Garaad Awal
War is coming.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Somali people origin
- Thread starter Nin123
- Start date
This makes a lot of sense, would this group be closely related to the Sandawe or Hadza?
PCA plot showed closest SSA group outside of typical horner/NEA was the Sandawe, Hadza and then Mursi, closest NA group was Timimoun Amazigh and other Amazigh groups.
"Although the Khoisan were originally thought to possess the oldest human DNA lineages, those of the Sandawe are older. This suggests southern Khoisan originated in East Africa.[2]"
I've heard of Khoisan haplogroups extracted from predynastic tombs around the Nile.
The alchemist
VIP
When I say ANA it means two things. ANA-proper, the Ancient North Africans and related DNA source. And there is the lazy and vague ANA which is a basket of every weird reading that can't be attributed to specific signatures or origins and vaguely might look like ANA but could be an artifact of an inherent drift from one of the genetics we have that is not ANA. Or some proto-Eurasian back migration that had so much non-Eurasian DNA retained and mixed with people in northeast Africa... It's difficult to say what is what in that regard. We might be surprised in the future when we gain a resolution. I think we need serious studies that utilize scientific tools to capture these developments.
And to your question regarding if we might find AEA. Maybe, I probably would think so. If we ever sample those Gebel Sahaba types. Those I would think would hold lots of such DNA, probably very Nilotic-like. Maybe we could even see dead basal sub-lineages that only passed on limited DNA or related to parts of our DNA removed indirectly. Parts of me want our current needs satisfied but I also want the complexity of the regions pre-historic mapped out. Similar to how Europeans are oriented with their hunter-gatherers.
Garaad Awal
War is coming.
Tutsis,Masais,Datooga,Ari,Kikuyu etc are all closer to us than the Sandawe or Hadza.
Isn't that due to them having Cushitic ancestry though?
Garaad Awal
War is coming.
Even the San of South Africa have Cushitic ancestry...
The alchemist
VIP
Those groups are furhter down in a gepgraphic paleolithic forager genetic cline.
Hadza and Sandawe are mixed groups:
This is likely not the best model, still, not so far-fetched (averages):
If you remove the food producer DNA in those groups (meaning, Sudanese; Somali, Yoruba), you'll have something roughly like this:
Sandawe 65.3% Kakapel (ancient hunter-gatherer from southwestern Kenya with excess central African DNA) with 34.7% southern African hunter-gatherer.
Hadza will show something roughly, 49.7% Kakapel, 44.3% Mota, and 6% South African hunter-gatherer.
I put in the relevant ancient samples for hunter-gatherers and it only picked up Mota and Youruba:
Still, notice the big distance...
With Somali sample:
Notice we don't pick up Yoruba. This can be explained by two reasons, we lack West/Central African related DNA and it is the fact that Mota doesn't provide Sudanese, a highly rich East African DNA with the structural consistency, so it compensates using Yoruba-like. We don't need that because our East African DNA is less, likely Mota got some variation related to it in excess. But check out the distance; shows how we really have nothing to do with that sample. Also, notice how Mota consumes so much Eurasian-like DNA...
Included some sims:
"BasalEurasian" in this case "BasalEurasian:ZlatyKun_minusBachoKiro_minusWest Eurasian)" -- simulated stuff. Nothing evidentiary -- purely experimental -- even methodological confirmation which is not good for asserting values behind results. We're not too constrained with things so might as well check things out.
How much do you know about ancient human dna? Do you believe we might have some homo sapien idaltu (herto man) DNA? Herto man was discovered in the afar region
The alchemist
VIP
How much do I know about ancient DNA? Some and little, depending on what the conversation is about. If you mean DNA regarding specimens in 150,000 years of age, then nothing. And I will further assert that no one knows what the genetics of Herto Man is either. There is a high chance he was a dead-end. Within speculatory, non-scientific grounds, a hypothetical proposition that appears on the surface rational claims that current humans are a resultant mosaic composite of many different humans that live in complex environments around Africa. Thus, extant humans are the homogenized versions of that complex mixing. "Homogenized" is purely put in a relative context.
I think humans are just humans. What motivates us now is what drove them then, behaviorally as well. You don't need any anthropology to come to this conclusion.
Based on what I know, most Somali males carry E-V32, which descends from the Iberomaurusians' E-M78; and most Somali males and females carry various sub-Saharan African haplogroups ("L" haplogroups) [Link]. So, Somalis appear to be a mixture of Iberomaurusian males who migrated into the Horn and mated with indigenous African females. However, when modeling Somalis using Vahaduo, the program will choose Natufian rather than Iberomaurusian in order to model part of Somalis' ancestry.
Collectively, this all implies that Somalis paternally descend from a mixture of Iberomaurusian males and Natufian females. More than likely, Natufians migrated into North Africa and the females were taken by the Iberomaurusian males; and their mixed male progeny then migrated into the Horn of Africa and mated with indigenous African females, thereby creating Somalis (and the other Afro-Eurasian Horners).
The Iberomaurusians and the Natufians shared ancestry; the former's E-M78 and the latter's E-Z830 both descend from E-M35:
E-M35 originated in the Horn of Africa according to phylogenetic analyses, which implies that the Iberomaurusians were partly sub-Saharan African / indigenous Horn African. This is consistent with peer-reviewed scientific studies that have concluded that the Iberomaurusians were partly sub-Saharan African; for example, Ancient West African Foragers In the Context of African Population History [Link] models the Iberomaurusians of Taforalt as deriving 54% of their ancestry from the same source as SSAs such as Mota, the SSA component of the Agaw, and West Africans & Bantus [Link].
This also explains why the Natufians have been determined to have been 6% Omotic (SSA) in the peer-reviewed scientific article, Re-analysis of Whole Genome Sequence Data From 279 Ancient Eurasians Reveals Substantial Ancestral Heterogeneity (2018) [Link], which states the following:
As already implied, the Iberomaurusians and the Natufians were partly Eurasian; the Iberomaurusians carried Eurasian Maternal Haplogroups M1b and U6a [Link], and the Natufians carried Eurasian Maternal Haplogroups J2 and N1 [Link, Table 2]. So, when their mixed progeny migrated into the Horn of Africa and mated with indigenous African females, they brought Eurasian DNA with them, which explains why Somalis have been determined to be 40% West Eurasian, according to peer-reviewed scientific studies, such as Genome-wide analyses disclose the distinctive HLA architecture and the pharmacogenetic landscape of the Somali population [Link].
Note that there were archaic humans known as Aterians were who present in North Africa between 150 kya and 20 kya, which overlaps with the first 5000 years of the Iberomaurusian culture therein - and which overlaps with the the time period at which E-M35 formed (34,700 years ago, according to YFull). Therefore, it's likely that the carriers of E-M35 who migrated to North Africa from the Horn of Africa mixed with the Aterians; the product of this intermixing would have been the Ancestral North Africans (ANA). Therefore, the Iberomaurusians - being a mixture of ANA and Eurasians - likely had Aterian ancestry, which is consistent with their robust mandibles and overall robust anatomy - which are unlike those of anatomically modern humans.
Here's a quote from the peer-reviewed scientific article, The relevance of late MSA [Middle Stone Age] mandibles on the emergence of modern morphology in Northern Africa (2022) [Link].
Therefore, the Iberomaurusians were a mixture of anatomically modern humans from the Horn of Africa who carried E-M35, anatomically modern humans from Eurasia (who carried M1b and U6a), and very possibly Aterians.
As for the Natufians, their African ancestry (Aterian and SSA) was less than that of the Iberomaurusians, which can be explained by their presence in the Middle East and their subsequent intermixing with full-blooded Eurasians.
Therefore, Somalis probably have a bit of Aterian ancestry from via their Iberomaurusian and Natufian ancestry.
For a full breakdown of the origin of the Iberomaurusians and Natufians, read my article here. Also, here is my Human Ancestry Graph for Africans, part of which represents what I've explained.
Collectively, this all implies that Somalis paternally descend from a mixture of Iberomaurusian males and Natufian females. More than likely, Natufians migrated into North Africa and the females were taken by the Iberomaurusian males; and their mixed male progeny then migrated into the Horn of Africa and mated with indigenous African females, thereby creating Somalis (and the other Afro-Eurasian Horners).
The Iberomaurusians and the Natufians shared ancestry; the former's E-M78 and the latter's E-Z830 both descend from E-M35:
- E-M215 (E1b1b) -> E-M35 -> E-L539 -> E-M78 (E1b1b1a1) [Link]
- E-M215 (E1b1b) -> E-M35 -> E-Z827 -> E-Z830 [Link]
E-M35 originated in the Horn of Africa according to phylogenetic analyses, which implies that the Iberomaurusians were partly sub-Saharan African / indigenous Horn African. This is consistent with peer-reviewed scientific studies that have concluded that the Iberomaurusians were partly sub-Saharan African; for example, Ancient West African Foragers In the Context of African Population History [Link] models the Iberomaurusians of Taforalt as deriving 54% of their ancestry from the same source as SSAs such as Mota, the SSA component of the Agaw, and West Africans & Bantus [Link].
This also explains why the Natufians have been determined to have been 6% Omotic (SSA) in the peer-reviewed scientific article, Re-analysis of Whole Genome Sequence Data From 279 Ancient Eurasians Reveals Substantial Ancestral Heterogeneity (2018) [Link], which states the following:
As already implied, the Iberomaurusians and the Natufians were partly Eurasian; the Iberomaurusians carried Eurasian Maternal Haplogroups M1b and U6a [Link], and the Natufians carried Eurasian Maternal Haplogroups J2 and N1 [Link, Table 2]. So, when their mixed progeny migrated into the Horn of Africa and mated with indigenous African females, they brought Eurasian DNA with them, which explains why Somalis have been determined to be 40% West Eurasian, according to peer-reviewed scientific studies, such as Genome-wide analyses disclose the distinctive HLA architecture and the pharmacogenetic landscape of the Somali population [Link].
Note that there were archaic humans known as Aterians were who present in North Africa between 150 kya and 20 kya, which overlaps with the first 5000 years of the Iberomaurusian culture therein - and which overlaps with the the time period at which E-M35 formed (34,700 years ago, according to YFull). Therefore, it's likely that the carriers of E-M35 who migrated to North Africa from the Horn of Africa mixed with the Aterians; the product of this intermixing would have been the Ancestral North Africans (ANA). Therefore, the Iberomaurusians - being a mixture of ANA and Eurasians - likely had Aterian ancestry, which is consistent with their robust mandibles and overall robust anatomy - which are unlike those of anatomically modern humans.
Here's a quote from the peer-reviewed scientific article, The relevance of late MSA [Middle Stone Age] mandibles on the emergence of modern morphology in Northern Africa (2022) [Link].
Therefore, the Iberomaurusians were a mixture of anatomically modern humans from the Horn of Africa who carried E-M35, anatomically modern humans from Eurasia (who carried M1b and U6a), and very possibly Aterians.
As for the Natufians, their African ancestry (Aterian and SSA) was less than that of the Iberomaurusians, which can be explained by their presence in the Middle East and their subsequent intermixing with full-blooded Eurasians.
Therefore, Somalis probably have a bit of Aterian ancestry from via their Iberomaurusian and Natufian ancestry.
For a full breakdown of the origin of the Iberomaurusians and Natufians, read my article here. Also, here is my Human Ancestry Graph for Africans, part of which represents what I've explained.
Last edited:
Ancestral North Africans (ANA) were one of the progenitors of the Iberomaurusians and were indigenous to North Africa. Therefore, the Iberomaurusians' genetic makeup and morphology can be used to determine what ANA were and where they were from.
The Iberomaurusians of Taforalt - who lived between 15,100 and 13,900 years ago - carried Paternal Haplogroup E-M78 according to the peer-reviewed scientific article, Pleistocene North African Genomes Link Near Eastern And Sub-Saharan African Human Populations (2018) [Link].
Additionally, the Iberomaurusian culture emerged approximately 25,000 years ago according to the scientific article, New radiocarbon dates for the earliest Later Stone Age microlithic technology in Northwest Africa (2016) [Link].
Therefore, the paternal haplogroup of the first Iberomaurusians would have been E-M35, because E-M78 did not exist yet and E-M35 was the most downstream ancestor of E-M78 that did exist at that time.
E-M215 (E1b1b) -> E-M35 -> E-L539 -> E-M78 [Link].
E-M35 formed approximately 34,700 years ago according to YFull [Link]; and it formed in the Horn of Africa according to the peer-reviewed scientific article, Origin, Diffusion, and Differentiation of Y-Chromosome Haplogroups E and J: Inferences on the Neolithization of Europe and Later Migratory Events in the Mediterranean Area (2004) [Link].
Subsequently, ANA - who would have carried E-M35 - partly descended from Horners. I say "partly" because their progeny - the Iberomaurusians - possessed morphological traits that were consistent with the morphology of a divergent branch of modern humans / Homo sapiens whose stone-tool culture existed in North Africa between 150 kya and 20 kya: the Aterians [Link].
Aterians appear to have been the descendants of the Jebel Irhoud humans - and the Jebel Irhoud humans have been classified as basal Homo sapiens (i.e. humans who were at the beginning of the transition from Homo heidelbergensis to Homo sapiens). Both the Jebel Irhoud human fossils and the human fossils of Aterians were discovered in Morocco, which supports this conclusion.
Therefore, while the basal Homo sapiens of East Africa were evolving into anatomically modern humans and Homo sapiens idaltu (Herto Man), those of North Africa were evolving into Aterians. This means that Aterians were a different subspecies.
Here's a quote from the peer-reviewed scientific article, The origin and Evolution of Homo sapiens (2016) [Link]. It concerns the Aterian human fossil Dar-Es Sultane II H5.
This indicates that ANA were a mixture of anatomically modern humans who carried E-M35 and Aterians.
Here's a quote from the peer-reviewed scientific article, The relevance of late MSA [Middle Stone Age] mandibles on the emergence of modern morphology in Northern Africa (2022) [Link]. It states that there is morphological continuity between the Jebel Irhoud humans, the Aterians and the Iberomaurusians, which supports this conclusion.
The human skeleton that was discovered at Nazlet Khater - Egypt [Link] and is estimated to be 33,000 years old fits the temporal and geographic parameters of ANA: Egypt is in North Africa, where ANA resided; and 33,000 years ago is a little after the time that E-M35 is estimated to have formed (34,700 years ago).
As should be expected, the skeleton possesses a mixture of anatomically modern and divergent Homo sapiens traits; his skeleton is slender overall, but he has a massive mandible and a very low and recessed frontal bone (forehead) [Link].
What separates the Iberomaurusians from their ANA ancestors is the Iberomaurusians' Eurasian ancestry; the maternal haplogroups of the Iberomaurusians of Taforalt were M1b and U6a, and they indicate that Eurasians migrated into North Africa approximately 24,000 years ago - which was close to the time that the Iberomaurusian culture emerged.
M1b and U6a either originated in Eurasia or descend from maternal haplogroups that originated in Eurasia; and they formed approximately 24,000 years ago.
Here is a quote from the aforementioned article Pleistocene North African Genomes Link Near Eastern And Sub-Saharan African Human Populations (2018) [Link].
...
Regarding West Africans (and Bantus), you've stated that we split from Ancestral East Africans 80 kya. This is impossible.
West Africans and Bantus carry haplogroups that originated in East Africa or that trace back to East Africa within the past ~39,200 to 52,300 years at most, such as E-M132, E-M2, and various subclades of L3. Note that we also have older haplogroups (e.g. subclades of A00, L1 and L2) via ancestry that is much more distantly related to that of East Africans, but they are not relevant to the portion of our ancestry that your comment concerns.
According to YFull, E-M132 [Link] formed approximately 49,800 years ago and E-M2 [Link] formed approximately 39,200 years ago. Therefore, the paternal lineages of West Africans split from East Africans 39,200 to 49,800 years ago at most.
In regard to our subclades of L3, consider Figure 1 [Link] of the scientific article Mitochondrial genetic profile of the Yoruba population from Nigeria (2019) [Link], which shows that the Yoruba of West Africa carry L3d, L3e, and L3f.
Also consider the scientific article Phylogenetic and phylogeographic analysis of African mitochondrial DNA variation (2004) [Link], which states the following:
According to the peer-reviewed scientific article, The Making of the African mtDNA Landscape. American Journal of Human Genetics (2002) [Link], L3e formed approximately 45,000 years ago in the region of Sudan (which is partly in East Africa) - and L3f formed in East Africa as well (though a date is not specified).
Furthermore, according to the peer-reviewed scientific article, Ancient West African Foragers in the Context of African Population History (2020) [Link], West Africans and Bantus derive at least 69% of our ancestry from the same source that provided 71% of Mota's ancestry, 59% of the Agaw's ancestry, and 54% of the Iberomaurusians of Taforalt's ancestry. This is represented in Figures 5 and S3.17 of the article; versions of these two figures that have been labeled by me show that the paternal haplogroup of their shared source of ancestry was E-P2 (E1b1) [Link].
E-P2 (E1b1) is the most downstream haplogroup that is ancestral to all of their paternal haplogroups (except West Africans and Bantus' E-M132), which indicates that it must have been the paternal haplogroup of the population from which they all descend.
West Africans & Bantus:
E-P2 (E1b1) -> E-V38 (E1b1a) -> E-M2 [Link]
Mota:
E-P2 (E1b1) -> E-V38 (E1b1a) -> E-M329 -> E-V2403 -> E-Y175024 [Link]: Mota's entry is id:I5950; if you hover your mouse's cursor over it, it will display the text "Ancient DNA."
The Agaw:
E-P2 (E1b1) -> E-M215 (E1b1b) [Link]: The Agaw tested positive for E-P2 (E1b1) but tested negative for E-V38 (E1b1a), which means that they carry unidentified subclades of E-P2 (E1b1); the only other branch of E-P2 besides E-V38 (E1b1a) is E-M215 (E1b1b), which means that the Agaw carry subclades of E-M215. These results have been recorded in the doctoral thesis Variation in Y chromosome, mitochondrial DNA and labels of identity on Ethiopia (2011) [Link]. Their paternal haplogroup results are recorded on line 380 of columns Q & R of the thesis’ excel spreadsheet, in which they are listed as “AG” (an abbreviation of “Agaw”); 74 Agaw males who speak a Cushitic language and 52 Agaw males who speak a Semitic language tested positive for E-P2.
The Iberomaurusians of Taforalt:
E-P2 (E1b1) -> E-M215 -> E-M35 -> E-L539 -> E-M78 [Link]
Based on this, the upper bound of West Africans' paternal divergence from East Africans was 52,300 years ago, when E-P2 (E1b1) formed.
Also, E-P2 (E1b1) originated in East Africa according to the peer-reviewed scientific article, Origin, Diffusion, and Differentiation of Y-Chromosome Haplogroups E and J: Inferences on the Neolithization of Europe and Later Migratory Events in the Mediterranean Area (2004) [Link]:
As for the lower bound of our paternal divergence, West Africans and Bantus' E-M2 formed 39,200 years ago, as already stated.
Therefore, the time frame within which West Africans and Bantus could have split from East Africans paternally was 39,200 to 52,300 years ago - not 80,000 years ago.
The aforementioned time at which West Africans and Bantus' L3e formed (45,000 years ago) fits within this range. Additionally, E-M132's formation 49,800 years ago also fits within this range.
As for the maternal haplogroup of the population from which the aforementioned groups and Mota share ancestry, it appears to have been L3e'i'k'x, since that is the most downstream haplogroup that is ancestral to all of their related maternal haplogroups that I could determine.
West Africans & Bantus: L3e'i'k'x -> L3e [Link]
Mota: L3x -> L3x2 -> L3x2a -> L3x2a2 -> L3x2a2b [Link]
The Agaw: I have not found a source for their maternal haplogroups.
The Iberomaurusians of Taforalt: As already stated, their maternal haplogroups came from their Eurasian ancestry - not from their African ancestry.
L3e'i'k'x likely originated in East Africa, because it is a direct subclade of L3 and because L3 likely originated in East Africa.
Last edited:
Garaad Awal
War is coming.
Do you have any proof that 70% of Agaw carry non-Cushitic paternal lineages? I’m pretty sure you pulled that out of your ass like most of your nonsensical post.
I’m to lazy and busy to dissect your post but I’m definitely calling bs on that stat you made up
I’m to lazy and busy to dissect your post but I’m definitely calling bs on that stat you made up
1. Where did I say that 70% of the Agaw carry non-Cushitic lineages?
2. My post is not pulled out of my rear, nor is it nonsensical. It's filled with links to sources that support my conclusions, and my conclusions are logical. What do you find to be nonsensical about it?
I made an error to the part of my second most recent post that is quoted below. I forgot to place L3e'i'k'x before L3x.
It should be as follows:
Mota: L3e'i'k'x -> L3x -> L3x2 -> L3x2a -> L3x2a2 -> L3x2a2b [Link]
It should be as follows:
Mota: L3e'i'k'x -> L3x -> L3x2 -> L3x2a -> L3x2a2 -> L3x2a2b [Link]
Are you referring to this part of my post?
If so, it doesn't say that 70% of the Agaw carry non-Cushitic paternal lineages. It says that 74 Agaw males tested positive for E-P2 (E1b1) - and the source for this claim is right in the post: Variation in Y chromosome, mitochondrial DNA and labels of identity on Ethiopia (2011) [Link].
I even explain how to find the data, by stating that it's on line 380 of the excel spreadsheet's columns Q and R. Click on the link, download the Excel spreadsheet, and navigate to line 380 of columns Q and R.
That spreadsheet also shows that 29 Agaw males who speak a Cushitic language and 23 who speak a Semitic language carry Paternal Haplogroup J - and that 35 who speak a Cushitic language and 21 who speak a Semitic language carry A3b2. They carry multiple paternal haplogroups.
Garaad Awal
War is coming.
Nobody uses E-P2 anymore it's called E-P177
That doesn't change my point. E-P177 formed 49,800 years ago according to YFull [Link] and is ancestral to paternal haplogroups of West Africans and Bantus, Mota, the Agaw, and the Iberomaurusians of Taforalt. This indicates that they all share common ancestry from a population that existed far less than 80,000 years ago; this counters the user to whom I was responding, who said that West Africans split from Ancestral East Africans 80,000 years ago (and therefore before East Africans split from Eurasians).
In actuality, Eurasians split from East Africans and West Africans first - and then East Africans and West Africans split from each other between 39,200 (when E-M2 formed) and 49,800 years ago (when E-M132 formed).
E-P2 isn't included on YFull's latest phylogenetic tree, but it still represents mutations that are in the lineage between E-P177 and the E1b1a and E1b1b (and their subclades). Additionally, it can be viewed on their archived tree [Link].
Do know of any studies and papers regarding this AEA population? What about you @Emir of Zayla do you have any information about AEA and when they split from Nilotics?
Last edited:
