Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Modern Nilotic Dinka wrong proxy for ancient African admixture in East Africans?

  1. #21
    Registered Users
    Posts
    165
    Sex

    United Nations African Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Mnemonics View Post
    His claim is that the Dinka are admixed with populations from the Horn, which would indicate that they are significantly West Eurasian and/or significant Mota like. Both of which are made unlikely by those factors.
    AEA is likely an admixed component itself but I doubt that is the result of recent admixture.

    I'm not even sure that "Basal Eurasian" proper exists anymore. The assumption that it exists is due to the inability of fstats to find significant relationships between Basal Eurasian rich populations and SSA populations but there is an obvious issue with the ability of the software to detect significant relationships between SSA populations and heavily admixed AEA rich populations like Kenya_PastoralN.

    It gets so bad that you can put two members of the same admixed African population in the fstat and get large significant stats for the Eurasian population even when you switch them.
    My claim is that the neighboring Nilotic populations are not purely African or to less admixed as it was previously thought and have non-African ancestry buried in their gene pool. They show obvious gene flow from ancient AA speaking groups (Especially ancient cushitic populations) when you look at their uniparental markers. This not being taking into account has created distorted and skewed ancestry proportions.


    What also makes me doubt this supposed affinity is that Wang et al. (2020)’s admixture analysis and genome modeling, which both suggest that the oldest Cushitic settlers in East Africa were almost entirely of non-African ancestry (~90%) at the time of their arrival in the region.

    Also the simple fact that they do have West African Affinity and the Early Neolothic Pastoral specimens are completely devoid of it , makes them unrealistic/unfit proxies for inferring an African admixture component among the ancient Cushitic settlers of the Pastoral Neolithic.
    Last edited by Mirix; 05-16-2021 at 09:05 PM.

  2. #22
    Registered Users
    Posts
    229
    Sex
    Location
    Canada
    Ethnicity
    Somali
    Y-DNA (P)
    T-L208
    mtDNA (M)
    N1b2

    Canada Somaliland
    Quote Originally Posted by Mirix View Post
    My claim is that the neighboring Nilotic populations are not purely African or to less admixed as it was previously thought and have non-African ancestry buried in their gene pool. They show obvious gene flow from ancient AA speaking groups (Especially ancient cushitic populations) when you look at their uniparental markers. This not being taking into account has created distorted and skewed ancestry proportions.


    What also makes me doubt this supposed affinity is that Wang et al. (2020)’s admixture analysis and genome modeling, which both suggest that the oldest Cushitic settlers in East Africa were almost entirely of non-African ancestry (~90%) at the time of their arrival in the region.

    Also the simple fact that they do have West African Affinity and the Early Neolothic Pastoral specimens are completely devoid of it , makes them unrealistic/unfit proxies for inferring an African admixture component among the ancient Cushitic settlers of the Pastoral Neolithic.
    The most Eurasian Early Pastoralist's SSA is predominantly Mota-related which indicates that the initial population was heavily Eurasian. But, their non-Native SSA is entirely Dinka-like which indicates that the population received Dinka-like admixture before arriving in the Horn which doesn't support your idea that the Dinka received significant admixture from Kenya_PastoralN type populations.

    Luxmanda is an interesting sample in that it seems to be a mix of Early Pastoralist + Mota which kind of resembles modern Omotic speakers. Its SSA is predominantly native to the Horn and distinct from Dinka-like ancestry.

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

     Alfa (05-17-2021),  drobbah (05-16-2021),  Keneki20 (05-17-2021)

  4. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,792
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF27 FGC17112
    mtDNA (M)
    H5a1

    Direct admixture from Shum Laka to the Dinka is something that does pop up in qpGraph.

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Chad Rohlfsen For This Useful Post:

     Alfa (05-17-2021),  Jatt1 (05-17-2021),  Mnemonics (05-16-2021),  Riverman (05-16-2021)

  6. #24
    Registered Users
    Posts
    165
    Sex

    United Nations African Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Mnemonics View Post
    The most Eurasian Early Pastoralist's SSA is predominantly Mota-related which indicates that the initial population was heavily Eurasian. But, their non-Native SSA is entirely Dinka-like which indicates that the population received Dinka-like admixture before arriving in the Horn which doesn't support your idea that the Dinka received significant admixture from Kenya_PastoralN type populations.

    Luxmanda is an interesting sample in that it seems to be a mix of Early Pastoralist + Mota which kind of resembles modern Omotic speakers. Its SSA is predominantly native to the Horn and distinct from Dinka-like ancestry.
    The Mota fossils are not representative of the Early ancestral Afro-Asiatic speakers in the Horn. Lorente et al. note that contemporary Ethiopian populations (specifically, the Afro-Asiatic speakers) have substantial West Eurasian affinities that the Mota specimen does not appear to possess.

    And as i explained earlier the Earliest Cushitic settlers appear to have been almost entirely non-African ancestry at the time. Only around 1,300 years after the earliest radiocarbon-dated Pastoral Neolithic sample does the first probable evidence of Nilotic influence in form of the Y-DNA haplogroup A and the mtDNA clade L4, appear among specimens excavated at the Naishi Rockshelter and Keringet Cave.

    The comparison between the ancient South Cushitic pastoralist (Luxmanda) and the Dinka sample shows obvious gene flow into them, beceause the Dinka sample all of a sudden showed almost 30% non-African ancestry at the K=2 level. This together with their various significant uniparental markers of mtDNA haplogroups M and N, and, E1b1b/E3b haplogroup, and M78, F-M89 clades shows they particularly admixed with ancient cushitic speakers.
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....804#post771804

    This in a nutshell is why they seemingly fit so well as a proxy.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Ancient Swahili East African coins found in Australia
    By SWAHILLI_PRINCE16 in forum African
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-25-2019, 09:25 PM
  2. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-29-2019, 09:52 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-22-2019, 06:12 AM
  4. African admixture in ancient Europeans
    By sciencediver in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-08-2016, 04:34 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
  •