Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 140

Thread: African phylogeny (beginning...)

  1. #121
    Registered Users
    Posts
    317

    Quote Originally Posted by Woozler View Post
    Will the model account for back-to-Africa migrations ("Ancient Admixture into Africa from the ancestors of non-Africans" - "We find evidence for substantial migration from the ancestors of present-day Eurasians into African groups between 40 and 70 thousand years ago, predating the divergence of Eastern and Western Eurasian lineages")?

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...555v1.full.pdf

    It's quite likely that the Levant served as the source of several back-to-Africa migrations that massively reshaped the genetic history of the entire African continent. First was the early Upper Paleolithic migration described in the article above, taking place possibly in the early stages of the Emiran archaeological culture. Modern Niger-Kordofanian and Nilo-Saharan speakers can trace a significant chunk of their ancestry to these early Levantine migrants.

    The "Emirans" later started to receive substantial gene flow (and cultural influences) from the north (Europe/Anatolia), turning into "Levantine-Aurignacians". During the later stages of this culture, around 25k ybp, some of these Levantine Aurignacians migrated across the shore of North Africa to the Maghreb (by that point seemingly unpopulated for almost 20 000 years), becoming "Iberomaurusians". The Levantines, meanwhile, continued to receive gene inflows from the north, eventually becoming Natufians, who again migrated to Africa during the Holocene, forming the bulk of the ancestry of the speakers of Afro-Asiatic languages.

    "Basal Eurasian", on the other hand, is a meaningless concept resulting from the facile oversimplification of UP Eurasian population genetics into an untenable "Basal/East/West Eurasian" trichotomy. There were multiple separate admixture events involving archaic humans, haplogroup C and D carriers initially had distinctly separate histories across much of the world (Kostenki/Sunghir mammoth hunters and Australian Aborigines were both initially pure C's, it seems) than the now-dominant haplogroup F and its branches, etc., etc.

    Any criticism of any of the above?
    How does the 'multiple Back migration from the Levant' hypothesis deal with the issue of Neanderthal Admixture in the levant?
    Basal Eurasian, Early African, etc mostly seem to be associated with the inverse of Neanderthal ancestry. I do think there is a "facile oversimplification" but it dont think its in relation to the levant. IMO It's relation to the adjacent area that has been occupied 5 times longer than the Levant.

    @Chad Rohlfsen - Family First. We aint going nowhere. Then again, this site may be so be sure to post it to your blog.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to beyoku For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (08-04-2022),  Mansamusa (08-04-2022)

  3. #122
    Registered Users
    Posts
    187
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by beyoku View Post
    How does the 'multiple Back migration from the Levant' hypothesis deal with the issue of Neanderthal Admixture in the levant?
    There was probably no Neanderthal admixture in the Emirans ("ANA"/"Basal Eurasians"). It was present in Levantine Aurignacians/Iberomaurusians due to admixture with the "Aurignacians" coming from the north around 35k ybp.

    Basal Eurasian, Early African, etc mostly seem to be associated with the inverse of Neanderthal ancestry. I do think there is a "facile oversimplification" but it dont think its in relation to the levant. IMO It's relation to the adjacent area that has been occupied 5 times longer than the Levant.
    This area did not go through the Eurasian bottleneck, whereas the Levantines did.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Woozler For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (08-04-2022),  Riverman (08-04-2022)

  5. #123
    Registered Users
    Posts
    317

    Quote Originally Posted by Woozler View Post
    There was probably no Neanderthal admixture in the Emirans ("ANA"/"Basal Eurasians"). It was present in Levantine Aurignacians/Iberomaurusians due to admixture with the "Aurignacians" coming from the north around 35k ybp.



    This area did not go through the Eurasian bottleneck, whereas the Levantines did.
    It probably did go through the OOA Bottle Neck. That is probably the main factor separating it from more Basal African ancestry.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to beyoku For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (08-04-2022)

  7. #124
    Registered Users
    Posts
    187
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by beyoku View Post
    It probably did go through the OOA Bottle Neck. That is probably the main factor separating it from more Basal African ancestry.
    What were the Emirans/Levantine Aurignacians genetically like, then? This is a major UP archaeological culture, after all.

  8. #125
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,620
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Woozler View Post
    What were the Emirans/Levantine Aurignacians genetically like, then? This is a major UP archaeological culture, after all.
    Emiran? Possibly ZlatyKun minus ~50% BachoKiro.
    Collection of 14,000 d-stats: Hidden Content Part 2: Hidden Content Part 3: Hidden Content PM me for d-stats, qpadm, qpgraph, or f3-outgroup nmonte models.

  9. #126
    Registered Users
    Posts
    233
    Sex
    Location
    Cyprus
    Ethnicity
    Greek Cypriot

    Cyprus European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Woozler View Post
    There was probably no Neanderthal admixture in the Emirans ("ANA"/"Basal Eurasians"). It was present in Levantine Aurignacians/Iberomaurusians due to admixture with the "Aurignacians" coming from the north around 35k ybp.



    This area did not go through the Eurasian bottleneck, whereas the Levantines did.
    Isn't the whole point of Basal Eurasian being Eurasian that Dzudzuana is not closer to Africans than other Eurasians even tho it has 28% ghost Ancestry that has no neanderthal? While populations hypothesized of having Ancestral North African are closer to Sub Saharan Africans relatively? Which means Ancestral North African did not go through the Out of Africa bottleneck while Basal Eurasian did.

    Last edited by IjustlikeHistory; 08-05-2022 at 01:01 PM.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to IjustlikeHistory For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (08-11-2022),  Dehlisandwich (08-05-2022),  MethCat (08-06-2022)

  11. #127
    Registered Users
    Posts
    187
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by IjustlikeHistory View Post
    Isn't the whole point of Basal Eurasian being Eurasian that Dzudzuana is not closer to Africans than other Eurasians even tho it has 28% ghost Ancestry that has no neanderthal? While populations hypothesized of having Ancestral North African are closer to Sub Saharan Africans relatively? Which means Ancestral North African did not go through the Out of Africa bottleneck while Basal Eurasian did.
    These constructs do not seem to address the hypothesized paleolithic back migration to Africa, which, according to some models, contributed substantial amounts of ancestry to most modern Africans:



    In populations from the Niger-Kordofanian and Nilo-Saharan language groups, comprising the majority
    of the population on the African continent, the peak inferred migration rate from Eurasian populations
    (2.53.0⇥10�4 and 3.54.0⇥10�4, in units of proportion of the target (ancestral African) population replaced
    per generation) most frequently falls in the epochs spanning 3545kya, while peak migration rates in the
    opposite direction are substantially lower (0.5-1.0 ⇥ 10�4) and occur earlier, in the epochs spanning 5570kya
    (Supplemental Fig. S1).



    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...06.01.127555v1
    Attached Images Attached Images

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Woozler For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (08-06-2022)

  13. #128
    Registered Users
    Posts
    233
    Sex
    Location
    Cyprus
    Ethnicity
    Greek Cypriot

    Cyprus European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Woozler View Post
    These constructs do not seem to address the hypothesized paleolithic back migration to Africa, which, according to some models, contributed substantial amounts of ancestry to most modern Africans:



    In populations from the Niger-Kordofanian and Nilo-Saharan language groups, comprising the majority
    of the population on the African continent, the peak inferred migration rate from Eurasian populations
    (2.5–3.0⇥10�4 and 3.5–4.0⇥10�4, in units of proportion of the target (ancestral African) population replaced
    per generation) most frequently falls in the epochs spanning 35–45kya, while peak migration rates in the
    opposite direction are substantially lower (0.5-1.0 ⇥ 10�4) and occur earlier, in the epochs spanning 55–70kya
    (Supplemental Fig. S1).



    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...06.01.127555v1
    Your response makes no sense because i did not claim in any way that there was no a back to Africa migration. The Paleolithic back to Africa migration was from a Dzudzuana related population. What i said is that Basal Eurasian is not related to Africans and i did not imply in any way that Africans don't have Eurasian admixture. I literally implied the opposite.

    Dzudzuana was modeled as having 28% Basal Eurasian and 72% common West Eurasian (common ancestors with WHG).
    Natufian from the Levant as 88% Dzudzuana and 12% Ancestral North African (ANA) (ANA indirectly from Taforalt related)
    Taforalt from Morocco as 55% Dzudzuana and 45% Ancestral North African (ANA).
    West African Yoruba was modeled as 13% Taforalt related, so that's 5.85% indirect Eurasian ancestry.
    From what i remember Khoisan have Cushitic admixture? So that's also indirect Eurasian ancestry from indirect Natufian from Cushites.

    I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that what i said "does not seem to address the hypothesized paleolithic back migration to Africa"
    Last edited by IjustlikeHistory; 08-09-2022 at 12:13 PM.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to IjustlikeHistory For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (08-11-2022),  Ronalawe (08-11-2022)

  15. #129
    Registered Users
    Posts
    187
    Sex

    You said "While populations hypothesized of having Ancestral North African are closer to Sub Saharan Africans relatively? Which means Ancestral North African did not go through the Out of Africa bottleneck while Basal Eurasian did."

    If there was gene flow exclusively from ANA to SSA in the early stages of the UP, 10-15k years after the separation of ANA from all other Eurasians, wouldn't it register as closer genetic links between ANA and SSA, even though ANA were part of the same original OOA migration?

  16. #130
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,620
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Woozler View Post
    You said "While populations hypothesized of having Ancestral North African are closer to Sub Saharan Africans relatively? Which means Ancestral North African did not go through the Out of Africa bottleneck while Basal Eurasian did."

    If there was gene flow exclusively from ANA to SSA in the early stages of the UP, 10-15k years after the separation of ANA from all other Eurasians, wouldn't it register as closer genetic links between ANA and SSA, even though ANA were part of the same original OOA migration?
    I think Chad's terminology was quite accurate before ANA became the go to term, he called it 'para-Eurasian'. OOA and 'para-Eurasian' at 65-80kbp would be the same population, mt-L3, y-CF and DE.
    OOA = L3 subclades M and N, y-CF and D1'2
    Para-Eurasian = other L3 subclades, y-D0 and E

    E coalesces ~15kbp after is splits from D, and E being signature of most SSA and ANA you would think that 15k years would accrue some drift, but we don't see it.
    A simple explanation in my view is that ANA absorbed a deeper lineage that distanced them from their nearest relatives. Good placement and timing for candidates would be remnant Aterians.
    Collection of 14,000 d-stats: Hidden Content Part 2: Hidden Content Part 3: Hidden Content PM me for d-stats, qpadm, qpgraph, or f3-outgroup nmonte models.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Kale For This Useful Post:

     theplayer (08-11-2022)

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-09-2020, 03:15 PM
  2. African population phylogeny
    By ren in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-23-2019, 05:45 PM
  3. How it was all clear from the beginning
    By Squad in forum R1b Early Subclades
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 02-18-2018, 08:59 PM
  4. How it was all clear from the beginning
    By Squad in forum General
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 02-07-2018, 09:52 PM
  5. New excavations beginning at the Vero Beach site in Florida
    By GailT in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-26-2013, 10:57 PM

Posting Permissions

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