Autosomal map : African admixture (from Dodecad)

Greeks: E + G2a + J1 + J2 + T = 58%

Most J2 (23%) must be J2b, more likely Southeast Mediterranean. A core of the rest is what makes Greeks 32% Mideast/Cucasus, with a residual 0.5% Northwest African. There is 41% of other haplogroups that probably replaced African autosomes and reduced others.

E1b1b falls under Mediterranean, otherwise nothing makes sense in the comparison between Dodecad admixtures and Y-DNA frequencies. J1 probably should be divided in J1c3 and JxJ1c3, but overall J1 and T are better classified as Southwest Asian.

For the Greeks, G2a + J2 = 29.5%, much closer to the 26% West Asian admixture. You can't expect a perfect match because these are rough averages. J1 + T = 7.5%, a very good match to the 6.8% Southwest Asian.
 
I don't see the point in putting all J2 to get the West Asian admixture, when most J2 must be J2b in Greece (in my opinion an Eastern Mediterranean marker, nothing to do with the rest). I don't know the percent, but must be significant.

E1b1b's migrated from North Africa crossing the Near East and Anatolia to get into Greece, almost sure, in a very important number. So they brought quite of the influences they got in their migration way. No way it's likely the original Mediterranean component was "started" by E1b1b peoples, since it doesn't peak in North Africa or neither the Near East. And we must assumne, if you are right, the most part got into Greece via sea (preserving the suposed Mediterranean autosomes)...not probable checking the E-M78 distribution (the main one). It's more likely the African autosomes got diluted and were replaced by West Asian and Southwest Asian, althought haplogroups still survived.
 
I don't see the point in putting all J2 to get the West Asian admixture, when most J2 must be J2b in Greece (in my opinion an Eastern Mediterranean marker, nothing to do with the rest). I don't know the percent, but must be significant.

All J2 originated in West Asia, even J2b.

E1b1b's migrated from North Africa crossing the Near East and Anatolia to get into Greece, almost sure, in a very important number. So they brought quite of the influences they got in their migration way. No way it's likely the original Mediterranean component was "started" by E1b1b peoples, since it doesn't peak in North Africa or neither the Near East. And we must assumne, if you are right, the most part got into Greece via sea (preserving the suposed Mediterranean autosomes)...not probable checking the E-M78 distribution (the main one). It's more likely the African autosomes got diluted and were replaced by West Asian and Southwest Asian, althought haplogroups still survived.

Don't think in terms of present distribution but ancient ones. Take out all the J1, J2 and G2a from North Africa and Europe, all the R1a and R1b from Europe.

Get rid even of E-M81 everywhere, as I think it migrated to Northwest Africa and Iberia well after* the "original" E-M78 people colonised the Mediterranean region and mixed with the indigenous I2a1 people.

Once you have computed the new frequencies in your head, try to imagine the new map of how the Mediterranean looked like 10,000 years ago (assuming that E-M78 was already in southern Europe). I will help you : E-M78 is everywhere in North Africa (close to 100% frequency) and Northern Europe (variable frequency depending on local I2 communities, but let's keep in mind that Paleolithic/Mesolithic people were mostly nomads or semi-nomads, so the map wouldn't be "frozen" like today).


*maybe only 5000 or 6000 years ago
 
Absolutly unclear where J2b as clade originated. Pretending to put J2b at the same level of J2 it's not reasonable in any case, there must be an autosomal difference like it or not, the same happens in ALL subclades...this haplogroup is not different from the rest, another thing is you just want to ignore the fact. I know you don't think so, but in my opinion J2b originated in Western Anatolia, or the zones around Macedonia and Greece. That's what makes more sense according to the distribution, it's likely it originated in a "circle" having inside the regions I mention (Western Anatolia-Greece-Macedonia).

Precisely think in ancient terms is what makes no sense, since those "pure" ethnicities were mixed and almost totally replaced in some regions. With the modern distribution you can see the different migration ways humans followed, but at many points (specially Anatolia and other East Mediterranean populations), you can't expect your "exact" estimations because the contact with many different peoples was very significant. What you obtain is a core of all wich recombines in ALEATORY terms, that simple.

West European and East European are quite widespread according to the last data too. There's a portrait of the Nepalese showing substantial West and East European...so the argument to atribute such influences to the Mediteranean component because it's widespread and must match somewhere (E haplogroup for example), it's simply not valid. West and Southwest Asian together are very widespread too, and we can continue with similar assumptions all day trying to match results. However, no need to say this, since the distances are very clear in the Dodecad run, and Mediterranean it's enough removed to match Southern Europe, even more than it was before at K=10 as I posted in other threads. So if that's the thought and want to match Mediterranean with haplogroup E, you must accept the distances doesn't support the argument since both West Asian and Southwest Asian are closer to North/East Africa as whole (everywhere in North Africa), and the Middle East (of course), than the Mediterranean actually is.

Sorry, but the insurmountable incoherence it's perfectly noticeable: http://dodecad.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2011-07-25T19%3A16%3A00%2B03%3A00&max-results=12
 
Last edited:
You did not understand what I meant. Maciano claims that these percentages in iberia are from ancient times and not medieva/renaissance times. I said that if the invasions ( celt ,goth and vandal) from the north did not occur, then the likelyhood of these current percentages would have been higher than what they are today.

Unless you mean that the celt in iberia where always there and did not come from gallic lands.

but then again. in ancient times I agree with many scholars that indicate that the celts meant a linguistic associated people and not always a migratory one. So, you have, gallic-celtic, iberic-celtic, italic-celtic, germanic-celtic etc etc.
I do beleive in time they ( celts ) developed there own culture, But I think that is only where they are present at the moment.

Tartessains where in the south, be them phoenicians or north africans, and some say they originated in modern romania from the black sea
http://www.pelasgians.org/website5/32_06.htm
WRONG !!! Tartessians spoke an Indo-European language, is impossible the came from Phoenicians or North-Africans.

I have modified the map too for Tuscany too. I was the first map on the Tuscan samples from Dodecad members, but it's true that the HapMap TSI is more representative as there are over 100 samples.

The few Spanish Basque members I know from the Dodecad Project have over 1% of African admixture. Which members did you take into account ?
The bigger sample : French Basques. They have 0.3% african. I imagine pure spanish-basques and navarrese are the same, on average.
 
The French Basques sample comes from the frontier, so they are neither "French" or "Spanish". Perhaps it's good to keep this in mind.
 
you must accept the distances doesn't support the argument since both West Asian and Southwest Asian are closer to North/East Africa as whole (everywhere in North Africa), and the Middle East (of course), than the Mediterranean actually is.
?
What are you talking about?

Do you ever know where West Asian is, do you even know the capital cities of West Asian countries? Sorry but you are ignorant as hell...

Egypt is in Norhteast Africa. You can't get a more Northeastern African country.
Greece and Italy are in South Europe.
Armenia, Azarbajdjan, Gerogia etc. are in West Asia.

The distance between Egypt is closer to Italy and Greece than between Egypt and Armenia-Azarbajdjan.
 
Check the GENETIC distance I posted Goga. Geographic assumptions have nothing to do here, so if you are not agree you should go and reply Dienekes'.
 
Check the GENETIC distance I posted Goga. Geographic assumptions have nothing to do here, so if you are not agree you should go and reply Dienekes'.
You're talking about geography. And you're spreading lies!

Genetic distance between the Medittearean and North Africa is closer to each other than distance between West Asia and North Africa.

While the GENETIC distance between West Asia and East Africa is closer to each other than distance between East Africa and the Mediterranean!
 
Btw., West Asia don't have any 'African admixture' (as you can see on the map), while the Medittearean especially in West (Southwest Europe & Northwest Africa) has a lot!
 
Med vs N. Africa = 0.067 (0.001 closer)
W. Asia vs N. Africa = 0.068 (0.001 far)

Med vs E. Africa = 0.117 (0.006 far)
W. Asia vs E. Africa = 0.111 (0.006 closer)

North/East Africa (everywhere in North Africa) = West Asian is 0.005 closer

No need to put a Word about Southwest Asian.
 
Btw., West Asia don't have the 'pure' African admixture, while the Medittearean especially in West has a lot!
Not a lot guy. With more than 90% European the distance is huge compared with West Asians. I showed you the example of a non mixed Georgian, and he was closer than any Spaniard to Africa., specially East Africa. Comparing with several Italians and Greeks, he was more or less the same, or showed less similarity. So wrong in your thoughts about Southwest Europe, but not about the rest.
 
Med vs N. Africa = 0.067 (0.001 closer)
W. Asia vs N. Africa = 0.068 (0.001 far)

Med vs E. Africa = 0.117 (0.006 far)
W. Asia vs E. Africa = 0.111 (0.006 closer)

North/East Africa (everywhere in North Africa) = West Asian is 0.005 closer

No need to put a Word about Southwest Asian.
You ARE ignorant as hell!

North and East Africans are different folks.
Just face it that the Medittearean are very close to NORTH Africans, and they even share the same DNA with each other. There's Southwest European DNA in North Africa and there's North African DNA in Southwest Europe!

Why can't you just accept that!
 
Not a lot guy. With more than 90% European the distance is huge compared with West Asians. I showed you the example of a non mixed Georgian, and he was closer than any Spaniard to Africa., specially East Africa. Comparing with several Italians and Greeks, he was more or less the same, or showed less similarity. So wrong in your thoughts about Southwest Europe, but not about the rest.
We are talking about the African admixture right?

As you can see on this map SothWest Europe HAS African admixture, while West Asia don't have any African admixture.

And please don't start with genetic distances again, because many Europeans are actually West Asian. I mean many Europeans with West Asian roots (R, G & IJ) migrated out of Africa at the same time as the current West Asians did...
 
You ARE ignorant as hell!

North and East Africans are different folks.
Just face it that the Medittearean are very close to NORTH Africans, and they even share the same DNA with each other. There's Medittearean DNA in North Africa and there's North African DNA in Southwest Europe!

Why can't you just accept that!

Because all other Iberian genetic affinities (West, North, N. Atlantic, etc.) overwhelm anything African. Not to mention that the African influences are very ancient and are not meaningful. N. African DNA is also present in many other regions of Europe. Why don't YOU accept the (obvious) facts. Enough codswallop already.
 
You are the only ignorant here who hasn't read the full post to understand why I put this together. Check carefully to get in discussion if you want, because I'll only repeat this one time: http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/6/1300/F2.large.jpg

We were talking about to include E-M78 as Mediterranean, for this reason it was relevant to talk about East Africans, since as you can see the distribution includes East Africa. Also Egypt has 12.5% East African, with one of the individuals scoring more than 20%. So yes, IT'S SIGNIFICANT ACCORDING TO THE DISCUSSION BEFORE YOUR INTROMISSION.

Got it guy?


An having little admixture does not make Spaniards closer, since Gerogians have a huge amont of West Asian and almost absent Northern European. Not the case of Spaniards, so stop with the nonsense, impossible they are closer than Georgians and similars.
 
Because all other Iberian genetic affinities (West, North, N. Atlantic, etc.) overwhelm anything African. Not to mention that the African influences are very ancient and are not meaningful. N. African DNA is also present in many other regions of Europe. Why don't YOU accept the (obvious) facts. Enough codswallop already.

Which facts? There is NO African DNA in West Asia AT ALL!
 
You are the only ignorant here who hasn't read the full post to understand why I put this together. Check carefully to get in discussion if you want, because I'll only repeat this one time: http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/6/1300/F2.large.jpg

We were talking about to include E-M78 as Mediterranean, for this reason it was relevant to talk about East Africans, since as youcan see the distribution includes East Africa. Also Egypt has 12.5% East African, with one of the individuals socring more than 20%. So yes, IT'S SIGNIFICANT ACCORDING TO THE DISCUSSION BEFORE YOUR INTROMISSION.

Got it guy?


An having little admixture does not make Spaniards closer, since Gerogians have a huge amont of West Asian and almost absent Northern European. Not the case of Spaniards, so stop with the nonsense, impossible they are closer than Georgians and similars.

SouthWest Europeans are MORE African. FACT!

We are talking about the African admixture right?

As you can see on this map SothWest Europe HAS African admixture, while West Asia don't have any African admixture.

And please don't start with genetic distances again, because many Europeans are actually West Asian. I mean many Europeans with West Asian roots (R, G & IJ) migrated out of Africa at the same time as the current West Asians did...
 
This map doesn't lie!


African-admixture.gif
 
But not genetically closer, that's the fact you don't seem to understand. West Asians are much more intermediate population, like it or not. At least, I hope you got the reason why I used the other figures, since I see in the second issue it's impossible we agree with your behaviour.
 

This thread has been viewed 140233 times.

Back
Top