Western migration route from Africa into Iberia

how old is the Ballito Bay (Khoisan)?
were they herders or HG?

domesticated animals arrived in S.-Africa ca 2 ka through contact with herders from PPNB Levantine descent

Mota or the Malawi HG would have been a better reference to compare against

Yes the Malawi HG is Nachikufu.
 
But there is something i dont really understand " An alternative possibility is that gene flow may have occurred even earlier in Southern Iberia from a population with Sub-Saharan African features, which left some genetic contribution in the genomes of the people, the local hunter–gatherers, they admixed with " I'm not sure how prehistoric Iberians and prehistoric Sub-Saharian Africans are supposed to have mixed without Iberomaurusian-related ancestry being more dominant than the Sub-Saharian One. Also the mtdna L2a1 shows no SSA ancestry at all, wich could mean that the lineage was at the time enough old in that place to have her SSA ancestry diluted into Neolithic ones. It's then possible that the SSA ancestry was related with a North African ancestry older than Iberomaurusians and more close to SSA, less Basal Eurasian.
 
Yeah, it's weird. L2a1 and L1b are clear enough indicators, but the D stat signal is pretty marginal, should we be sure it's even real? Seems like it wouldn't take much of undetected artifact somewhere to throw them off.

In general f stats involving Africans are hard to interpret, and I'll be surprised if the real population history isn't way more complicated than any qpGraph yet attempted.
 
But there is something i dont really understand " An alternative possibility is that gene flow may have occurred even earlier in Southern Iberia from a population with Sub-Saharan African features, which left some genetic contribution in the genomes of the people, the local hunter–gatherers, they admixed with " I'm not sure how prehistoric Iberians and prehistoric Sub-Saharian Africans are supposed to have mixed without Iberomaurusian-related ancestry being more dominant than the Sub-Saharian One. Also the mtdna L2a1 shows no SSA ancestry at all, wich could mean that the lineage was at the time enough old in that place to have her SSA ancestry diluted into Neolithic ones. It's then possible that the SSA ancestry was related with a North African ancestry older than Iberomaurusians and more close to SSA, less Basal Eurasian.

I've been wondering that too.
Prior to Iberomaurisian there was Aterian, which descended from the archaic Jebel Irhoud population (315 ka), so not the SSA.
If SSA entered Iberia, these people must have crossed Iberomaurisian territory prior to that.
 
Yeah, it's weird. L2a1 and L1b are clear enough indicators, but the D stat signal is pretty marginal, should we be sure it's even real? Seems like it wouldn't take much of undetected artifact somewhere to throw them off.

In general f stats involving Africans are hard to interpret, and I'll be surprised if the real population history isn't way more complicated than any qpGraph yet attempted.


Hard to interpret in what way?
 
In that you could probably get the same results from a variety of histories involving who knows what mixtures and ghost populations; and on top of that there's reference bias and perhaps other artifacts to consider.
 
In that you could probably get the same results from a variety of histories involving who knows what mixtures and ghost populations

Are you implying false postitive results, as in a population showing a signature of African admixture in f statistics but it's maybe not indicative of straightforward African ancestry? Couldn't you have this potentiality with any population, not just Africans?


and on top of that there's reference bias and perhaps other artifacts to consider.

Can you elaborate a bit more? I take it you have some personal experience using these software packages.
 
No, I don't do any of this stuff, just looking at other people's results. Yes, marginal results could be misleading in any case. Africa is only worse because there is such deep diverse branching mixed together and much less ancient DNA.
 
very weird
at K=7 the CHG splits in 2 components, and only one of them is in steppe

I guess this is one of the flaws of K admixture, which splits into different components depending on what populations are compared in the mix

It's what I find unpleasant since some studies: inconsistance of admixtures runs from survey to survey. Impossibility to compare quietly. Aside IBD what is of worth?
 
it's worth to know that if someone tries hard, it can be founf SSA admixture, or Mongolian steppe admixture, no matter.
 
I've been wondering that too.
Prior to Iberomaurisian there was Aterian, which descended from the archaic Jebel Irhoud population (315 ka), so not the SSA.
If SSA entered Iberia, these people must have crossed Iberomaurisian territory prior to that.

We dont have Iberomaurusian samples from all their existence, only from Epipaleolithic. It's very possible that, early Iberomaurusians were genetically different than later ones. Just like Gravettians were C1a2 people that were replaced with R1b in Epigravettian with a different ancestry cf. ( dolni vestonice against villabruna cluser ). But at the same level, it's frustrating to know that a place lile Iberia who is the dominant place in Europe for prehistoric Archeology, cannot give us more samples than Eastern Europe.
 
We so far have mtDNA haplogroups L2a1 and L1b1a in Neolithic/Chalcolithic Iberia, and a L2a1 sample from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic culture located in Tell Halula, Syria. These samples do not have any Sub-Saharan African admixture correct? If I recall in the Lazaridis et al. 2018 preprint, the Iberomaurusians were demonstrated to have had no SSA ancestry, and they contributed ancestry to Sub-Saharan Africans not the other way around. It could be that the Iberomaurusians and/or their descendants contributed ancestry to some of the peoples of Neolithic Western and Southern Europe. That may explain why mtDNA Haplogroups L2a1 and L1b1a show up in Neolithic/Copper Age Iberia. Seeing that mtDNA haplogroups L2 and L1 both predate the widely accepted date of Homo Sapiens entry into Eurasia at 70,000 ybp, is it possible that like Y-DNA haplogroups A, B, BT, and CT, various subclades of mtDNA haplogroup L were part of the original gene pool of the first Eurasians?
 
We so far have mtDNA haplogroups L2a1 and L1b1a in Neolithic/Chalcolithic Iberia, and a L2a1 sample from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic culture located in Tell Halula, Syria. These samples do not have any Sub-Saharan African admixture correct? If I recall in the Lazaridis et al. 2018 preprint, the Iberomaurusians were demonstrated to have had no SSA ancestry, and they contributed ancestry to Sub-Saharan Africans not the other way around. It could be that the Iberomaurusians and/or their descendants contributed ancestry to some of the peoples of Neolithic Western and Southern Europe. That may explain why mtDNA Haplogroups L2a1 and L1b1a show up in Neolithic/Copper Age Iberia. Seeing that mtDNA haplogroups L2 and L1 both predate the widely accepted date of Homo Sapiens entry into Eurasia at 70,000 ybp, is it possible that like Y-DNA haplogroups A, B, BT, and CT, various subclades of mtDNA haplogroup L were part of the original gene pool of the first Eurasians?

BT and CT were already found in some Paleolithic Europeans and Neolithic Middle-Easterns, but i dont know if they lacked SNP's, so actually the BT and CT individuals might more likely be just C1a2 or C1b. As for Iberomaurusians, it's a little bit complicated because Iberomaurusians and Natufians have a clear shared ancestry, and the mtdna U6 in Iberomaurusians, is probably not native North African. As i said in my post, it would be interesting to have early Iberomaurusian samples, instead of the late one that we have. The genetic signatures might been different in the two groups. It's like comparing Gravettians of the Vestonice Cluster and Epi-Gravettians of the Villabruna Cluster. As far as the mtdna L samples, at this point it's hard to have any conclusions because this L2a1 individual from Iberia have no SSA ancestry, but doesn't have Iberomaurusian ancestry either. It might just mean that her ancestors were already here to take in the face the Neolithic ancestry and lose entirely their previous ancestry, or something like that.
 
I've been wondering that too.
Prior to Iberomaurisian there was Aterian, which descended from the archaic Jebel Irhoud population (315 ka), so not the SSA.
If SSA entered Iberia, these people must have crossed Iberomaurisian territory prior to that.

Ancient physical anthropology spoke of the 'grimaldi' type in mediterranea, modified over time and almost disappearing in late Neolithic; showing the most of its features very close to 'cro-magnon' but with some features evocating 'negroid' (old namings). A fragrence of AFN old cultures? mixture or old badly differentiated types, as what occurred in South SIberia?
 
Thanks for your input. I always thought that—along with Y-dna A and C—mtdna L was a surviving lineage of the original Eurasians. That’s why mtdna L and Y-dna A are found in Northern Europe and parts of West Asia. Is there an ancient mtdna database online by chance? I am still trying to find a link to that L2a1 Tell Halula sample.
 
Thanks for your input. I always thought that—along with Y-dna A and C—mtdna L was a surviving lineage of the original Eurasians. That’s why mtdna L and Y-dna A are found in Northern Europe and parts of West Asia. Is there an ancient mtdna database online by chance? I am still trying to find a link to that L2a1 Tell Halula sample.

mtdna L and y-dna A must been recent commers to Northern Europe, they never were found in Paleolithic and Neolithic samples to date. There was a minor hypothesis that y-dna E and mtdna L3 were in fact Eurasian coming back to Africa, but it's hard to conciliate with the datas, y-dna E was found in the Levantine Natufians but not mtdna L3 ( or any other L ). I didn't know about the Tell Halula sample until you spoked of it, and i cannot found anything in the prehistoric samples interactive map i used in general. There was a website from Jean Manco wich repertoriate an amazing set of samples from almost every studies on ancient dna, but unfortunately she past out and the website eventually shut down. But even, i dont recall have found an L2 from Tell Halula in her tables.

The only prehistoric mtdna L samples i know are:

Mota 1, Ethiopia, 2'500 BC: Y-dna E1b1, Mtdna L3X2a.

Pastoral Neolithic, Tanzania, 1200-940 BC: mtdna L2a1.

Malawi Stone Age, Malawi, 700-400 BC: mtdna L0f.

Nachikufu, Malawi, 8000-3000 BC: Y-dna BT, Mtdna L0K2.

And a few prehistoric HG's from South Africa, all y-dna A and mtdna L, probably ancestors of Khoikhoi people.

Also one of the Guanche sample from the Canaria Islands was: Mtdna L3b1a.
 
it's worth to know that if someone tries hard, it can be founf SSA admixture, or Mongolian steppe admixture, no matter.

Short post. What will you mean here?
All the way, I'm not sure we know always separate little traces of admixture from very remote common heritage. I suppose it depends on length of shared segments?
 
Very interesting

giHCPyG.png

How weird these admixture charts. Where is all the green of CHG or Iran Neolithic in the LNBA steppe? They show some Anatolian blue, Levantine puple even, but almost no green CHG. How is that so?
 
it's not in the PCA, nor in K6 or K7
it is only detectable with D- and f3-statistics

Then how can they define that as small but significant Subsaharan ancestry. Significant? It looks like some tiny residual ancestry picked up by Neolithic North Africans possibly related to the Cardial Ware in the southern Mediterranean coast, which also extended to/from Iberia. But I fail to see anything significant about those results. It happened, but apparently without major or even minor but notable impact.
 
We so far have mtDNA haplogroups L2a1 and L1b1a in Neolithic/Chalcolithic Iberia, and a L2a1 sample from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic culture located in Tell Halula, Syria. These samples do not have any Sub-Saharan African admixture correct? If I recall in the Lazaridis et al. 2018 preprint, the Iberomaurusians were demonstrated to have had no SSA ancestry, and they contributed ancestry to Sub-Saharan Africans not the other way around. It could be that the Iberomaurusians and/or their descendants contributed ancestry to some of the peoples of Neolithic Western and Southern Europe. That may explain why mtDNA Haplogroups L2a1 and L1b1a show up in Neolithic/Copper Age Iberia. Seeing that mtDNA haplogroups L2 and L1 both predate the widely accepted date of Homo Sapiens entry into Eurasia at 70,000 ybp, is it possible that like Y-DNA haplogroups A, B, BT, and CT, various subclades of mtDNA haplogroup L were part of the original gene pool of the first Eurasians?

1/3 of the ancestry of UP Iberomaurusians had close affinities to Subsaharan Africans, mainly a Hadza-like population, but it is indeed not found in any modern African population. My guess is that that 1/3 Hadza-like admixture represents the genetic structure of North Africa before West Eurasian back-migration that brought Basal Eurasian ancestry and other Eurasian admixtures that would eventually cause the high genetic affinity with the Natufians (who also had some North African input).
 

This thread has been viewed 23549 times.

Back
Top