Page 39 of 61 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 610

Thread: Impact of invasions and/or settlements in the Iberian Peninsula

  1. #381
    Banned
    Posts
    217
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF27

    Castile and León Spanish Empire (1506-1701)
    Quote Originally Posted by Luso View Post
    it's useless for what you're testing for? You're saying italians and greeks are closer to north africans than iberians while ignoring variability in admixture. Spaniards and Portuguese have a more distinct plot away from other south euros due to their inflated whg so already they plot further from other more south euros (central, southern italians, greeks) even with small pockets of nafri admixtures. Aside from this they are similar to other south euros in EEF and steppe numbers. Clearly, this difference in plotting has some sort of affect on why some italian and greeks in some individual cases can have a closer distance, no? Because they have more fundamental Mediterranean sources which guanche share... but the isolated whg admixture is virtually incomparable. That is my hypothesis.

    As a result, iberians (most aside from those who lack nafri admixture) cline towards nafri and are still genomically closer because they have legitimate influx of this admixture. It is almost non-existent outside of sicily in non-iberian places. Also I agree with some others (Ruderico, Aben Aboo, etc.) that clearly taforalt shows some issues as an old component when looking at samples... but this is what makes most sense to answer your question.
    I am not testing anything, remember that I am merely posting results obtained by professional geneticists.

    So, you think that as Spaniards have more WHG than Italians or Greeks this means that the latter share more SNPs with Taforalt?

    I think that you still dont understand what Fst distances are and how they are calculated. The reasoning is very simple, for example, we have 250,000 SNPs targeted in the human genome, of those, Extremadura shares 10,000 with WHGs and 2,500 with Taforalt, while Calabria shares 1,000 with WHGs and 2,500 with Taforalt.. Those populations that share more SNPs are genetically closer, that's all.

    If lithuanians share more SNPs with Latvians than with sardinians, they are genetically closer to the former than to the latter, and if they share more SNPs with WHGs than sardinians then Lithuanians are closer to WHG than Sardinians. I think that it is not so difficult to understand

    If Spaniards are genetically closer to WHGs than Italians it is because they share more SNPs with them, and finally if Calabria is closer to Taforalt than Extremadura it is because they share more SNPs with them.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Bodilkas For This Useful Post:

     hantrolugharsts (11-29-2022)

  3. #382
    Registered Users
    Posts
    900
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Human
    Nationality
    Luso-American
    aDNA Match (1st)
    Roman-Lusitanian_AD_426:R10500
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-Z225
    mtDNA (M)
    H1c3*

    Portugal Portugal 1143 Galicia
    You're right I'm not super knowledgeable about this. This is purely speculation on my part.

    But no.. that is not what I am saying. I think spaniards shift (which is different from south italy , central italy, and greece) due to whg inflation, has an affect on iberian’s distances (even with relatively significant taforalt cline) to fall further away from nafri sources than one may presume. Essentially the whg component - that is today almost exclusively high in central and northern euro populations, not southern euros - will make iberian pops distance further even in (many) cases where they have real taforalt admix. And so when youre forming conclusions that iberians nafri admixture is insignificant by showing comparisons with distances using non-iberian south euro populations with different admixture and without clear whg inflation we have… I think it is very disingenuous. You need to look at the bigger picture of how populations plot vs each other and how their specific components together can cause differences in the direction they show.

    I think this is why distances are not always something to use as a tool for detecting admixture similarities. Why? bc youre comparing whole population avgs which are more variable in admixture than one specific ancestral component and youre forming conclusions that are way more complex than you think. Specifically, down to how components behave in unison as opposed to isolation

    Most iberians have some variation of real nafri dna, most other south euros do not. Deal with it.
    Last edited by Luso; 11-30-2022 at 03:35 AM.
    [1] "distance%=1.5901"

    Luso

    West_Iberia_IA,53.2
    Roman_Colonial,19.2
    Germanic_Migration,17.4
    ITA_Sardinia_C_o,7.8
    Berber_EMA,2.4

    My Paternal Lineage-

    My dad's father- R-Z225- São Bartolomeu de Messines, Silves, Portugal
    My dad's mother- H5a- Alcantarilha, Silves, Portugal


    Maternal Lineage-

    My mom's mother- H1c3- Monchique, Silves, Portugal
    My mom's father- G2a-Y65- Lagoa, Ferragudo, Portugal

  4. #383
    Registered Users
    Posts
    400
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodilkas View Post
    I believe that there is real north African ancestry in all southern Europe, including southern France, no recent middle eastern input. Although it is true that the excess of Levantine component in some regions such as Tunisia, may increase this affinity between some Italian regions and Greece with North Africa.
    The papers show that the Nafri in North and Center Italy is almost non-existent, being 0.77 and 1.00 sinedo a very low averageand South France should be similar

    https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article...lementary-data

    https://i.ibb.co/pbycs96/capture.png

  5. #384
    Registered Users
    Posts
    400
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by vettor View Post
    carthagians, numidians also
    Do you mean Iberia or Italy? If you mean the first, at least the Carthaginians seem to have left a considerable impact, since the Bronze Age Southeast Iberian sampels show an average Nafr of 1% while the Roman and medieval average reaches 20%. If you are referring to the second case, I understand that West Sicily and Cantabria are the 2 areas of Italy with the most Nafr, so there may be a combination of both towns, but then the question comes to me ¿ How many Nafr do the 2 areas mentioned ?

  6. #385
    Registered Users
    Posts
    400
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Aben Aboo View Post
    With G25 Ultimate World Deep Ancestry Calculator
    Target: Spanish_Canarias
    Distance: 2.8142% / 0.02814179
    52.2 Anatolia_Neolithic_Farmer_TUR_Barcin_N
    27.0 Pontic_Steppe_Yamnaya_Pastoralist_Yamnaya_RUS_Sama ra
    9.8 Morocco_Early_Neolithic_Farmer_MAR_EN
    9.6 West_Europe_Hunter-Gatherer_WHG
    0.6 Nilotic_Pastoralist_KEN_Kakapel_900BP
    0.4 West_Africa_Hunter-Gatherer_CMR_Shum_Laka_3000BP
    0.4 West_Africa-Bantu_Farmer_COG_Kindoki_230BP

    10% IBM is like around 32% North Morrocan for average......

    Target: Moroccan_North
    Distance: 1.9915% / 0.01991538
    38.6 Anatolia_Neolithic_Farmer_TUR_Barcin_N
    29.8 Morocco_Early_Neolithic_Farmer_MAR_EN
    9.0 Levant_Neolithic_Farmer_Levant_PPNB
    8.4 Pontic_Steppe_Yamnaya_Pastoralist_Yamnaya_RUS_Sama ra
    7.2 West_Africa-Bantu_Farmer_COG_Kindoki_230BP
    2.6 Levant_Natufian_Hunter-Gatherer_Levant_Natufian
    2.2 Iran_Neolithic_Farmer_IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
    2.2 West_Europe_Hunter-Gatherer_WHG

    NAfr in studies for canarians:
    From this last studyeveloping CIRdb as a catalog of natural genetic variation in the Canary Islanders.
    http://europepmc.org/article/MED/36168029

    "Overall, while there is a large interindividual variability in the ancestry proportions in the current inhabitants, they have been estimated to an average of 75–83% European (EUR), 17–23% North African (NAF), and 3% or less sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)11,12. The most recent analyses based on genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array data evidenced that these numbers can be as high as up to 29.9% NAF and 9.2% SSA ancestries in some individuals13. Most importantly, they have also evidenced broad genomic regions of Canary Islanders that tend to concentrate African alleles and that are enriched in genes involved in diverse complex diseases, which is highly suggestive of characteristic footprints of local adaptations."

    "The historical conquest and admixture events, jointly with the isolation and inbreeding, as well as the likely local adaptation processes, have shaped the current genetic background of the Canary Islands population, constituting the population with the largest proportion of North African ancestry among Southwestern Europeans12,13"
    So the Morocco_Early_Neolithic_Farmer ( Taforalf right ? ) is 1/3 Nafr ancestry ? In some estimates I have seen that Iberomaurisian is usually close to half Nafr ancestry

    https://www.zupimages.net/up/19/12/3lt4.jpg

  7. #386
    Registered Users
    Posts
    400
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Luso View Post
    Most iberians have some variation of real nafri dna, most other south euros do not. Deal with it.
    For my part I will say the following

    - I think it is obvious that there was a great contact between the Maghreb and Iberia at least since the Iron Age and that, except for the Basques, the Nafr influence can be seen from a minimum of 3% in Catalonia to a maximum of 11% in Galicia and Portugal showing again the contact between the Amazight peoples and the Iberians but what I ask and I would like to know what you say is whether most of that impact came from the Islamic conquests or, on the contrary, there was no impact from that and the component arrived earlier, let's assume carthage
    Last edited by lorddraco14; 11-30-2022 at 04:06 PM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to lorddraco14 For This Useful Post:

     Luso (11-30-2022)

  9. #387
    Registered Users
    Posts
    900
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Human
    Nationality
    Luso-American
    aDNA Match (1st)
    Roman-Lusitanian_AD_426:R10500
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-Z225
    mtDNA (M)
    H1c3*

    Portugal Portugal 1143 Galicia
    Quote Originally Posted by lorddraco14 View Post
    For my part I will say the following

    - I think it is obvious that there was a great compact between the Maghreb and Iberia at least since the Iron Age and that, except for the Basques, the Nafr influence can be seen from a minimum of 3% in Catalonia to a maximum of 11% in Galicia and Portugal showing again the contact between the Amazight peoples and the Iberians but what I ask and I would like to know what you say is whether most of that impact came from the Islamic conquests or, on the contrary, there was no impact from that and the component arrived earlier, let's assume carthage
    The only answer is that we need way more samples to observe when nafri admixture was prevalent in the average person in iberia. Right now we have only some samples from late-roman era in west iberia (Modern day Portugal) that show varying amounts of taforalt, some with none, some with modern amounts, and some with lots of it. We need way more to see the trend because for now we can't assume any of those samples are native-like for that period with so much variation.... unless we average many many samples from the era from different areas. We need that to be done with similar time frames all across iberia's regions to be certain of any trends.

    I already answered the question previously:

    Quote Originally Posted by Luso View Post
    Makes sense.

    Not sure most people did not expected nafri admixture to be present in Iberia before Islamic conquest. Perhaps an agenda to overemphasize nafri genetic influence during Islamic era to paint us as completely mixed due to violent incursions on a previously Christian land. Or maybe, because of how long the conquest was for. I believe before, the view was that andalusians would have the most nafri admixture due to ending in 1492 (700 yrs of islamic hold of the land) and, in Portugal it ended in 1249 (500 yrs of islamic hold the land). Most without very much historical knowledge would then assume Portugal to have less nafri genetical influence compared to most of Spain. Clearly, not true. Evidence shows a huge andalusian repopulation from northerners including other europeans. Same occured in Portugal but it seems nafri already existed in genomes north of the Algarve and the puzzle pieces are connecting now. Based off this it seems, Galicians and other northern west Iberians may have already had some levels of amazigh admixture that more central north, and east north iberian pops did not have, so repopulating didn't change much of the nafri admixture already present before (islamic invasion), instead is just homogenized the gene pools admixture further. But this particular part of my writing is 100% speculation bc we lack late-roman nw iberian samples due to acidic soils
    -- I say all this with 100% respect to my amazigh brothers and sisters just ab 1,042 km away , I am fascinated in your people and culture, and your beautiful roots. Genetical and religious differences aside and in the modern context we are clearly all related in some way or another.

    But regardless, it was my view as well at one point mostly due to my initial ignorance on the topic. Being from the algarve I expected a major Moorish nafri component in me compared to northerners... I expected the more north you go in Portugal the less (Same view for Spain). But after some time reading and participating in this forum I am no longer surprised bc of north to south repopulation, Carthages influence on the Mediterranean world, and more archaic south Iberia trade with coastal Berber tribes (could have moved even further north in some instances). I still agree with Ruderico's theory as well, that late roman mine extraction using nafri slaves could have contributed to intermixing among some genomes. We still see some genomes lacking modern levels or very high levels so there must have been some more native / less impacted individuals at the time. TLR; as of right now, the view seems to be that Islamic invasion more so pushed snippets of nafri dna in iberian homogeneity on a longitudinal level (west more nafri, east less) rather than really be the sole cause of Iberians having nafri admixture varying in some areas post late roman era / throughout Islamic conquest (ie. highest in West Iberia, Portugal, south Galicia, Extremadura, West Andalucía).

    Looking forward to more samples to help fill the puzzle. Some questions in here are unanswerable at the moment. Patience.

    ps. completely unrelated - but G25 seems a bit sketchy sometimes, obviously it is a statistical formula no guarantees but I'm curious. Theoretically if I were to send my raw dna to davidski again what are the chances that my coordinates will represent different variations in numbers?
    That is all speculation though. Almost most of what you ask is very hard to answer with any concrete evidence at the moment. I guess that is part of the thrill this type of field deals with a lot
    Last edited by Luso; 11-30-2022 at 06:12 AM.
    [1] "distance%=1.5901"

    Luso

    West_Iberia_IA,53.2
    Roman_Colonial,19.2
    Germanic_Migration,17.4
    ITA_Sardinia_C_o,7.8
    Berber_EMA,2.4

    My Paternal Lineage-

    My dad's father- R-Z225- São Bartolomeu de Messines, Silves, Portugal
    My dad's mother- H5a- Alcantarilha, Silves, Portugal


    Maternal Lineage-

    My mom's mother- H1c3- Monchique, Silves, Portugal
    My mom's father- G2a-Y65- Lagoa, Ferragudo, Portugal

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Luso For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (11-30-2022)

  11. #388
    Registered Users
    Posts
    653
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    North African Arab
    Nationality
    Libyan
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-FT458078
    mtDNA (M)
    H65a

    Quote Originally Posted by lorddraco14 View Post
    So the Morocco_Early_Neolithic_Farmer ( Taforalf right ? ) is 1/3 Nafr ancestry ? In some estimates I have seen that Iberomaurisian is usually close to half Nafr ancestry

    https://www.zupimages.net/up/19/12/3lt4.jpg
    it varies, from around 25%-50% in modern berbers and 5%-40% in north african arabs

    and no it is a later sample with a bit more west asian/EEF compared to taforalt

    Target: Morocco_EN_(Ifri_n'Amr_ou_Moussa)
    Distance: 2.7921% / 0.02792054
    94.6 Iberomaurusian
    3.8 Levant_PPNB
    1.6 Steppe_Pastoralist
    Target: abceff_scaled
    Distance: 1.6186% / 0.01618598
    34.2 Tunisian_Douz
    31.4 Moroccan_Asilah
    22.4 Algerian_Mazuna
    5.4 Tunisian_Sfax
    4.6 Algerian_Tlemcen
    2.0 Tunisian_Jendouba

  12. #389
    Banned
    Posts
    217
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF27

    Castile and León Spanish Empire (1506-1701)
    Quote Originally Posted by Luso View Post
    You're right I'm not super knowledgeable about this. This is purely speculation on my part.

    But no.. that is not what I am saying. I think spaniards shift (which is different from south italy , central italy, and greece) due to whg inflation, has an affect on iberian’s distances (even with relatively significant taforalt cline) to fall further away from nafri sources than one may presume. Essentially the whg component - that is today almost exclusively high in central and northern euro populations, not southern euros - will make iberian pops distance further even in (many) cases where they have real taforalt admix. And so when youre forming conclusions that iberians nafri admixture is insignificant by showing comparisons with distances using non-iberian south euro populations with different admixture and without clear whg inflation we have… I think it is very disingenuous. You need to look at the bigger picture of how populations plot vs each other and how their specific components together can cause differences in the direction they show.

    I think this is why distances are not always something to use as a tool for detecting admixture similarities. Why? bc youre comparing whole population avgs which are more variable in admixture than one specific ancestral component and youre forming conclusions that are way more complex than you think. Specifically, down to how components behave in unison as opposed to isolation

    Most iberians have some variation of real nafri dna, most other south euros do not. Deal with it.
    You are right, you dont have much knowledge on the subject and you are only speculating, if you dont understand that the excess of WHG in the Spaniards with respect to Italians has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about, then it is useless to try to reason with you

    How you can say this"bc you are comparing whole populations avgs which are more variable in admixture than one specific component"

    We are not ONLY talking about distances between contemporary populations, we have also compared TAFORALT, using Portugal and some Italian.and Spanish regions, and the result is that Calabria is closer than Extremadura, Sicily west closer than Portugal or Campania closer than Murcia

    You understand that Taforalt is one specific ancestral component, right, and you understand than even using that component Calabria is closer than Portugal, right?

    I dont have to deal with anything, most of Spain has non existent or negligible Taforalt levels (0.0-2.0), this is not a problem for me, may be is a problem for you if you are trying to africanize Portugal or Spain.

    All european countries have african components to a greater or lesser extent. Do you know what is RFMix? Percentages in Europe

    Qatari
    0.26-Cyprus
    0.22-Greece
    0.20-Italy
    0.18-Romania
    0.14-Portugal
    0.14-Galicia
    0.14-Andalucia
    0.14-Swiss French
    0.13-Austria
    0.12-Hungary
    0.11-Ireland

    Saharawi
    0.10-Portugal
    0.09-Galicia
    0.09-Andalucia
    0.07-Italy
    0.06-Hungary
    0.06-Greece
    0.05-Swiss French
    0.05-Austria
    0.04-Romania
    0.04-Ireland

    In order to find out why Fst distances with north Africa are smaller in Italy or Greece than in Spain, it is only necesary to study which african populations are closer to the different european regions and of course thier genetic composition (ANF, WHG, Yamnaya, Levant_Neolithic and Taforalt levels)

    And this works precisely the opposite of the way Luso is reasoning. Excesses in certain components may be a reason for the similarity and of course, this is not related tp ANF or WHG because Iberia have more percentages of these components than Greeks or southern Italians- Then the similarity form these regiond come from Taforalt or the Levantine component.

    1-Direct gene flow between north Africa and Europe-This is the best explanation to understand the situation in Portugal (0.10) and Andalucia (0.09) since our history can explain this genetic relationship with north Africa, but how can explain the saharawi % in Austria (0.05), Hungary (0.06), Greece (0,06) or Italy (0.07)

    2-An alternative model is that these IBD segments and shared alleles with north Africa can only have their origin in an excess of levantine markers in those countries with respect to those of southwestern europe (through Taforalt>Natufians>Levant_Neolithic>Anatolia). Both IBD and allele sharing with the Near East appear elevated in southeastern europe (eg Italy, Greece, Cyprus). This could be an explanation for those countries that have much higher Near East levels such as Italy (0.20), Greece (0.22) or Romania (0.18), than those of southwestern Europe, but it does not work for Austria (0.13) which has very similar levels (even lower) than Portugal (0.14) or Andalucia (0.14).

    3-Therefor, we could even think that these north African markers are shared by Europeans since more remote times (even mesolthic) which also seems to be deduced from the size of the shared IBD segments

  13. #390
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,909
    Ethnicity
    Arab

    Quote Originally Posted by Abceff View Post
    it varies, from around 25%-50% in modern berbers and 5%-40% in north african arabs

    and no it is a later sample with a bit more west asian/EEF compared to taforalt

    Target: Morocco_EN_(Ifri_n'Amr_ou_Moussa)
    Distance: 2.7921% / 0.02792054
    94.6 Iberomaurusian
    3.8 Levant_PPNB
    1.6 Steppe_Pastoralist
    The mar en samples are low coverage pointless to make conclusions about them
    Last edited by Gentica277282; 11-30-2022 at 08:55 AM.
    Target: _Arab
    Distance: 1.5938% / 0.01593837 | R3P
    57.6 TUN_Kerkouane_IA
    32.4 Levant_Baqah_BA
    10.0 COG_Kindoki_230BP

    Itrane model

    Target: _Arab
    Distance: 1.2836% / 0.01283568
    60.0 Berber
    11.2 Sub_saharan
    10.8 Levantine
    10.4 Arabian
    7.6 Egyptian

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Gentica277282 For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (11-30-2022)

Page 39 of 61 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Impact of invasions of Great Britain and Ireland
    By lorddraco14 in forum Western
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-07-2022, 07:30 AM
  2. K1a in the Iberian Peninsula
    By estesiquesabe in forum K
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-23-2020, 07:46 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-31-2019, 12:42 AM
  4. Haplogroup L in the Iberian Peninsula
    By E_M81_I3A in forum L
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-29-2019, 10:54 AM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-13-2017, 10:59 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
  •