Where did E-V13 originate ?

Im not being sarcastic or anything, but what has happened to the information of these papers? are they absolete now and the North Africa migration of E-V13 to europe is taking over? if it is were can i find scientific documents about it? I am really interested.


  • Cavalli Sforza says Haplogroup E1b1b1, mainly in the form of its E1b1b1a2 (E-V13) sub-clade reaches frequencies above 40% around the area ofKosovo.[31] This clade is thought to have arrived in Europe from western Asia either in the later Mesolithic,[32] or the Neolithic.[33]


Battagliaet al Concerningtiming the distribution and diversity of V13 however,Battagliaet al. (2008)proposed an earlier movement whereby the E-M78* lineage ancestral toall modern E-V13 men moved rapidly out of a Southern Egyptianhomeland and arrived in Europe with only Mesolithictechnologies.They then suggest that the E-V13 sub-clade of E-M78 only expandedsubsequently as native Balkan 'foragers-cum-farmers' adoptedNeolithic technologies from the Near East. They propose that thefirst major dispersal of E-V13 from the Balkans may have been in thedirection of the AdriaticSea withthe NeolithicImpressedWarecultureoften referred to as Impressa or Cardial. Peričicet al. (2005),rather propose that the main route of E-V13 spread was along theVardar-Morava-Danube river 'highway' system.
Incontrast to Battaglia, Crucianiet al. (2007)tentatively suggested (i) a different point where the V13 mutationhappened on its way from Egypt to the Balkans via the Middle East,and (ii) a later dispersal time.



Morerecently, Lacanet al. (2011)announced that a 7000 year old skeleton in a Neolithic context in aSpanish funeral cave, was an E-V13 man. (The other specimens testedfrom the same site were in haplogroupG2a,which has been found in Neolithic contexts throughout Europe.) Using7 STR markers, this specimen was identified as being similar to modern individuals tested in Albania, Bosnia, Greece, Corsica, and Provence. The authors therefore proposed that, whether or not themodern distribution of E-V13 of today is a result of more recentevents, E-V13 was already in Europe within the Neolithic, carried byearly farmers from the Eastern Mediterranean to the WesternMediterranean, much earlier than the Bronze age. This supports theproposals of Battaglia et al. rather than Cruciani et al. at leastconcerning earliest European dispersals, but E-V13 may have dispersedmore than once. Even more recent than the Bronze Age, it has alsobeen proposed that modern E-V13's modern distribution in Europe is atleast partly caused by Roman era movements of people.[86] (Seebelow.)


Afteran initial focus upon E1b1b as a Neolithic marker, a more recentstudy in January 2010, looked at Y haplogroup R1b1b, which is muchmore common in WesternEurope.Mark Jobling said: "We focused on the commonest Y-chromosomelineage in Europe, carried by about 110 million men, it follows agradient from south-east to north-west, reaching almost 100%frequency in Ireland. We looked at how the lineage is distributed,how diverse it is in different parts of Europe, and how old it is."The results suggested that the lineage R1b1b2(R-M269),like E1b1b or J lineages,spread together with farming from the Near East. Dr PatriciaBalaresque added: "In total, this means that more than 80% ofEuropean Y chromosomes descend from incoming farmers. In contrast,most maternal genetic lineages seem to descend from hunter-gatherers.To us, this suggests a reproductive advantage for farming males overindigenous hunter-gatherer males during the switch from hunting andgathering, to farming"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe

None of these mention a crossing from North Africa more and more Libya.





How do we know that E-V13 survived in the Mountains? The highest E-V13 concentration is in the Norman founded town of Piazza Armenia besides its more evident in the eastern part of Sicily which was Greek dominated since antiquity. It is not known that there were any great settlement from invaders in Sicily except for the installation of Garrisons and the immediate minimal ripple effect that will bring with it. Example the British were in Malta for 200 years but the genetic impact (British surnames (as its difficlut to suss out through DNA) would only have some 2% on the present day gene pool. It wasn't much different during past eras. Dont think that there were some mass migrations and settlements from all people that invade a country and somehow present DNA results prove that too.

check this out for E-v13

It seems ray Banks is assigned to upgrade/change layout of Isogg

File is 2015
https://sites.google.com/site/compositeytree/e1b1b-1

V13 is way down the E tree line
 
What do you mean by upgrades ? Newer studies ? There aren't any about E1b1b. The most up-to-date info, I think, is on Eupedia. Academics who publish these studies are usually people who studied biology (genetics) but have little knowledge of history or archeology. They have funds to run large scale studies, but aren't always good at interpreting the historical significance of the results. Then there are times when everybody, even hobbyists, mistake. That was the case with E-V13 being brought by Near Eastern farmers.

Sorry, yes that's what I meant, Updated/Newer studies one can read. Re geneticist I know what you mean. Spencer wells said (reported on National geographical) that Malta had nearly 50% Phoenician dna. Most people know nothing about DNA and some still echo this which is totally false. He also said that the Phoenicians must have wiped out the aboriginal population that was here when they arrived. He based this on J2 as being Phoenician when we all know its not the only Phoenician marker and its found in other populations besides Phoenician. He was not aware that Malta was repopulated from Sicily sometime in the late 1000's as it was depopulated after the Aglabide invasion. Other studies established that J2 in Malta is 22% with J1 being 8%. So it seems that some theories have to be taken with a pinch of salt....even if National geographic magazine had stated it.

You are right any google search on the matter points out to Eupidia most of the time....and to the forums too. Not much more info (other then Dienekes pops up)

The positive thing is we know much more now then we did even 5 years ago, and I have no doubt we will be knowing much more, making things more accurate in the years to come.
 
Maciamo, I think you're missing something here as far as Afroasiatic is of concern: While E-M35.1 and its subclades strongly correlate with the different AA branches, one should not forget that J1, T1a and R1b-V88 are very strong contenders and might've taken part in the spread of AA at a very early stage. This relates to the common debate around PAA's timeframe and subsequent associations with hunter-gatherers & agropastoralism (while it is obvious that the spread of several AA branches is tied to pastoralism, the association of PAA with herding communities is far more uncertain).

As far as E-V13 goes, it's obvious that it was born in North(east?) Africa as all the other M78 branches are found there... However, I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe its arrival to a Paleolithic or Mesolithic migration, we'll have to wait for more results from ancient remains to say for sure (Mesolithic E-V13 would be a good start).
 
Maciamo, I think you're missing something here as far as Afroasiatic is of concern: While E-M35.1 and its subclades strongly correlate with the different AA branches, one should not forget that J1, T1a and R1b-V88 are very strong contenders and might've taken part in the spread of AA at a very early stage. This relates to the common debate around PAA's timeframe and subsequent associations with hunter-gatherers & agropastoralism (while it is obvious that the spread of several AA branches is tied to pastoralism, the association of PAA with herding communities is far more uncertain).

As far as E-V13 goes, it's obvious that it was born in North(east?) Africa as all the other M78 branches are found there... However, I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe its arrival to a Paleolithic or Mesolithic migration, we'll have to wait for more results from ancient remains to say for sure (Mesolithic E-V13 would be a good start).

I recommend that you view the new Ydna tree from June 2014 and note that, before any of the markers you mentioned where born , the only markers around where
D, E, C and F ( and the A B etc )

From F ( which is stated as )
The presence of several subclusters of F-M89 and K that are largely restricted to the Indian subcontinent is consistent with the scenario that a coastal (southern route) of early human migration out of Africa carried ancestral Eurasian lineages first to the coast of the Indian subcontinent, or that some of them originated there.
Came the ydna Haplogroups of GHIJKLT............Clearly all born outside of africa along with it's parent F.

From K , there later broke down further into P, M, S, N, O, X, Q and R

Clearly anything in Africa apart form D, E and C relates to subclades of haplogroups born outside of Africa but migrated to Africa ( not the back to Africa rubbish ) . I am not saying all E subclades where born in Africa, as some are from the Levant ( an indication that E moved out of africa via Egypt )
 
As far as E-V13 goes, it's obvious that it was born in North(east?) Africa as all the other M78 branches are found there... However, I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe its arrival to a Paleolithic or Mesolithic migration, we'll have to wait for more results from ancient remains to say for sure (Mesolithic E-V13 would be a good start).

Semetic Duwa what makes it so obvious that E-V13 was mutated in North (east?) Africa? M78 that was mutated some 18,000 BP is a very high probability to be born there. E-V13 was mutated some 8/10,000 later. Why would that make it obvious for it to be born there too? If it did, do you really believe that as soon as the person who had that mutation hopped over on a raft and had lots of children on the other side? We all know that E-V13 is approx 1% in North Africa. Apart from what is a real obvious fact that Greek settlements in Egypt are very well document from the classical era, so those meagre 1% cannot even be considered to be innate to the region and seems more like an import from the balkans rather then the other way round. I am doing my best to make sense out of it all.
 
I am not saying all E subclades where born in Africa, as some are from the Levant ( an indication that E moved out of africa via Egypt )

That makes much more sence to me as things stand. Surely have to wait for more concrete answers
 
Semetic Duwa what makes it so obvious that E-V13 was mutated in North (east?) Africa? M78 that was mutated some 18,000 BP is a very high probability to be born there. E-V13 was mutated some 8/10,000 later. Why would that make it obvious for it to be born there too? If it did, do you really believe that as soon as the person who had that mutation hopped over on a raft and had lots of children on the other side? We all know that E-V13 is approx 1% in North Africa. Apart from what is a real obvious fact that Greek settlements in Egypt are very well document from the classical era, so those meagre 1% cannot even be considered to be innate to the region and seems more like an import from the balkans rather then the other way round. I am doing my best to make sense out of it all.

Age estimation of haplogroups are notoriously imprecise, even with a lot of data. For proof, the latest (and supposedly most accurate) Y-chromosomal tree's TMRCA estimations by Hallast et al. (2014) give haplogroup I1 an age of 3,500 years, even though a 7,000 year-old sample from Neolithic Hungary was found.

Personally I remain undecided about the place of origin of E-V13. It could have appeared in North Africa just before crossing to South Europe, but it could just as well have appeared soon after E-M78 people landed in Europe. We simply cannot know for now. E-V13 in Libya and Egypt could be easily explained by the ancient Greek presence in the region.
 
Maciamo, I think you're missing something here as far as Afroasiatic is of concern: While E-M35.1 and its subclades strongly correlate with the different AA branches, one should not forget that J1, T1a and R1b-V88 are very strong contenders and might've taken part in the spread of AA at a very early stage. This relates to the common debate around PAA's timeframe and subsequent associations with hunter-gatherers & agropastoralism (while it is obvious that the spread of several AA branches is tied to pastoralism, the association of PAA with herding communities is far more uncertain).

Where did I say that Afroasiatic languages were spread only by E1b1b people ? If you put the explanations from different Y-DNA pages together, you'll see that I explained that R1b-V88 brought cattle to the Levant and North Africa, while J1 and T1a brought goats to the same region (+ the Arabian peninsula), both during the Early Neolithic. If Afroasiatic languages spread back from East Africa to Northwest Africa and the Middle East, then they would have brought all the lineages already present in East Africa at the time, namely an E1b1b majority accompanied by J1, T1a and R1b-V88. So yes, I agree with you on that.
 
So why is E-V13 more common in Europe than North Africa today ? For three main reasons:

A) Due to a founder effect in the population that migrated from North Africa to Europe (a small group that had more V13 than average).

B) E-V13 survives mostly in places where Indo-Europeans arrived late and had a much smaller impact than in the rest of Europe, i.e. Iberia (R1b spread very slowly from 1800 to 1000 BCE), Italy (Italics only entered from 1200 BCE, but didn't reach the south until c. 500 BCE), southern Balkans (early entry of R1b but region already heavily populated and difficulty to Indo-Europeanise locals, as attested by the numerous pre-IE vocabulary in Albanian and Greek).

C) Europe didn't have the Arabic conquest (except Iberia, Malta and Sicily). Note how E-V13 survived better in the mountains of central Sicily than in coastal regions battered by waves of medieval invaders (Vandals, Normans, Saracens).
Italics arrived in Italy around the 2000 BCE and R1b was present there since the Copper Age.
Another correction is the Italics in south Italy, the Enotrian family (and the subgroups of the South like Sicels and Brutius entered in the south around 1300 BCE) with the myth of King Italo.
E-V13 has the same distribution of south Italy even in Germany according to this map.



C) Europe didn't have the Arabic conquest (except Iberia, Malta, Creta, South Western France and Sicily).

Fixed but they were deported from Spain and Sicily.
 
Age estimation of haplogroups are notoriously imprecise, even with a lot of data. For proof, the latest (and supposedly most accurate) Y-chromosomal tree's TMRCA estimations by Hallast et al. (2014) give haplogroup I1 an age of 3,500 years, even though a 7,000 year-old sample from Neolithic Hungary was found.

3500 year seems very late, I'd say 4-5000 years
there doesn't have to be a contradiction with the neolithic I1 found 7000 years old
either neolithic I1 got extinct or it got through a serious bottleneck
as you stated yourself, not much of the G2a LBK and Cardial Ware expansions survived, most are G2a-P303 Indo-Europeans
 
I don't think we can, at present, know whether E-V13 arose in north Africa (perhaps Egypt?). It might have, but as has been pointed out, there isn't very much there now, and what does exist could easily be explained by the large numbers of Greeks who settled in Egypt (and Libya) in the Hellenic period. I think the preponderance of the evidence is that it is more likely to have arisen either in the Near East or in Europe. It may turn out, however, that this will remain a mystery.

Certainly, if it did originate in North Africa, the more parsimonious take on the route for it, imo, would be north along the Levant and then into Europe. I'm not persuaded that it somehow crossed the Mediterranean directly from North Africa to Sicily, for example. The vast majority of the gene flow in the Mediterranean was by boats (or rafts) hugging the coastline and following the prevailing wind and sea currents. This was the case until very late indeed. Even in the Bronze Age, with much better technology, trade from Egypt to Greece followed a route north along the Levantine coast and only then headed west.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Qz...e Mediterranean run counter clockwise&f=false

http://www.mediterranean-yachting.com/Immagine/Maps/current.GIF

Furthermore, one thing that I think is clear from Boattini et al is that whatever the precise dates might be for E-V13, the relative dating, at least, shows that the E-V13 in Italy arrived rather late in history. The most reasonable explanation, in my view, is that it arrived via Greece and the Balkans, and I think the likelihood of the E-V13 in the Balkans and Greece stemming from a man being being blown across the Mediterranean from North Africa to Greece and getting very lucky is even more unlikely than the same scenario for Sicily.
See:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29842-southern-Italian-paper-2014?highlight=Boattini

There is a reason why current haplogroups are distributed along the Mediterranean in certain specific ways: it's just not all that easy to go south/north or north/south across it. It required more sophisticated shipbuilding and navigation techniques. That isn't to say, of course, that there couldn't have been some gene flow in those directions. While some E-M81 in Iberia may have come from North Africa with the Moors, the fact that there is WHG in North Africa indicates some gene flow in both directions occurred, and some of it could have arrived at an earlier time. (Given the relatively young age of E-M81, however, I think it looks more like Neolithic era gene flow than a Mesolithic one.) Likewise, there could have been some movement from Tunisia to Sicily in ancient times. I just don't think that fits with E-V13; it was in the Balkans before it was in Italy.

As to whether this migration was Mesolithic or Neolithic I don't know. The expansion time for modern European E-V13, however, seems to be pretty late and correlates pretty well to the Bronze Age.
 
Semetic Duwa what makes it so obvious that E-V13 was mutated in North (east?) Africa? M78 that was mutated some 18,000 BP is a very high probability to be born there. E-V13 was mutated some 8/10,000 later. Why would that make it obvious for it to be born there too? If it did, do you really believe that as soon as the person who had that mutation hopped over on a raft and had lots of children on the other side? We all know that E-V13 is approx 1% in North Africa. Apart from what is a real obvious fact that Greek settlements in Egypt are very well document from the classical era, so those meagre 1% cannot even be considered to be innate to the region and seems more like an import from the balkans rather then the other way round. I am doing my best to make sense out of it all.

The sheer fact that all the other M78 branches (V12, V22, V65) are distributed mainly throughout North Africa and that the respective branches' have their highest diversity in North Africa does a great disfavour to any theory implying that E-V13 wasn't born in North Africa... I sincerely fail to see what's so hard to understand about this.
Now of course, we cannot be sure just yet as we don't have actual confirmation from archeogenetic data, and so in a sense "anything" is possible (including the disappearance of earlier centres of M78 diversity in the Middle East), one thing's for sure though: The odds are in favour of a North African origin for E-V13.
 
The sheer fact that all the other M78 branches (V12, V22, V65) are distributed mainly throughout North Africa and that the respective branches' have their highest diversity in North Africa does a great disfavour to any theory implying that E-V13 wasn't born in North Africa... I sincerely fail to see what's so hard to understand about this.
Now of course, we cannot be sure just yet as we don't have actual confirmation from archeogenetic data, and so in a sense "anything" is possible (including the disappearance of earlier centres of M78 diversity in the Middle East), one thing's for sure though: The odds are in favour of a North African origin for E-V13.

Since we know the Phoenicians only came from modern lebanon and it was under hittite influence in the early days of its success, its trading area was only with syria in the levant. The other southern parts where under the Egyptians.
If we study the November 2009 paper - landscape of the Levant, we find the following markers: only lebanon+syria
381 x J2-M172
368 x J1-M267
222 x E1b-M35
107 x L-M20
94 x G-M201
91 x R1b-P25
51 x R1a-M17
48 x T-M70
41 x I-M170
the other are too minor

Clearly the Phoenicians could only bring these markers to North Africa and the western Med.
Since E is one of the major ones, it seems like this is the answer ..
 
The sheer fact that all the other M78 branches (V12, V22, V65) are distributed mainly throughout North Africa and that the respective branches' have their highest diversity in North Africa does a great disfavour to any theory implying that E-V13 wasn't born in North Africa... I sincerely fail to see what's so hard to understand about this.
Now of course, we cannot be sure just yet as we don't have actual confirmation from archeogenetic data, and so in a sense "anything" is possible (including the disappearance of earlier centres of M78 diversity in the Middle East), one thing's for sure though: The odds are in favour of a North African origin for E-V13.

Simple. It seems that there are thousands of years between the birth of M78 and the new E-V13 mutation. Thousands of years means that the M78 could have easily moved to another completely different region and new mutation happened in a completely different location (region). This is extremely logical and possible and should carry no controversy. It is well known with other haplogroups and new mutations. Why is it too hard to understand? Then the next step is to:-

*)get correct ancient data (still very scarce but some is available)
*)see present concentrations
*)fit it in with documented history

and one can start to draw a picture.

Personally I am very much inclined to believe that E-78 (before the E-V13 mutation occurred) traveled out of Egypt and mixed or created part of the Natufian culture, moving further up along the coast by time (mixed with other haplogroups since the area seems to have been natural melting pot of haplos especially those known to have accompanied E-V13 like G's and J's). (Natufian culture covered present day Israel, Lebanon and Parts of Syria right up to the Turkish border and Carbon dating suggests it started from 15,000 years BP ).

quote:- More generally there has been discussion of the similarities of these cultures with those found in coastal North Africa. Graeme Barker notes there are: "similarities in the respective archaeological records of the Natufian culture of the Levant and of contemporary foragers in coastal North Africa across the late Pleistocene and early Holocene boundary" -unquote

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture#Precursors_and_associated_cultures

The M78 traveled further north crossing to Europe (balkans or Islands) and E-V13 was born there or in the Levant (close to the balkans) . Of course when the miracle happens that we can correctly access the haplogroups of the many Natufian remains found in the near east region it would make things a little more easier. But I do not know of any study that has established these haplogroups yet.
 
Simple. It seems that there are thousands of years between the birth of M78 and the new E-V13 mutation. Thousands of years means that the M78 could have easily moved to another completely different region and new mutation happened in a completely different location (region). This is extremely logical and possible and should carry no controversy. It is well known with other haplogroups and new mutations. Why is it too hard to understand? Then the next step is to:-

*)get correct ancient data (still very scarce but some is available)
*)see present concentrations
*)fit it in with documented history

and one can start to draw a picture.

Personally I am very much inclined to believe that E-78 (before the E-V13 mutation occurred) traveled out of Egypt and mixed or created part of the Natufian culture, moving further up along the coast by time (mixed with other haplogroups since the area seems to have been natural melting pot of haplos especially those known to have accompanied E-V13 like G's and J's). (Natufian culture covered present day Israel, Lebanon and Parts of Syria right up to the Turkish border and Carbon dating suggests it started from 15,000 years BP ).

quote:- More generally there has been discussion of the similarities of these cultures with those found in coastal North Africa. Graeme Barker notes there are: "similarities in the respective archaeological records of the Natufian culture of the Levant and of contemporary foragers in coastal North Africa across the late Pleistocene and early Holocene boundary" -unquote

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture#Precursors_and_associated_cultures

The M78 traveled further north crossing to Europe (balkans or Islands) and E-V13 was born there or in the Levant (close to the balkans) . Of course when the miracle happens that we can correctly access the haplogroups of the many Natufian remains found in the near east region it would make things a little more easier. But I do not know of any study that has established these haplogroups yet.

The arguments you've made can also be assessed for other M78 branches, so once more I fail to see what's so hard to understand about what I just said, the other M78 branches (which all have a significant time gap between their birth and that of M78) arose and emerged in Africa, and so this makes an African origin for E-V13 more likely than the scenario you speak of. Now as I said I could be wrong, we cannot know for sure judging from contemporary samples, we can only suspect, so we'll have to wait for archeogenetic confirmation of a given model.

As far as the Natufian horizon is of concern, while it does harbour North African influences it mostly seems to be derived from the earlier Kebaran horizon which preceded it... The thing is, we shouldn't try to make this a black & white issue, we've stumbled onto a few surprises while uncovering Europe's genetic past (and we still are), there's no reason why North Africa and SW Asia would prove any less bewildering especially if we take into account the fact that these parts of the world have a far more complex story to tell than Europe has.
 
I think you guys should check the E1b1b tree. There are three new subclades in between E-M78 and E-V13, each defined respectively by 2 and 13 mutations. Let's call them E-Z1919 and E-L618. V13 has four other defining mutations. After that V13 expands into numerous subclades (six to date) each defined by a single mutation.

What this shows is that L618 evolved in isolation for quite a well before V13 appeared, then V13 seems to have blossomed in all directions. This would be consistent with L618 being a minor North African lineage winnowed by the advance of the Sahara, and that V13 suddenly re-expanded after reaching fertile southern Europe.

It would be interesting to get the distributions of E-Z1919* and E-L618* to get an idea of the path followed by this lineage on its way to Europe. Unfortunately they are too new to have relevant data, esp. from Africa where commercial tests are sparse.
 
I think you guys should check the E1b1b tree. There are three new subclades in between E-M78 and E-V13, each defined respectively by 2 and 13 mutations. Let's call them E-Z1919 and E-L618. V13 has four other defining mutations. After that V13 expands into numerous subclades (six to date) each defined by a single mutation.

What this shows is that L618 evolved in isolation for quite a well before V13 appeared, then V13 seems to have blossomed in all directions. This would be consistent with L618 being a minor North African lineage winnowed by the advance of the Sahara, and that V13 suddenly re-expanded after reaching fertile southern Europe.

It would be interesting to get the distributions of E-Z1919* and E-L618* to get an idea of the path followed by this lineage on its way to Europe. Unfortunately they are too new to have relevant data, esp. from Africa where commercial tests are sparse.

what we know is the E-Z1919 split into E-V13 and E-V22 : Red Sea, Somalia
and YFull has 81 SNPs for E-V13 (I guess inclusive E-L618) , so E-V13 may have made a long journey before expanding

E-V68 and E-M78 also have lots of SNP
 
what we know is the E-Z1919 split into E-V13 and E-V22 : Red Sea, Somalia
and YFull has 81 SNPs for E-V13 (I guess inclusive E-L618) , so E-V13 may have made a long journey before expanding

E-V68 and E-M78 also have lots of SNP

A long period of isolation is compatible with V13 crossing early to Italy during the Ice Age and being stuck there for several millennia because of the glaciers around the Alps. Then, we could suppose that the sudden diversification of subclades coincides with the warming up of the climate and the adoption of agriculture after mixing with G2a farmers (and J1+T1a herders).
 
The arguments you've made can also be assessed for other M78 branches, so once more I fail to see what's so hard to understand about what I just said, the other M78 branches (which all have a significant time gap between their birth and that of M78) arose and emerged in Africa, and so this makes an African origin for E-V13 more likely than the scenario you speak of. Now as I said I could be wrong, we cannot know for sure judging from contemporary samples, we can only suspect, so we'll have to wait for archeogenetic confirmation of a given model.

As far as the Natufian horizon is of concern, while it does harbour North African influences it mostly seems to be derived from the earlier Kebaran horizon which preceded it... The thing is, we shouldn't try to make this a black & white issue, we've stumbled onto a few surprises while uncovering Europe's genetic past (and we still are), there's no reason why North Africa and SW Asia would prove any less bewildering especially if we take into account the fact that these parts of the world have a far more complex story to tell than Europe has.

The question is or should be asked is .....Where ancient North-East Africans ( Egyptians ) really africans :eek:

http://www.academia.edu/3642572/Unr..._An_Archaeogenetic_Approach_to_Neolithisation

as per the link, not many of these "back to Africa" ( what a bad term for a haplogroup that never originated there) where more than a single subclade of a haplogroup

Apart from E1b1b showing origins in egypt, the rest seem like visitors
 

This thread has been viewed 236217 times.

Back
Top