I had to remove the quotes given that my post exceeds the limits on words, so just figure out what I am answering from the two of your posts.
@Ayen224
I have mtDNA L2a1, I wrote down my long result from there on to Google and I seem to have L2a1+143, which makes sense:
I belong to any of those. Most likely in those concentrated with Somalis or northeast Africans, which would be L2a1j.
The screenshots of those samples are of one individual who was Pastoral Neolithic, and one is a hunter-gatherer individual who had clear pastoral admixture. Such evidence is outlined in Lipson et all 2022:
The other one (Jawuoyo) was a hunter-gatherer with E-V22 (Nile Valley clade), accompanying considerable Hadza-like qualities, being similar to just more southern African hunter-gatherer and central African hunter-gatherer shift. This sort of falls in line with why the mtDNA is similar to what I showed with the Cushitic-influenced foragers in past comments.
The most ancient ancestor (TMCRA) of L4b2a2c was 10,000 years ago old. This means that you were probably of an ancestral East African maternal stock if your clade split between the initial millennium like 10,000-9000, however, from then on, it is highly likely that your maternal ancestor was actually from a Cushitic population, given that what we observe in the data is dominated by northeast Africans that are Cushitic dominated.
There are two Luhya samples that are in the basal section. From my assessment, those people are not pure Bantus and usually have noticeable Cushitic substructure within aspects of their ethnic demographics, the reason why you have E-V32 popping up among them:
One would see some results here and there of various Nilo-Saharan people if it was comprehensively represented among Nilotic peoples and Saharans. So it looks like you might be of a Cushitic maternal origin. We cannot completely rule out that you could have mtDNA from the first or so thousand years before those Ancestral East African people mixed with the desert Afro Asiatics, however, seeing how the earliest samples look nothing like pure Nilo-Saharans, the most reasonable assumption is that you come from a maternal Cushitic origin.
You might wonder, well, why don't you have any Eurasian or Cushitic DNA to prove that? The answer to that is that we're talking about an ancient Cushitic introduction. It only takes a couple of generations before autosomal ancestry is burried in layers of geneflow of where the assimilation happened until it is not noticeable.
One introduction could have come through the migration of Cushites through a southern Sudanese path, and then moving in towards northwestern Kenya. That is how the pastoral neolithic came to Kenya thousands of years ago. It is possible that your Nilo-Saharan ancestors intermarried with some as they moved down.
Their movement in simplified form walked down this path and not through the Eritrean corridor that my ancestors underwent:
On Google Maps, you can actually spot the Cushitic burials peripheral towards the southern Sudanic lands:
I went and checked the map to see such ring-form burials because they were easy to spot in the northern Somali peninsula. Turns out one can say the same for northwestern Kenya. The point is, that the L4b2a2c could have been introduced through such migration. It looks to me that mtDNA was common among those Cushitics.
It looks like a Somali goes back around the time the genesis of Cushitic formed:
Some Cushites arrived in Kenya around 4200 ybp, and you see that samples from South Africa have sub-clades that go back to that common ancestor date, which is again, beneath timewise the more basal Somali sibling branch:
I think there was a complex and gradual mixing of Ancestral East Africans and proto-Cushitic speakers, and then once you had some even mix on a gradient on an upper and lower bound, there was a rapid spread of founder effects (basically family units that migrated to different parts and formed respective tribes) that established a stabilized tribal distribution. Later those tribes mixed across again stabilizing what already was similar genetically but tightening the upper and lower bound elements since the model was mobile seasonal pastoralism. This is why the Cushitic component, no matter where, is similar. But this happened in ways that confirm a paternal. Some of those very early Cushites probably went in other directions and were assimilated by overwhelmingly numerous Chadic Saharans or other Sudanics as well.
The proto-Cushitic speakers were patrilineal and mixed with Ancestral East African women, who might have been matrilineal.
Regarding the thing, Ancestral East African is a very specific term I coined to describe the Cushitic East African ancestors. But I changed it in the drawing to highlight deep lineages. In this case, when I say Ancestral East African, I only mean ANE2 since Nilo-Saharan is a respective branch that I describe as such.
In truth, I should perhaps coin it Ancient East African for the Cushitic ancestry and Ancestral East African being the common ancestral line people conflate with, being the parental lineage to the respective lineages ANE and Nilo-Sharans.
But to the question of Nilo-Saharan West African affinity, well, I think it is some Green Saharan West African hunter-gatherer DNA that probably looked more like forager with increased central African ancestry rather than modern Yoruba. But since it also probably accompanied very early divergent East African ancestry as well, the percentage of West African-like ancestry increased to somewhere between 28-30% Yoruba-like because Yorubas already contain such ancestry. ANE in Cushites lacked that ancestry which tells us it came later and that ANE and Nilo-Saharan proper divergent much earlier than we thought. But again, I think pre-Cushitic (meaning before Cushitc was a thing, before animal husbandry and farming) offshoot ANE mixed with Nilo-Saharans that did not introduce geneflow back to Cushitics after. I think the ANE of Cushites was a small isolated ban of hunter-gatherers.
Take note that some of what I say here is liable to change and also falls into speculative realms within quite rational conditions of what we know, the room for re-interpretation is wide but what I am saying is quite reasonable and not out of bounds given the conditions.
The question of the archaic ancestry in West Africans and if the West African type ancestry in Nilo-Saharans contains such ancestry. The "archaic" ancestry in West Africans contains a "Ghost" modern, really just another lineage that went extinct but was akin to perhaps Ancestral North African, East African, or the older Central and Southern African hunter-gatherer, not "archaic" in the sense of old humans. That ancestry is the large bulk. But then you did have an older lineage that seemed to be the same age as Neanderthals; that ancestry was ~2%. What people do is conflate "modern" with the very old stuff, and add the two numbers to inflate, and frame it as if it is all from the very old ancestry that has Neanderthal time-depth.
I think Ghost modern is a north African lineage relatively close or distantly related to Ancient North African.
To the question of if Nilo-Saharans got it. I think not above 1% if they do have such ancestry at all.
Sorry for not responding right away. Don't think my lack of answer is dismissive. I often take mental footnotes of things I am mentioned on to answer later for whatever reason I don't delve into the topics as I read them first. Just ask away if you feel curious. It's cool to have people who want to engage with it.