PDA

View Full Version : EEF gave Africa R1b-V88



Fire Haired14
25-11-16, 09:58
Chad Genetic Diversity Reveals an African History Marked by Multiple Holocene Eurasian Migrations (http://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(16)30448-7)

No Chadic genomes were sequenced before this study. Chad is a big country and multi-ethnic. They specifically sequenced genomes from the Lala people in Southern Chad, the Nilo-Saharan speaking Tobou in Northern Chad, the Nilo-Saharan people Sara in Southern Chad, and people from Chad's capital who weren't assigned to an ethnic group. The Lala people speak a language isolate and there are less than 1,000 of them. R1b-V88 has a consistent presence throughout Africa and peaks in Central Africa(mostly in Chad) at over 50%. Eurasian ancestry varies among the tested Chadic people. The Tobou have 26-30% and the Chadic people tested have less than 5%, according to one method they used. F3 stats of the form f3(Toubou; Yoruba, X) say that Sardinians, Neolithic Europeans, and Northern Africans are the best proxy for the Eurasian ancestor of Toubou. They ran the same test for the Amhara people in Ethopia and Sardinians and Neolithic Europeans were the best proxy for their Eurasian ancestor. R1b-V88 had a weak presence in Neolithic Europe, so it's totally possible EEF-like people from the Near East or Mediterranean Europe are the source of R1b-V88 in Central Africa.

LeBrok
25-11-16, 17:49
Neolithic East Anatolia? They could have brought Caucasian admixture to Egypt with them (Harappa World, Gedmatch). This admixture was low in Natufians, so probably even lower farther south, but is up to 30% in Egypt these days. Who knows, maybe some Egyptian pharaohs belonged to V88?


There is also a very high level of Mediterranean and SW Asian admixtures in all Sahara region today, but it could have been there before Neolithic already.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32877-HarappaWorld-Gedmatch-post-and-compare-your-admixtures-to-ancient-and-contemporary?p=490581&viewfull=1#post490581
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32877-HarappaWorld-Gedmatch-post-and-compare-your-admixtures-to-ancient-and-contemporary/page4?p=491063&viewfull=1#post491063

berun
25-11-16, 20:30
I will read the paper but all it is quite logic; R1b was wandering in Anatolia / Fertile Crescent in the Mesolithic, so that after learning to herd they were able to expand further than farmer tribes; the Green Sahara was not fitable for farmers but only for herders, so that Natufians and co. (Afro-Asiatic languages) were not welcomed at first, only peoples that mastered herding. Maybe it was the same case in Europe? (the R1b-V88 found in Neolithic Pyrenees was surely a herder also, see Valle de Benasque (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valle_de_Benasque) economy)

Angela
25-11-16, 20:59
From the abstract:

"Understanding human genetic diversity in Africa is important for interpreting the evolution of all humans, yet vast regions in Africa, such as Chad, remain genetically poorly investigated. Here, we use genotype data from 480 samples from Chad, the Near East, and southern Europe, as well as whole-genome sequencing from 19 of them, to show that many populations today derive their genomes from ancient African-Eurasian admixtures. We found evidence of early Eurasian backflow to Africa in people speaking the unclassified isolate Laal language in southern Chad and estimate from linkage-disequilibrium decay that this occurred 4,750–7,200 years ago. It brought to Africa a Y chromosome lineage (R1b-V88) whose closest relatives are widespread in present-day Eurasia; we estimate from sequence data that the Chad R1b-V88 Y chromosomes coalesced 5,700–7,300 years ago. This migration could thus have originated among Near Eastern farmers during the African Humid Period. We also found that the previously documented Eurasian backflow into Africa, which occurred ~3,000 years ago and was thought to be mostly limited to East Africa, had a more westward impact affecting populations in northern Chad, such as the Toubou, who have 20%–30% Eurasian ancestry today. We observed a decline in heterozygosity in admixed Africans and found that the Eurasian admixture can bias inferences on their coalescent history and confound genetic signals from adaptation and archaic introgression."

So, more than one flow, and differential percentages in the many diverse and structured populations.

In some sense the paper is responding to skepticism that the Eurasian back flow extended beyond East Africa.

To that question:
"we found that the Toubou in Chad, who also speak a Nilo-Saharan language, are a mixture of Africans and Eurasians, making f3(Toubou; Eurasian, Yoruba) always significantly negative. This suggests that the impact of Eurasian migrations today extends beyond East Africa and the Afro-Asiatic-speaking populations. We did not detect significant (Z score < 4) Eurasian admixture in the Sara (Nilo-Saharan language family) or the Laal speakers (unclassified language)."

"In addition to introducing to African populations genes that were positively selected in Europe, the recent AfricanEurasian admixture carried Neanderthal alleles to Central and East Africa. Neanderthals are closer to the Amhara than to the Yoruba."

So, also, language is not the sole determining factor. Neither is religion.

In all cases, these are "Sardinian like" genes. " Among modern populations, Sardinians showed the highest genetic affinity to both the Toubou and Amhara. (B) Ancient Eurasians also showed correlated affinity to both the Toubou and Amhara; the early Neolithic LBK (Linearbandkeramik, or Linear Pottery) population (~5,000 BCE) had the highest affinity."

So, we're talking about Anatolian Neolithic like people, not people from eastern Anatolia presumably higher in Iran Neolithic.

It isn't clear to me yet whether the migration 3,000 years ago, like the one at the time of the early Neolithic, was also "EN" like. If it was, either the western Near East changed a lot after 1000 BC, or this migrating population had already moved south to some way station.


The third Eurasian gene flow into some of these people was different:

"The Toubou, despite their Islamic faith, do not show the genetic admixture detected in many Near Eastern and North African populations around 1,100 ya,41 suggesting conversion without population mixing at this time. They did, however, receive additional Eurasian ancestry in the past 200 years from a source represented by North African populations such as Tunisians, Mozabite, Algerians, and Sahrawi (Figure 3C). This recent interaction could have been promoted by the nomadic lifestyle of the present-day Toubou and a shared Muslim religion with North Africans."

So, the Arabic led conversions did not result in significant gene flow. There was some smaller amount of admixture quite a bit later.

The percentages are also interesting:

". Eurasian ancestry was estimated at 26%–30% in the Toubou, 0.3%–2% in the Sara, and 1.2%–4.5% in the Laal speakers. Eurasian ancestry in Ethiopians ranged from 11%–12% in the Gumuz to 53%–57% in the Amhara. African ancestry in the Near East ranged from 7%–14% (Yemen) to 0.7%–5% (Lebanese Christians)."

Finally, "In addition, we detected in admixed Africans an inflation of positive-selection signals on alleles associated with adult lactose tolerance and pigmentation in Europeans, but we suggest that these alleles have drifted neutrally in Africans after admixture." So, according to these researchers, no selection at these sites, which is also no surprise, in my opinion. Environmentally, these would not be beneficial. The only possible selection would be social, but it doesn't seem to have occurred. (I'm sure those convinced that a preference for white (or lighter) skin is hard wired into all humans will be disappointed.

johen
25-11-16, 22:36
I will read the paper but all it is quite logic; R1b was wandering in Anatolia / Fertile Crescent in the Mesolithic, so that after learning to herd they were able to expand further than farmer tribes; the Green Sahara was not fitable for farmers but only for herders, so that Natufians and co. (Afro-Asiatic languages) were not welcomed at first, only peoples that mastered herding. Maybe it was the same case in Europe? (the R1b-V88 found in Neolithic Pyrenees was surely a herder also, see Valle de Benasque (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valle_de_Benasque) economy)

Can we think that the R1b-v88 was the Afro-Asiatic language spreader, even more Anatolian IE 4,000bc?

Aaron1981
25-11-16, 22:45
For some odd reason the Toubou admixture event is much later from the one in southern Chad, which makes it difficult to explain. Greek chroniclers talked of nomadic tribes roaming Libya who were pale complexioned and consumed raw animal milk, often this stuff gets dismissed as nonsense.. but I believe there is a grain of truth to it. Perhaps it's no coincidence these individuals likely carried the European LCT mutation. I am doubtful these ancient Libyans came from Ethiopia and carried YDNA J1, simply because that region has their own distinct LCT mutations. The first confirmed incidence of European LCT is Bell Beaker Germany. The Neolithic package seems to be very complex as YDNA H2 and G do not turn up in these results but were apparently part of the PPN package. More data is definitely required. Perhaps the R1b-V88 and T carrying tribes in Libya who contributed to the locals who became Toubou remained distinct and separate for thousands of years like we have been seeing in Europe among the Neolithic settlements. The same may apply here.

Fire Haired14
25-11-16, 22:56
I don't think we should not take their age estimates for when the Eurasian-African admixture in Chad and Ethopia occurred seriously. Evidence suggests their Eurasian ancestors were like Neolithic Anatolians(and Levanties?) and we know Anatolia and the Levant received ancient Iran/Caucasus admixture at least 5,000 years ago. So, the Neolithic might be the only time frame EEFish people could have migrated into Africa. I guess maybe EEFish people remained isolated in Southern parts of West Asia up until 3,000 years ago or more recently, but we have no confirmation from ancient DNA yet.

MarkoZ
25-11-16, 23:30
I will read the paper but all it is quite logic; R1b was wandering in Anatolia / Fertile Crescent in the Mesolithic, so that after learning to herd they were able to expand further than farmer tribes; the Green Sahara was not fitable for farmers but only for herders, so that Natufians and co. (Afro-Asiatic languages) were not welcomed at first, only peoples that mastered herding. Maybe it was the same case in Europe? (the R1b-V88 found in Neolithic Pyrenees was surely a herder also, see Valle de Benasque (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valle_de_Benasque) economy)

What the findings of this paper suggest is that Eurasian admixture doesn't correlate well with the distribution of Afrasian languages. On the other hand, additional African admixture relative to Natufian in the Middle East, the southern Levant and beyond indicates that there must have been a subsequent migratory event in the opposite direction. If anything, this paper lends support to an African origin of Afrasian, IMHO.

berun
25-11-16, 23:48
Can we think that the R1b-v88 was the Afro-Asiatic language spreader, even more Anatolian IE 4,000bc?


The fact to be local R1b-V88 more related to Sardinians than lets say Samaritanians or Druzes point more to an Anatolian origin, also the arrival of such clade in the Pyrenees must be related with the Anatolian expansion. Also there are some V88 in Sardinia... by that I stick with such route instead than Natufians and Afro-asiatic (the Chadic branch could be a late comer, otherwise if present there by 5000 BC I think it wouldn't be easily related to the main tree... as it would be more set appart in time than Luwian from Polish).

Sile
26-11-16, 00:21
For some odd reason the Toubou admixture event is much later from the one in southern Chad, which makes it difficult to explain. Greek chroniclers talked of nomadic tribes roaming Libya who were pale complexioned and consumed raw animal milk, often this stuff gets dismissed as nonsense.. but I believe there is a grain of truth to it. Perhaps it's no coincidence these individuals likely carried the European LCT mutation. I am doubtful these ancient Libyans came from Ethiopia and carried YDNA J1, simply because that region has their own distinct LCT mutations. The first confirmed incidence of European LCT is Bell Beaker Germany. The Neolithic package seems to be very complex as YDNA H2 and G do not turn up in these results but were apparently part of the PPN package. More data is definitely required. Perhaps the R1b-V88 and T carrying tribes in Libya who contributed to the locals who became Toubou remained distinct and separate for thousands of years like we have been seeing in Europe among the Neolithic settlements. The same may apply here.

NRY haplogroups R1b1c-V88 and T yield relevant information. R1b1c-V88 is interpreted by Cruciani et al (2002; 2010) as trans-Saharan pastoralists wandering toward the Chad Basin and the region of present-day Cameroon with a coalescence age between 9.2 and 5.6 kya. Haplogroup R1b1c-V88 hasa Eurasian origin and entered Northeast Africa from the Near East. The number of sublineages(L=5) stemming from R1b1c-V88 indicates an expansion. Haplogroup T has its highest variability in the region of present-day Syria and diversified there for a long period of time. It must have arisen earlier than the T1-M70 coalescence age of 17 kya.A migration to Northeast Africa from this area occurred by T1a-Page21* males with a coalescence age of 14 kya. A similar migration was by T1a1b-P77 males with a coalescence age of 7.6 kya(Mendezet al.2011). These lineages may well have entered Northeast Africa during the same migration shortly after 7.6 kya as a group of distantly related male farmers. Haplogroups R1b1c-V88 and T thus inform of relevant male migrations to Northeast Africa.


Clearly R1b-V88 passed into Africa from the Levant without bringing any IE language with it , because it passed Anatolia 4000 years earlier.......As for T1 .......the only one type found was with marker SNP page21* ...........it does appear in tunisia but does not appear in east-africa ( because T in east-africa only arrived there less than 2000 years ago from other sources, most likely india or the persian gulf )

johen
26-11-16, 00:27
The fact to be local R1b-V88 more related to Sardinians than lets say Samaritanians or Druzes point more to an Anatolian origin, also the arrival of such clade in the Pyrenees must be related with the Anatolian expansion. Also there are some V88 in Sardinia... by that I stick with such route instead than Natufians and Afro-asiatic (the Chadic branch could be a late comer, otherwise if present there by 5000 BC I think it wouldn't be easily related to the main tree... as it would be more set appart in time than Luwian from Polish).

Ancient Sardinians were divided into 3 ethnicities.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Etnie_Nuragiche.jpg

The Balares in Baleares islands could be related with the megalithic culture of Basque. And the ancient Corsicans were perhaps related with Etruscans or ancient Ligurians, who were most likely related with the famous Sea Peoples/Pelasgians

Pretty interesting thing is Basque and Pelasgians were similar to sumer language. They would be different from EEF language. I think there is another possibility of Sumerian to be R1b-v88. Moreover seems like ANE R,Q were the spreader of Nostratic language family.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33126-Lost-city-of-the-tomb-builders-uncovered-in-Egypt-7-000-year-old

“Prehistorically, the Sumerians were not aboriginal to Mesopotamia. Their native hearth is unknown. Speaking an agglutinative tongue showing affinities, on one hand, with the Uralo-Altaic languages (Balto-Finnish, Hungarian, Volgaic, Uralien, Samoyuedic, Turkish, Mongolian, and Eskimo) and, on the other hand, with the Dravidian tounges of India, the Pelasgian of pre-Homeric Greece, Georgian of the Caucasus, and Basque of the Pyrenes, they had arrived apparently c.3500 B.C. to find the river lands already accupied by an advanced Neolithic, farming and cattle-raising population known to science as the Ubaidian (also, Proto-Euphratean), [...].” (Joseph Campbell, The Mythic Dimension, New World Library, 2008, p.122)"

Angela
28-11-16, 16:50
Razib Khan's blog post on the paper:
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/afro-asiatic-and-eurasian-backflow/

berun
28-11-16, 19:22
Ancient Sardinians were divided into 3 ethnicities.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Etnie_Nuragiche.jpg

The Balares in Baleares islands could be related with the megalithic culture of Basque. And the ancient Corsicans were perhaps related with Etruscans or ancient Ligurians, who were most likely related with the famous Sea Peoples/Pelasgians

Pretty interesting thing is Basque and Pelasgians were similar to sumer language. They would be different from EEF language. I think there is another possibility of Sumerian to be R1b-v88. Moreover seems like ANE R,Q were the spreader of Nostratic language family.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33126-Lost-city-of-the-tomb-builders-uncovered-in-Egypt-7-000-year-old

“Prehistorically, the Sumerians were not aboriginal to Mesopotamia. Their native hearth is unknown. Speaking an agglutinative tongue showing affinities, on one hand, with the Uralo-Altaic languages (Balto-Finnish, Hungarian, Volgaic, Uralien, Samoyuedic, Turkish, Mongolian, and Eskimo) and, on the other hand, with the Dravidian tounges of India, the Pelasgian of pre-Homeric Greece, Georgian of the Caucasus, and Basque of the Pyrenes, they had arrived apparently c.3500 B.C. to find the river lands already accupied by an advanced Neolithic, farming and cattle-raising population known to science as the Ubaidian (also, Proto-Euphratean), [...].” (Joseph Campbell, The Mythic Dimension, New World Library, 2008, p.122)"

The Mythic Dimension... if do you would provide us linguistical information... and if do you wish to have scientific knowledge about these matters, just take linguistic books from the library, myths are not related to linguistic science and if do you read linguistic books you will realize how far are such statements from actual knowledge.

berun
28-11-16, 19:32
By the way V88 came from the Fertile Crescent, also the Hurrite Z2103 that spread among Yamnayans, M335 and L23 is yet today in Anatolia, and an "eastern" R1b was found in Paleolithic Italy coming from...

Angela
28-11-16, 21:50
By the way V88 came from the Fertile Crescent, also the Hurrite Z2103 that spread among Yamnayans, M335 and L23 is yet today in Anatolia, and an "eastern" R1b was found in Paleolithic Italy coming from...


Are you talking about Villabruna? That's Mesolithic, not Paleolithic, who were different people, and we don't know where the WHG cluster came from yet.

As for Z2103, we don't know yet whether it went from south of the Caucasus north or vice versa, although it's my personal opinion that early clades of R1b may have spread from the northwestern Iran area; V-88 south, and the rest north. We're going to need more DNA before it can finally be pinned down, imo.

berun
29-11-16, 00:11
Well, epipaleolithic would be the best word then.

For Z2103 of course it's soon to know its history but if there was a caucasian / transcaucasian / zagros signal in the steppes and such signal appers just when herding expands eveywhere... the source is quite clear.

firetown
21-12-16, 09:55
What makes you think that the original settlers in the Pyrenees mountains were R1b? Don't examinations of ancientburisl grounds show an R1b decline?