Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 34 of 34

Thread: Blame it on the Rain: Paleohydrologic considerations for Shaping African Substructure

  1. #31
    Registered Users
    Posts
    58
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    J2a - L70
    mtDNA (M)
    N1a1a1a2

    Quote Originally Posted by ThaYamamoto View Post
    Thanks, not fully following cuz Basal Eurasian has always confused me, but I don't wanna derail the thread.
    Remember this is a hypothetical lineage.

    Consider the group of humans that migrated out of Africa 50-60 kya, let's call them non-Africans. This group of non-Africans then splits somewhere in the Middle East, resulting in two sub-groups. One of these sub-groups contains the ancestors of the main Eurasian lineages (Europeans, East Asians, Australian Aborigines, Native Americans) and the other sub-group are Basal Eurasians. Sub-group 1 containing the ancestors of the main Eurasian lineages mixes with Neanderthals and spreads across Eurasia, splitting into Western and Eastern clades later on. Sub-group 2 (Basal Eurasians) do not mix with Neanderthals and remain in the initial territories of the non-African migrations i.e Middle East and possibly Northeast Africa.

    But once again, this is a model construct which may or may not reflect a real genetic component.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nebuchadnezzar II For This Useful Post:

     Angoliga (07-06-2020),  Awale (06-10-2020),  ThaYamamoto (04-06-2020)

  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar II View Post
    Remember this is a hypothetical lineage.

    Consider the group of humans that migrated out of Africa 50-60 kya, let's call them non-Africans. This group of non-Africans then splits somewhere in the Middle East, resulting in two sub-groups. One of these sub-groups contains the ancestors of the main Eurasian lineages (Europeans, East Asians, Australian Aborigines, Native Americans) and the other sub-group are Basal Eurasians. Sub-group 1 containing the ancestors of the main Eurasian lineages mixes with Neanderthals and spreads across Eurasia, splitting into Western and Eastern clades later on. Sub-group 2 (Basal Eurasians) do not mix with Neanderthals and remain in the initial territories of the non-African migrations i.e Middle East and possibly Northeast Africa.

    But once again, this is a model construct which may or may not reflect a real genetic component.
    Thanks appreciate it, I actually get it now. The semantic issue of Basal Eurasian being considered 'non-african' is extremely strange I must say, ..if they did not intermix with other hominims like the other sub-group, non-African seems like a very flimsy term for these peoples.
    Last edited by ThaYamamoto; 04-06-2020 at 05:29 PM.

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ThaYamamoto For This Useful Post:

     beyoku (04-11-2020),  Mansamusa (04-14-2020),  Nebuchadnezzar II (04-06-2020)

  5. #33
    Registered Users
    Posts
    58
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    J2a - L70
    mtDNA (M)
    N1a1a1a2

    Quote Originally Posted by ThaYamamoto View Post
    Thanks appreciate it, I actually get it now. The semantic issue of Basal Eurasian being considered 'non-african' is extremely strange I must say, and I'm no afrocentrist...if they did not intermix with other hominims like the other sub-group, non-African seems like a very flimsy term for these peoples.
    What defines them as non-African is their participation in the Out of Africa bottleneck, not the admixture with Neanderthals/Denisovans. But imagine if this Out-of-Africa bottleneck occurred just 1km west of the border defining the Sinai peninsula and thereby geographically making them African. Would this change their genetic significance? No. They would still be the group ancestral to all Eurasians, hence why they are so named.

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Nebuchadnezzar II For This Useful Post:

     Angoliga (07-06-2020),  Awale (06-10-2020),  Riverman (06-10-2020),  Ryukendo (06-10-2020),  ThaYamamoto (04-06-2020)

  7. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Angoliga View Post
    IMO that would seem logical based on the limited data atm
    Just to build on this, played around with Ethiopian Anuak [a Luo peoples] and they seem to have the same amount of Yoruba+some Gambian affinity that the Dinka do. I think its safe to say that most modern South Sudanese pops. have this deep WA affinity, including the ancestors of modern Nilo-Bantu's like Dholuo, Alur, Acholi, Langi etc. I think with the constraints G25 suffers from regarding African ancestry [I think David stated that somewhere], this affinity is 'lost' in heavily Bantu admixed Western Nilotic speakers. I guess we can assume that the 'original' Luo peoples still present in South Sudan exhibit the same. All in all modern South Sudanese (excluding the Ubangian admixed groups and Zande < would really like to see these guys autosomals as they are considered intrusive) are a kinda homogenous cluster in terms of the WA ancestry, I can't speak for anything else. I wonder if the WA was acquired by the proto-Western Nilotes or by various sub-groups successively over time. Surely it can't be during the time of the proto-proto-Nilotes as then Somalis and Habeshas would carry it too?

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-23-2020, 06:03 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-11-2019, 07:53 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-18-2016, 06:28 PM
  4. Autosomal substructure in W & S Asians
    By Kurd in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 10-29-2015, 05:22 AM
  5. Agriculture to blame for crooked teeth?
    By Erik in forum Anatomy and Physiology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-10-2015, 12:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •