluded since the haplotypes are different between Mozambique and Yemen..and most of Ethiopia…there was no “slavery”.
|
|
|
Post by anastasiaescrava on Aug 19, 2014 16:14:00 GMT -5
I posted this and the woman I was debating said that you guys are not legitimate, and your arguments are invalid. Oh yeah, Thanks everyone for posting.
|
|