qpGraph models of Tanzania_Luxmanda_3100BP

[Apollo]

So this hunter-gatherer cave man had ANA?

Not sure about that, have to look into it.

 

[Asrafael]

The upcoming Shum Laka paper will reveal loads.

We could be in for a surprise.

It has potential to be the most revealing paper of all. The recent preprint said they were not like West Africans, but like Pygmies. The LSA cultures that occupied much of West Africa were known to be ancestral or closely related to central African hunter gatherer cultures, like the Tshitolian culture and the general Lupemban family. A00 is definitely showing us whatever groups lived in Shum Laka before Bantoid speaking West Africans became more dominant around Shum Laka, they represent or at least have significant ancestry from a early split group. But I don't like the possible prospect they could just end up being like the Pygmy or even Bantoid groups nearby, with all the accompanying West African admixture.

It's hard to make predictions based on the archeological data we have, especially due to a known fact of the quick spread of otherwise indicatory phenomena across cultural barriers, except for Iron (which wasn't really found at the site outside the most recent historic layer). Some say Shum Laka has major 2 layers, one from 9-4,000 years ago, and another from 4,000 to now. But things are probably more unclear, especially due to the material continuity to a large degree even to the present.

Most interesting is within the first layer, they had pottery by 6,000 years ago, which means some direct or indirect contact with probably early Nilo-Saharans in Chad-Niger-S. Libya-W. Sudan.
The heights of the few skeletons they excavated are also somewhat interesting, with the only adult they have from the older layer being 167cm. It is in the second layer we see people with heights within range of less admixed Pygmies.

2nd most crucial paper to me is the Takarkori shelter group. 2 closely related women carrying a early split basal N mtdna who were apart of a Saharan pastoral neolithic culture. They were very likely some early Afroasiatic culture, and it is possible they could have been very similar to Somalis.

Are you making this assessment based on the possibility of our proto nilo ancestors having some ANA ancestry?

I never heard of this, since it's very unlikely (nay, almost impossible) we have any proto-Nilotic ancestry. proto-Nilotes are very young compared to proto-Cushitic. Cushitic peoples were already in the Horn before Nilotes came into existence. It's even younger than east Cushitic. And the Mbuti-like ancestry in Nilotes, their ydna and mtdna, none of it is present in Cushitic groups with no Nilotic and Nilo-Saharan admixture.

It is true that all native population in Africa except Pygmies are showing ANA admixture, including Somalis. Central and southeast African Bantus are showing clear Ibermaurusian-like ancestry, and so do Yoruba. But let us not jump the gun, we don't know whether any ANA or ancient East African existed, and everything to varying degrees is biological formulae. Think of this - Basal Eurasian with every new paper looks more and more irrelevant. Papers were using Mota and people rich in clearly non-Eurasian ancestry to induce Basal into existence (which makes no sense) under the assumption there was no actual Mota-like and more basal then Eurasian admixture in Eurasians. But it now seems that at least some degree of what we thought was Eurasian ancestry is actually more basal African ancestry in Eurasia, f.e ANA admixture in Natufians, Sinai/Negev Bedouins, and neolithic Anatolians.

It isn't shocking that ANA is eating into ancient East African and Basal Eurasian ancestry. Whatever it was, it was closely related to ancient East African. But again, was ancient East African and ANA ever an actual population? just as ANA is threatening the existence of ancient East African and Basal Eurasian, is it possible that it is actually just ancient East African + Basal Eurasian? impossible to know until we get ancient dna from the populations that contributed the non-Eurasian and post-Mbuti ancestry that Ibermaurusians and Cushitics and Nilotes carry.

All that is certain is all Bantoids and West Africans and Nilo-Saharan populations (outside of pure language shifters) have Eurasian and neanderthal admixture. And so do all South Africans.

Are you making this assessment based on the possibility of our proto nilo ancestors having some ANA ancestry?

ANA isn't a Eurasian pop. Let me assume you mean the Eurasian admixture in Ibermaurusian. The Eurasian admixture in Ibermaurusian is chiefly represented by their Eurasian mtdna M1 and U6, which also makes up a 1/4th of Somali mtdna, so we clearly share alot of their "paleolithic African" Eurasian ancestry.

 

[Apollo]

I never heard of this, since it's very unlikely (nay, almost impossible) we have any proto-Nilotic ancestry. proto-Nilotes are very young compared to proto-Cushitic. Cushitic peoples were already in the Horn before Nilotes came into existence. It's even younger than east Cushitic. And the Mbuti-like ancestry in Nilotes, their ydna and mtdna, none of it is present in Cushitic groups with no Nilotic and Nilo-Saharan admixture.

Most of us here use it as a shorthand for the non-AA, non-Paleo-Horn ancestry in Cushites/Somalis. We don't necessarily mean it is exactly the same as the Nilotic sub-language family.

Since the AAs/Erythraeics traveled through Sudan to get to the Horn, it's almost certainly related to Nilote groups. However, likely some odd variety that is no longer common in Sudan due to population movements just like how the proto-AA/North-African-like ancestry in Cushites is no longer common in North Sudan as it has been overwhelmed by new Egyptian and new Arabian input there.

 

[land owner]

It has potential to be the most revealing paper of all. The recent preprint said they were not like West Africans, but like Pygmies. The LSA cultures that occupied much of West Africa were known to be ancestral or closely related to central African hunter gatherer cultures, like the Tshitolian culture and the general Lupemban family. A00 is definitely showing us whatever groups lived in Shum Laka before Bantoid speaking West Africans became more dominant around Shum Laka, they represent or at least have significant ancestry from a early split group. But I don't like the possible prospect they could just end up being like the Pygmy or even Bantoid groups nearby, with all the accompanying West African admixture.

It's hard to make predictions based on the archeological data we have, especially due to a known fact of the quick spread of otherwise indicatory phenomena across cultural barriers, except for Iron (which wasn't really found at the site outside the most recent historic layer). Some say Shum Laka has major 2 layers, one from 9-4,000 years ago, and another from 4,000 to now. But things are probably more unclear, especially due to the material continuity to a large degree even to the present.

Most interesting is within the first layer, they had pottery by 6,000 years ago, which means some direct or indirect contact with probably early Nilo-Saharans in Chad-Niger-S. Libya-W. Sudan.
The heights of the few skeletons they excavated are also somewhat interesting, with the only adult they have from the older layer being 167cm. It is in the second layer we see people with heights within range of less admixed Pygmies.

2nd most crucial paper to me is the Takarkori shelter group. 2 closely related women carrying a early split basal N mtdna who were apart of a Saharan pastoral neolithic culture. They were very likely some early Afroasiatic culture, and it is possible they could have been very similar to Somalis.



I never heard of this, since it's very unlikely (nay, almost impossible) we have any proto-Nilotic ancestry. proto-Nilotes are very young compared to proto-Cushitic. Cushitic peoples were already in the Horn before Nilotes came into existence. It's even younger than east Cushitic. And the Mbuti-like ancestry in Nilotes, their ydna and mtdna, none of it is present in Cushitic groups with no Nilotic and Nilo-Saharan admixture.

It is true that all native population in Africa except Pygmies are showing ANA admixture, including Somalis. Central and southeast African Bantus are showing clear Ibermaurusian-like ancestry, and so do Yoruba. But let us not jump the gun, we don't know whether any ANA or ancient East African existed, and everything to varying degrees is biological formulae. Think of this - Basal Eurasian with every new paper looks more and more irrelevant. Papers were using Mota and people rich in clearly non-Eurasian ancestry to induce Basal into existence (which makes no sense) under the assumption there was no actual Mota-like and more basal then Eurasian admixture in Eurasians. But it now seems that at least some degree of what we thought was Eurasian ancestry is actually more basal African ancestry in Eurasia, f.e ANA admixture in Natufians, Sinai/Negev Bedouins, and neolithic Anatolians.

It isn't shocking that ANA is eating into ancient East African and Basal Eurasian ancestry. Whatever it was, it was closely related to ancient East African. But again, was ancient East African and ANA ever an actual population? just as ANA is threatening the existence of ancient East African and Basal Eurasian, is it possible that it is actually just ancient East African + Basal Eurasian? impossible to know until we get ancient dna from the populations that contributed the non-Eurasian and post-Mbuti ancestry that Ibermaurusians and Cushitics and Nilotes carry.

All that is certain is all Bantoids and West Africans and Nilo-Saharan populations (outside of pure language shifters) have Eurasian and neanderthal admixture. And so do all South Africans.



ANA isn't a Eurasian pop. Let me assume you mean the Eurasian admixture in Ibermaurusian. The Eurasian admixture in Ibermaurusian is chiefly represented by their Eurasian mtdna M1 and U6, which also makes up a 1/4th of Somali mtdna, so we clearly share alot of their "paleolithic African" Eurasian ancestry.

When I say proto nilote I’m referring to the ancestral population of dinkas, nuer, anuak etc not modern day ones. With that ancestry plus our paleo-somali HG ancestry that makes up around 12% of our ancestry would makes our SSA ancestry close to 60%