AUN South Cushites

[Prince Abubu]

Tanzania Luxmanda was an early pastoralist + some additional Mota.

I'm intrigued to know where the Kenyan Pastoralist originated from.

So far there are five separate ancient East African samples;

Luxmanda

Kenyan PN (other)

Kenyan PN (all) - not sure what they mean by this, is it some sort of average?

Kenyan PN (Elmenteitan)

Kenyan early pastoralists

Would it be fair to assume that these go back in time starting from the Luxmanda and with Kenyan EP being the earliest, because it has the lowest Eurasian ancestry and the highest mota ancestry?

 

[EDsomali]

So far there are five separate ancient East African samples;

Luxmanda

Kenyan PN (other)

Kenyan PN (all) - not sure what they mean by this, is it some sort of average?

Kenyan PN (Elmenteitan)

Kenyan early pastoralists

Would it be fair to assume that these go back in time starting from the Luxmanda and with Kenyan EP being the earliest, because it has the lowest Eurasian ancestry and the highest mota ancestry?

Luxmanda is older than Pastoralist N.

It's early pastoralists then luxmanda then Pastoralist N then Elementarian and lastly the Nilotic admixed ones from the iron age.

 

[Prince Abubu]

@EDsomali @The alchemist @Alexis

Would you say that the Afro-Asiatic ancestors of the Cushitic-speakers, Berber-speakers and Predynastic Egyptians were Pre-Pottery Neolithic people? And the Semitics speakers were Pre-Pottery Neolithic + Chalcolithic Iranian from Mesopotamia?

 

[The alchemist]

@EDsomali @The alchemist @Alexis

Would you say that the Afro-Asiatic ancestors of the Cushitic-speakers, Berber-speakers and Predynastic Egyptians were Pre-Pottery Neolithic people? And the Semitics speakers were Pre-Pottery Neolithic + Chalcolithic Iranian from Mesopotamia?

All the Semitic speaking populations have Chalcolithic Iranian admixture. The direct descendants of the Canaanite, the Lebanese, have around half of their Near Eastern genetic makeup from Chalcolithic Iranians.

The Late Period and Hellenistic Egyptian samples had ChL admixture also, but less than the modern Egyptians today, and this points to evident additional processes of admixture between Semitic speaking groups in the region. The other North African groups have less of it but have more of Iberomaurusian, Subsaharan, and European admixture.

Somalis don't seem to have more than a little over 1% of ChL Iranian, and I suspect our Near Eastern ancestors had more genetic differentiation and less heterozygosity. If true, it could mean they were Pre-Pottery Neolithic and mixed with ancestral Nilotic people shortly after the introduction of agriculture, or they had a time of isolation from other related populations for an unknown reason.

I think the Old Kingdom Egyptians probably had less ChL admixture than Late/Hellenistic, and the close geographic proximity with the Levant makes it convincing, and hopefully, we'll see some aDNA studies published to clarify this.

 

[Prince Abubu]

All the Semitic speaking populations have Chalcolithic Iranian admixture. The direct descendants of the Canaanite, the Lebanese, have around half of their Near Eastern genetic makeup from Chalcolithic Iranians.

Yeah. Makes sense, the Levant and fertile crescent have had a lot of population movement over time.

The Late Period and Hellenistic Egyptian samples had ChL admixture also, but less than the modern Egyptians today, and this points to evident additional processes of admixture between Semitic speaking groups in the region. The other North African groups have less of it but have more of Iberomaurusian, Subsaharan, and European admixture.

That's why I specified 'Predynastic' Egyptians. I think they are likely the purest Afro-Asiatic stock compared to NAs who have some west African and European genetics and Cushites who have Nilotic + Omotic ancestry.
Are the Coptics still mostly Egyptian, or have they also absorbed a lot of ChL ancestry as well?

Somalis don't seem to have more than a little over 1% of ChL Iranian, and I suspect our Near Eastern ancestors had more genetic differentiation and less heterozygosity.

What do you by this?

If, true it could mean they were Pre-Pottery Neolithic and mixed with ancestral Nilotic people shortly after the introduction of agriculture, or they had a time of isolation from other related populations for an unknown reason.

I think the Old Kingdom Egyptians probably had less ChL admixture than Late/Hellenistic, and the close geographic proximity with the Levant makes it convincing, and hopefully, we'll see some aDNA studies published to clarify this.

I would discount any time after the Old Kingdom, as a lot of foreign ancestry came into Egypt during and after the Middle and New Kingdoms.

 

[Asrafael]

@EDsomali @The alchemist @Alexis

Would you say that the Afro-Asiatic ancestors of the Cushitic-speakers, Berber-speakers and Predynastic Egyptians were Pre-Pottery Neolithic people? And the Semitics speakers were Pre-Pottery Neolithic + Chalcolithic Iranian from Mesopotamia?

Nope. Because Cushitic does not share a ancestor with Egyptian until well into ore-Neolithic. Cushitic is isolated even prior to the existence early Neolithic, in addition to its pre-agricultural background. They were not farmers.

PPN were probably not even Afroasiatic speakers - Semitic came into West Asia very recently, post-Neolithic and it ancestor language crossed into Sinai after a pre Neolithic split with Berber and Cushitic.

 

[The alchemist]

"Somalis don't seem to have more than a little over 1% of ChL Iranian, and I suspect our Near Eastern ancestors had more genetic differentiation and less heterozygosity."

"What do you by this?"

@Prince Abubu

What I meant was pre-agriculture ancient populations had significantly more differentiation between neighboring groups, and the geneflow that happened later reduced this differentiation and increased the genetic diversity within groups. I, therefore, suspect our Eurasian lineage was more similar to the sedentary ancestors than the farmers. The negligible amount of ChL in Somalis could be an indication of this.