|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Sept 13, 2014 18:22:27 GMT -5
Mapping Human Genetic Diversity in Asia
The HUGO Pan-Asian SNP Consortium
Asia harbors substantial cultural and linguistic diversity, but the geographic structure of genetic variation across the continent remains enigmatic. Here we report a large-scale survey of autosomal variation from a broad geographic sample of Asian human populations. Our results show that genetic ancestry is strongly correlated with linguistic affiliations as well as geography. Most populations show relatedness within ethnic/linguistic groups, despite prevalent gene flow among populations. More than 90% of East Asian (EA) haplotypes could be found in either Southeast Asian (SEA) or Central-South Asian (CSA) populations and show clinal structure with haplotype diversity decreasing from south to north. Furthermore, 50% of EA haplotypes were found in SEA only and 5% were found in CSA only, indicating that SEA was a major geographic SOURCE of EA populations.
|
|
|
Post by nebsen on Sept 14, 2014 1:31:28 GMT -5
I found the video with Dr.S.O.Y. Ketia at about 7:14 he begins to explain about African & Asians.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Sept 14, 2014 5:19:47 GMT -5
Great video. Exactly what I subscribe to I found the video with Dr.S.O.Y. Ketia at about 7:14 he begins to explain about African & Asians.
|
|
|
Post by nebsen on Sept 14, 2014 12:05:01 GMT -5
Wasn't quit sure what your stance was on the subject, but I have tons of respect for Dr. S.O.Y. Ketia, even at times that what he has to say might be uncomfortable to my understanding of things; he is the expert in this area & glad to see a brother in this field. Some folks don't get him at all, for he is very much, as he can be objective, & will knock down ideology be it Eurocentric or Afrocentric, & that is as it should be as a scientist in the field of DNA.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Sept 15, 2014 11:14:43 GMT -5
Some of my post may seem confusing, but I Some of my post may seem confusing, but I don’t believe; and there is no scientific evidence of races. That is the point of the thread. I am with Keita on this. African looking people can be found throughout the old world but they are NOT related to extant Africans. Because I point certain things out does not make me an AfroCentric. No one has proven me wrong ……..and they can’t. The geography and genetics does not lie. And Euros cannot change that. Fortunately the European scientists have not started outright lying and falsifying data as yet…but that may be their next step(the hard core lunatics). As of now they only manipulate the data. Regardsless, “Caucasoids” are indigenous to Africa. The Berbers(M-35) and Nilo-Saharan lineage has presence in Africa longer than the new “Bantu” lineage (M-2). Making the assumptions that someone is admixed because of their facial feature or complexion is pre-historic ie pre-genetics. Once someone understands genetics and how it works they can come to no other conclusion. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your point of view, I may seem Afro-Centric. But the facts are, many of the lineages are indeed AFRICAN eg mtDNA H. . Ubber Africa!! Some senior posters don’t get it I am not the one who produces the data, but I can analyze it. . Wasn't quit sure what your stance was on the subject, but I have tons of respect for Dr. S.O.Y. Ketia, even at times that what he has to say might be uncomfortable to my understanding of things; he is the expert in this area & glad to see a brother in this field. Some folks don't get him at all, for he is very much, as he can be objective, & will knock down ideology be it Eurocentric or Afrocentric, & that is as it should be as a scientist in the field of DNA.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Sept 16, 2014 4:48:33 GMT -5
Andaman
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Sept 16, 2014 14:19:51 GMT -5
WHY HAVE THE PENINSULAR "NEGRITOS" REMAINED DISTINCT? GEOFFREY BENJAMIN ABstract The primary focus of this article is on the so-called negritos of Peninsular Malaysia and southern Thailand, but attention is also paid to other parts of Southeast Asia. I present a survey of current views on the "negrito" phenotype—is it single or many? If the phenotype is many (as now seems likely), it must have resulted from parallel evolution in the several different regions where it has been claimed to exist. This would suggest (contrary to certain views that have been expressed on the basis of very partial genetic data) that the phenotype originated recently and by biologically well-authenticated processes from within the neighboring populations. Whole-genome and physical-anthropological research currently support this view. Regardless of whether the negrito phenotype is ancient or recent - and to the extent that it retains any valid biological reality (which is worth questioning) - explanations are still needed for its continued distinctiveness. In the Malay Peninsula, a distinctive "Semang" societal pattern followed by most, but not all, so-called negritos may have been responsible for this by shaping familial, breeding, and demographic patterns to suit the two main modes of environmental appropriation that they have followed, probably for some millennia: nomadic foraging in the forest, and facultative dependence on exchange or labor relations with neighboring populations. The known distribution of "negritos" in the Malay Peninsula is limited to areas within relatively easy reach of archaeologically authenticated premodern transpeninsular trading and portage routes, as well as of other non-negrito, Aslian-speaking populations engaged in swidden farming. This suggests that their continued distinctiveness has resulted from a wish to maintain a complementary advantage vis-à-vis other, less specialized populations. Nevertheless, a significant degree of discordance exists between the associated linguistic, societal-tradition, and biological patterns which suggests that other factors have also been at play.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Sept 18, 2014 8:49:49 GMT -5
Any guesses where I am going with this?
Is DJ a Negrito or “regular” Filiopino(sic)?
Quotes from the Study: ========
The existence of a distinct population of short-statured Aboriginal inhabitants of the Far North Queensland (FNQ) rainforest ecozone (the 4,600 km2 area between Mossman, Cardwell, and the Atherton Tablelands) was first noticed by travelers on Captain Cook’s exploratory voyage in the 1770s (Parkinson 1984). It was not, however, until the Harvard/Adelaide Museum anthropological expedition of
Norman Tindale and Joseph Birdsell visited the area in 1938 that anthropological science officially recorded their existence. Tindale and Birdsell (1940), after taking anthropometric measurements and oral history from some 600–700 people at two FNQ missions, Yarrabah and Mona Mona, confirmed that the “pygmy” Aboriginal people there were indeed marked by much shorter stature than other Aboriginal people and by features such as lighter (though still black) skin and “frizzly” [sic] hair. Describing these traits as “negrito” features, Birdsell (1949)
Such evidence has led most researchers to abandon Birdsell and Tindale’s Barrinean classification in favor of a shared Aboriginal Australian origin for the FNQ and Tasmanian rainforest populations AND AN ADAPTIVE EXPLANATION OF THEIR MORPHOLOGY. No genetic analyses, however, have yet been undertaken.
Within these few haplogroups, however, Australian Aboriginal populations show a very high level of diversity and great time depth.
Other than at the most basal, very ancient clades of macrohaplogroups M and N, the Southeast Asian negrito groups analyzed here share only one haplogroup (P) with either FNQ or Tasmania.
These frequencies of P among Filipinos and negritos tend to negate the hypothesis of a recent back-migration of P people from Sahul. Further, Filipino subtypes P9 and P10 did not appear in any of the FNQ samples or in Tasmanians, are not seen in Papua New Guinea or Melanesia (van Oven and Kayser 2009), and are very distant from any P subtypes found in Australian Aboriginals to date (van Holst Pellekaan et al. 2006; Hudjashov et al. 2007).
Thus, it appears that the P haplogroup, too, is shared only between Southeast Asian negritos and FNQ/Tasmanian populations at the most ancient, basal level.
By contrast, FNQ and Tasmanian Aborigines share many more haplogroups with other mainland Australian Aboriginal populations
Thus, Tindale and Birdsell’s hypothesis of a Barrinean population distinct from other Australian Aboriginal people and closely related to Southeast Asian negritos receives no support from this study of mtDNA lineages
|
|
rivertemz
Scribe
The thirst for Knowledge is strong in this one
Posts: 211
|
Post by rivertemz on Sept 19, 2014 6:47:19 GMT -5
One of the things that led me to research African and peoples of AE was when I came across information in the news on Taiwan. That was about 7years go. The news report stated the "indigenous people of Taiwan". I always assumed that the current people of Taiwan I see on the TV were "indigenous" . That started my trex. "negritos" are found all over Asia, yet, are not related to Africans. Why? They are related to people geographically closest to them.
|
|