Iberomauresian had African DNA but from who?

Discussion in 'Anthropology & Genetics' started by CaliTedesse, Jul 7, 2019.

  1. EDsomali

    EDsomali Dheeftiinu Waa Calan

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    1,154
    Ratings:
    +1,648

    I notice than Dinka seem to have some Iberomaurusian ancestry.

    Maybe an indication that we carry some ANA on our Nilotic side aswell or just false signal from recent Eurasian ancestry?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Apollo

    Apollo Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    18,956
    Ratings:
    +34,558
    If West Africans have it like the Yoruba, who knows perhaps Nilotes can have it at a low level as well.

    But I doubt paleo-Horners had it. Too far away from North Africa and more barriers (Ethiopian highlands).
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
  3. EDsomali

    EDsomali Dheeftiinu Waa Calan

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    1,154
    Ratings:
    +1,648
    But it seems that Dinka levels are higher than that of West Africans with confirmed ~10% ancestry when used as a reference for ancestry.


    Register to view spoiler content!

    Notice that Somalis have higher ancestry of Iberomaurusian than Tigray for example.

    Perhaps there was ancient contact between ANA and AEA.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Timo Jareer and proud

    Timo Jareer and proud

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2018
    Messages:
    3,249
    Ratings:
    +5,148
    Tigray have it lower most likely due to recent South Semitic Ancestory. Tigray on average are 10% South Semitic so their iberomuurasian ancestry would go down by 10% (24% to 14%) and the rest would be recent middle eastern ancestry.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. EDsomali

    EDsomali Dheeftiinu Waa Calan

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    1,154
    Ratings:
    +1,648

    The runs used no modern populations.

    So the fits are quite bad tbh.

    Xabasha have like 20% Yemeni and 10-15% Omotic DNA hence there lower levels of iberomaurusians.

    But this may mean that our AEA may have carried ANA admixture, possibly 20-30%.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Timo Jareer and proud

    Timo Jareer and proud

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2018
    Messages:
    3,249
    Ratings:
    +5,148
    Wait, if our AEA ancestors carried up to 20% ANA then our ancestory would be 80% Eurasian to 20% Sub Sharan African? Endless these ANA were Negroid in origin.
     
  7. EDsomali

    EDsomali Dheeftiinu Waa Calan

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    1,154
    Ratings:
    +1,648

    Terms like Negroid are unscientific.

    ANA probably was part of the OOA group but remigrated back into Africa early on.

    No one really knows what ANA looked like or even is. It's purely a theoretical component.

    Unless we get samples of DNA and possibly body specimens then we won't really know for sure.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. land owner

    land owner

    Joined:
    May 3, 2019
    Messages:
    1,671
    Ratings:
    +3,654
    So how Neolithic Levantine and taforalt were our ancient North African ancestors??? What’s the percentage?
     
  9. Timo Jareer and proud

    Timo Jareer and proud

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2018
    Messages:
    3,249
    Ratings:
    +5,148
    40% they are where all our Eurasian admixture comes from.
     
  10. land owner

    land owner

    Joined:
    May 3, 2019
    Messages:
    1,671
    Ratings:
    +3,654
    I know they’re about 40% of our ancestry I just want the beak down of our ancient North African ancestry alone, I wanna know how neolithic Levantine and taforalt they were
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Timo Jareer and proud

    Timo Jareer and proud

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2018
    Messages:
    3,249
    Ratings:
    +5,148
    probably mostly Neothlithic Levantine since that's where Afro-Asiatic languages originated from. But we won't know for sure till we get more DNA results grom their skeletons. I think they were 80% Levantie and 20% Taforat. which would be 5% Taforat for us and remainder being Levantine.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. land owner

    land owner

    Joined:
    May 3, 2019
    Messages:
    1,671
    Ratings:
    +3,654
    I believe they also had some chalcolithic Iranian ancestry as well
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. Timo Jareer and proud

    Timo Jareer and proud

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2018
    Messages:
    3,249
    Ratings:
    +5,148
    Bro I am Iranian and from Mesopotamia woooow:ooh::ooh::ooh:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. land owner

    land owner

    Joined:
    May 3, 2019
    Messages:
    1,671
    Ratings:
    +3,654
    sumerians n persians n shiet :wowsweat:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2019
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +65
    Afro-Asiatic is from north Africa, not Levantine

    This is the consensus for 20 years now in linguistics, Levantine homeland now sounds like pseudoscience

    Ibermaurusians were like 50% eurasian but not Natufian bc Natufians have Ibermaurusian blood and ANA

    There was no Iranian ancestry in the neolithic Levant or the Ibermaurusian or ancient Cushitics, it has ANE and siberian ancestry
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. Apollo

    Apollo Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    18,956
    Ratings:
    +34,558
    Early Neolithic Iranians didn't have any ANE/Paleo-Siberian. That came with the Indo-European invasions from the Steppe much later.

    The Middle East had two main Neolithic groups:

    Levant Neolithic.

    Zagros/Iranian Neolithic.

    Despite being close to each geographically, they were quite different in terms of genetics.
     
  17. Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2019
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +65
    Their R2 and close relationship to CHG is because they are ANE + dzudzuana. They are why Balochis have high ANE although they have low steppe ancestry. And why some Dravidians with low steppe have alot of ANE

    CHG and Iranian neolithic are two points of a cline from ANE to no ANE more basal dzudzuana. Early Iran Neolithic were very ANE

    The Iranian Turan neolithic people had even more ANE affinity bc of WSHG
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2019
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +65
    [​IMG]
    This is good except Cushitic and Omotic being grouped
     
  19. Apollo

    Apollo Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2015
    Messages:
    18,956
    Ratings:
    +34,558
    The original/proto-Omotics were similar to the proto-Cushites, but instead likely carried E-M84.

    Most modern Omotics are majority Mota (local forager, non-Omotic) rather than actually being Omotic in the sense of the ancestral ethnolinguistic population.

    PS. Whoever made that map was too E-M78-centric. The PAA likely had several E-M35 lineages, not just M78.

    Hmm, there's a theory that Dravidian is a foreign language family to India and was brought there with the Iranian Neolithic farmers. Modern Dravidians could be Iran Neolithic + Onge-like.

    R2, J, and LT could be Iranian Neolithic lineages. By the way, R2 is not close to R1. Quite an early divergence between them.
     
  20. Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Pseudo-A'staramaia

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2019
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +65
    Most Afro-Asiatic people are nothing like proto Afro-Asiatics. Ibermaurusian is closest we have. Omotics are not special I think in this. Look at the Ashkhenazi and Ouldeme kkkk

    They are 16 - 18% west eurasian, and some of the east african is not Mota type, it looks like its from Sudan but dont look like Nilote (no WA)

    The PAA map guy looks crazy from his FBD posts. I agree with you that many E M35 lineages were involved not just E M78. Sometimes this E1b1b1a vs E1b1b1b is like the war of R1a vs R1b being the first Indo European ydna

    LT looks like it has the most diversity around the black sea area, even T. Maybe it is the dzudzuana ydna bc it unite Iranian neolithic with Anatolia/levant neolithic. Both have dzudzuana, but more basal. But since its not more related to K2 than IJ, I think its maybe originally east eurasian

    Maybe dzudzuana people were LT, and some mix with ANE and become Iranian/CHG and other mix with IBM and become Levantine and Anatolia mostly the same. All of the neolithic groups share ydna LT. E1b and R2 in Levant and Iranian is bc of E1b IBM and R2 ANE type people and dzudzuana mixing and forming both

    I think T1 in neolithic Europe and Africa is Anatolia and Levant neolithic. LT autosomal divergence is similar to how one branch of P1 is mostly west eurasian (R) and another (Q) is mostly east eurasian. Both likely come from Andaman-Negrito-Papuan type men with ydna K2b in paleolithic SEA who mix with east asian, and then with west eurasian ancestor of ANE in north asia and form ANE
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
Verification:
Draft saved Draft deleted
Loading...

Share This Page