Origins of Berber Speakers

[EclectYummination]

The Maghreb, home to some of the highest numbers of Berber speakers, is described as "having a patchy DNA landscape unlike that seen anywhere else in the world" as a result of how much it varies from place to place [them having ancestries from about every direction].

The main constant, the signature Berber marker I would say, were there any, is paternal (nrY-DNA) E-M81. So we'll start from there, the paternal, and Hg (Haplogroup) E side.

E-M215

E-M78 (from which derives E-M81) descends from E-M215. M215 is found at its highest frequences in the North Kenyan Borana ethnic group and probably originates somewhere between the Horn (Ethiopia-Somalia) and Tanzania.

E-M78

E-M78 itself derives from E-M215 about 10.5 kya. M78 although found across Sudan (and the entire mediterranean really) and although found at exceptionally high frequencies in the Eastern Beja and Western Darfurians [Hassan et. al. 2008], probably originates near Egypt in Lake Nubia at around the time (10.5 kya) of a hyper arid phase Sahara. It's presense in Horners (such as in Somalia) is due to backmigration from the North, due to population stresses and pressures put on the Nile River Valley around 4-6 kya as a result of the Sahara's re-emergence (it had disappeared as North Africa went through one of its wet-phases).

*E-M81*

E-M81 is found throughout "Berberia" from the coastal Maghreb to the inland Sahel region. I've read of studies dating its Maghrebian expansion to around 2,000 years ago (2kya). Importantly: it derives (originates) at around 6 kya, which is contemporary with the earliest Nation-State (Kemet) and earliest city-states (Sumer) and which is by the time (after the time) the earliest known agro-incorporated urbanized settlements had arisen [around Sumeria]. This is important to me because it means that, it's only been here since a time when the NA landscape has been more cosmopolitan.

Besides E, Berber speakers have some J and some European lineages, on the male [paternal] side. While predominantly E (and majoratively M78) on the male side, maternally they are less consistant and on average more West-Eurasian.

Maternally, I'm either ignoring two significant markers, M1 and U6, or assuming them aboriginal North African, which one rarely does. Why I'm doing this is because I regard them as archaic lineages in terms of human ancestry because U6 I believe derives around OOA (the first Africans exiting Africa anyway) and all Eurasians descend from [L3 descended] M and N lineages, but none are found with the ancestral L3. Not only is North Africa geographically (lattitude-fattitudinally) consistant with whereever in Eurasia these would likely derive from anyway, but Paleolithic [pre-Neolithic] humans in general resemble A.) eachother and B.) SSAs [clickable link -- link is related to origins of modern phenetic differentiation] (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21425/abstract) so it's misleading to attribute traits of people from that time as indicating (for moderns) one ancestry verses the other. All in all we know they are Asian, proto-Asian, or NA.

So, ommitting those two or considering them native (which is consistant with the fact they're consistant with paternal Hg E as both are associated with the same greater language Family),

my question is,

to which scenario do you attribute the fact that they are overrepresented maternally on the European side?

I've read of NRY Hg A being found in Iberia and dating to before Berber - Islamic Spain! I was like, "Holy cheetos!" but now I've also heard that at times the straight of Jibralter (which, can't you see the other side, ie North Africa, from Iberia?) was non-existant or less existant than it is today and people may have crossed both ways. Also, when Northern Europe was depopulated by the Ice Age Southern Europe would have housed many people, some of them possibly crossing over -- North Europe's depopulating is confirmed btw by North Africans with Saami lineages. Haplogroup E Berber speakers would have met with these groups and merged with them. Then there was the North African capturing of Christian slaves (http://www.osu.edu/researchnews/archive/whtslav.htm), usually European, mostly Southern European. This capturing was to such a level it had the Roman Catholic Trinitarian Order missioned in France under the special operation of collecting and disbursing funds for the relief and ransom of slaves of Mediterranean Pirates -- it was also at such a level that [after narratives and letters of freed captives from American ships] it caused The First Barbary War in the early 19th century which resulted in the Tripoli being paid ransom in exchange for prisoners. As the text I link to immediately above relates, for a century this Mediterranean trafficking rivaled that of the Atlantic and people as far North as Britain had been abducted (which, on the opposite end of Europe, for the longest the Vikings would've been the main ones to worry about becoming abducted by). This scenario could entail oriental Harems.

So far I take it, the Maghreb is patchy, with the sampling they've amounted to thus far. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajhb.20473/abstract)

[Lol_Race]

E-M81 does not descend from E-M78, it descends from E-M35.

[EclectYummination]

Correct, my mistake.

Haven't looked at this topic in an enormous while. Those are brother mutations.

-------

Then again.. thanx still, but .. well regarding E-M215, E-M35 are the main representatives anyway, aren't they? I mean, i'm not aware that underived M215 is all that common anywhere anyway, is it?

[Doctoris Scientia]

Aren't most of the Eurasian mtDNA haploclades in North Africa identical to those found in Eurasia, or of little differentiation; which implies that they were introduced rather recently.

M1 and U6 in North Africa expanded into North Africa by way of East Africa.

East African mtDNA lineages date back to 20,000 BP in North Africa.
West African mtDNA lineages date back to 15,000 BP in North Africa.
Eurasian mtDNA lineages date back to 10,000-13,000 BP in North Africa.

According to Tishkoff et al. 2009, North Africans are around 35% "Afrasan", 15% West African, and 50% "Saharan". So basically an East African derived population that eventually absorbed/assimilated both West African and Eurasian admixture/people.

[beyoku]

Good Write up, I will add these :

[Bandar Qasim]

According to Tishkoff et al. 2009, North Africans are around 35% "Afrasan", 15% West African, and 50% "Saharan". So basically an East African derived population that eventually absorbed/assimilated both West African and Eurasian admixture/people.

Correction: 64% Eurasian, 14% Sahelian, 11% Niger-Congo, 8% Afrasan, 3% Nilo-Chadic

From the Global run of Tishkoff, which is more accurate.

[Doctoris Scientia]

Correction: 64% Eurasian, 14% Sahelian, 11% Niger-Congo, 8% Afrasan, 3% Nilo-Chadic

From the Global run of Tishkoff, which is more accurate.

Your choice to view the Global run as more accurate is subjective if anything. Tishkoff finalized the results from the African run, not the Global run. The main significance of the Global run was to discern the relationships shared between Africans and non-Africans.

[Bandar Qasim]

Your choice to view the Global run as more accurate is subjective if anything. Tishkoff finalized the results from the African run, not the Global run. The main significance of the Global run was to discern the relationships shared between Africans and non-Africans.

More populations = better results.

The relatively high Cushitic score they got in the intra-Africa run is just an artifact. In your previous post you admitted that Berbers have significant European ancestry so a structure run with only African populations will give very off results for them. Europeans have to be included for the structure results of Berbers to make sense.

[EclectYummination]

^Right.


Your choice to view the Global run as more accurate is subjective if anything. Tishkoff finalized the results from the African run, not the Global run. The main significance of the Global run was to discern the relationships shared between Africans and non-Africans.

Be that as it may, your percentage compilation leaves something to be desired in the way of Eurasian percentages, but I'd say the same thing for Bandar Qasim and his in terms of Saharans.

What left to do then but list the percentages being referred to as "Saharan" and "Eurasian" respectively?

[Mattyas3]

Berber language is classed as being Afro-Asiatic (google it). From what I saw on the African Project, the descandants of the Berbers appear as mainly West Eurasians with various degrees of local SouthSaharan admixture. There's no consensus on when they came in Africa (besides they are indigenous of the north sides) execpt maybe this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberomaurusian.

[Doctoris Scientia]

More populations = better results.

The relatively high Cushitic score they got in the intra-Africa run is just an artifact. In your previous post you admitted that Berbers have significant European ancestry so a structure run with only African populations will give very off results for them. Europeans have to be included for the structure results of Berbers to make sense.

Western Eurasian ancestry was taken into account (in the African run) as I've previously mentioned in older threads on the same topic. The Western Eurasian component was represented by the northern "Saharan" component; the other non-African clusters from the Global run where eliminated from the African run, because of their insignificance in Africa. Reason for why the "Western Eurasian" ancestry of the Cape Coloreds (Global run) for example matched their "Saharan" score in the African run.

[Bandar Qasim]

Western Eurasian ancestry was taken into account (in the African run) as I've previously mentioned in older threads on the same topic. The Western Eurasian component was represented by the northern "Saharan" component; the other non-African clusters from the Global run where eliminated from the African run, because of their insignificance in Africa. Reason for why the "Western Eurasian" ancestry of the Cape Coloreds (Global run) for example matched their "Saharan" score in the African run.

Yes, and Cape Coloureds are 25% Cushitic. :lol: Just admit you prefer the intra-African structure run of Tishkoff over the Global one because it suits your agenda.

[Doctoris Scientia]

Berber language is classed as being Afro-Asiatic (google it). From what I see on the African Project, the descandants of the "Berbers" appear as mainly West Eurasians with various degree of local SouthSaharan admixture. There's no consensus on when they came in Africa (besides they are indigenous of the north sides) execpt maybe this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberomaurusian

It's not about when they came to Africa, they've always been in Africa. The correction questions would be...

When did they acquire European admixture/ancestry?

[EclectYummination]

Berber language is classed as being Afro-Asiatic (google it).

Yes, this is the language "greater language family" [I said in those exact terms, page search it] to which I refer in my O.P.

I'd take it though that this is know by practically everyone here who knows anything about their language family (Berber) to begin with, though.


From what I saw on Dienekes analysis , descandants of the Berbers appear as mainly West Eurasians with various degree of local South-Saharan admixture.

I'd take it to be that by my guess; they appear the same way to me. Though, I've heard .. things .. about this Dienekes blogger dude.


There's no consensus on when they came in Africa (besides they are indigenous of the north sides) execpt maybe this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberomaurusian

Here's the thing: Berber languages are spoken no where outside of Africa, as you said, they're Afroasiatic, which is majoritively spoken inside the continent, with one branch of languages perhaps being the exception (Semitic -- Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew etc).

I think their origins might lay somewhere around the Eastern Sahara / Nile Valley infact.

[Particula]

Yes, this is the language "greater language family" [I said in those exact terms, page search it] to which I refer in my O.P.

I'd take it though that this is know by practically everyone here who knows anything about their language family (Berber) to begin with, though.



I'd take it to be that by my guess; they appear the same way to me. Though, I've heard .. things .. about this Dienekes blogger dude.



Here's the thing: Berber languages are spoken no where outside of Africa, as you said, they're Afroasiatic, which is majoritively spoken inside the continent, with one branch of languages perhaps being the exception (Semitic -- Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew etc).

I think their origins might lay somewhere around the Eastern Sahara / Nile Valley infact.

why the Nile Valley or Sahara it might have originated in the North
I mean it is like saying no South African oboriginal dialects must have strated in Madagascar because everything starts "south" of everywhere in my opinion berber languages started North and spreaded South,berbers where a light skinned people they must have originated in cold ares,berbers who are dark are those who look mixed,berbers who don't look mixed have southern European skintones and Egyptians depicted Libyans as fair skinned,Libyans of today are quite dark because they're recently admixed

[EclectYummination]

Ta tha both a yuz, Qasim with your "Eurasians", and Scienta with your "West Eurasians", both of the terms are vague, hence:


^Right.



Be that as it may, your percentage compilation leaves something to be desired in the way of Eurasian percentages, but I'd say the same thing for Bandar Qasim and his in terms of Saharans.

What left to do then but list the lineages making up the percentages being referred to as "Saharan" and "Eurasian" respectively?

[Doctoris Scientia]

Yes, and Cape Coloureds are 25% Cushitic. :lol: Just admit you prefer the intra-African structure run of Tishkoff over the Global one because it suits your agenda.

The Cape Coloureds are an exception, they possess Oceanian, Indian, and "East Asian" admixture... three out of the four non-African clusters that were eliminated from from the African run, alongside Native American (due to the absence of these ancestral components in Africa). The results of the Cape Coloureds were therefore skewed for the obvious reasons. I've already previously mentioned the above in previous threads. Tishkoff finalized the results from the African run, not the Global run.

---------- Post added 2011-07-30 at 22:02 ----------



I think their origins might lay somewhere around the Eastern Sahara / Nile Valley infact.

Agree, they likely expanded from the vicinity of the Eastern Sudan, alongside Chadic, in which the two eventually split in the vicinity of the Western Sudan... with Chadic expanding west towards the direction of Chad and Berber expanding northwest towards the direction of eastern Egypt/Libya.

[Mattyas3]

Here's the thing: Berber languages are spoken no where outside of Africa, as you said, they're Afroasiatic, which is majoritively spoken inside the continent, with one branch of languages perhaps being the exception (Semitic -- Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew etc).

I think their origins might lay somewhere around the Eastern Sahara / Nile Valley The Berbers appear to be rather distinct from Egyptians on Behar and Dienekes projects . If their ancestral language came from the Nile Valley (as you supposed), then a large part of their ancestry might be on the contrary rather indigenous to the Maghreb.

[Doctoris Scientia]

Ta tha both a yuz, Qasim with your "Eurasians", and Scienta with your "West Eurasians", both of the terms are vague, hence:

The Maternal component sheds the most light on the possible origins of the Western Eurasian affinity among NW Africans. They're found at a frequency of ~45-65% among "core" NW African populations, less so among Saharans. The majority of these lineages are young clades of Iberian haplogroups like H (in particularly H1) and HV.

[EclectYummination]

why the Nile Valley or Sahara it might have originated in the North [...] in my opinion berber languages started North and spreaded South,berbers where a light skinned people they must have originated in cold ares

Firstly, My stress there was Eastern, not Southern, I know Sahara has a Southern connotation from a coastal / Northern perspective, but both the Sahara and the Nile strech as far as the Mediterranean coast and Egyptian Delta home to cities such as Alexandria and dispersal point to the rest of the Mediterranean see.

Infact, I'm indeed open to the possibility that the original ballsack home to the earliest Berber speaker may have come out from, though Hg E, might have been light skinned and they could've been mixed at genesis / origin. I doubt it though, to be honest with you.

There are speakers of the language living in areas ranging from the Maghreb to the Sahara desert to the Sahel which is South of the Sahara, which is why:


berbers who don't look mixed have southern European skintones and

this is mighty presumptious of you, wouldn't you say?

But you mention Egyptian paintings of Libyans -- likely of Meshwesh or Tamehou individuals. They also painted brown looking Saharans, like Saharan Saharans today.

Whatever the conclusion from art (which is subjective, Equatorial Africans have depicted themselves as just as cream coloured if not white while depicting other groups as brown), it's besides the main question and point of this thread [and indeed forum] which is genetics.

---------- Post added 2011-07-30 at 18:13 ----------


The Maternal component sheds the most light on the possible origins of the Western Eurasian affinity among NW Africans. They're found at a frequency of ~45-65% among "core" NW African populations, less so among Saharans. The majority of these lineages are young clades of Iberian haplogroups like H (in particularly H1) and HV.

Young. So that makes it likely (though not certain) that these lineages have arived in historic / recent (more Cosmopolitan) times.

[Doctoris Scientia]

The identity of many of these uniparental lineages shared between both Africans and Western Eurasians are going to have be further assessed given the most recent evidence. That evidence being the OOA population continued to receive African gene-flow for a maximum of some 40,000 more years after their expansion out of Africa; therefore it's very likely that many of these older "Eurasian" lineages are in fact remnants of this African mediated gene-flow. But as of North Africa, Eurasian maternal ancestry does an indicate a relatively recent European contribution.

---------- Post added 2011-07-30 at 22:21 ----------



So that makes it likely (though not certain) that these lineages have arived in historic / recent (more Cosmopolitan) times.

Many of these lineages have yet to differentiate into their own clades, but are simply extensions of what we're used to seeing in Iberia... so possibly yes. According to Frigi et al. and Keita et al. (2009), the introduction of European/Eurasian maternal ancestry in North Africa was without a doubt a prolonded and sporadic "event"... reason for why North African Berbers are still relatively culturally African. So basically a combination of pre-historic and historic gene-flow by way of Western Eurasia... or better yet a "build up" of Eurasian admixture.

[Bandar Qasim]

^^How come you accept that Eurasian gene flow in Maghreb Berbers is very ancient but you reject the same to be true for Egyptians? Why the double standard? Is it because Berbers didn't build pyramids? ;)

[Aware_Dog]

The identity of many of these uniparental lineages shared between both Africans and Western Eurasians are going to have be further assessed given the most recent evidence. That evidence being the OOA population continued to receive African gene-flow for a maximum of some 40,000 more years after their expansion out of Africa; therefore it's very likely that many of these older "Eurasian" lineages are in fact remnants of this African mediated gene-flow. But as of North Africa, Eurasian maternal ancestry does an indicate a relatively recent European contribution.
Exactly, many people want to ignore this new evidence as if it is just going to go away or something:lol: by the way I think the Saharan/Dogon cluster found in many northerly Afrasans, at least some of it, may have something to do with this ancient ancient breeding of Africans with the OOA population, that may have later on , after breeding with Africans, came back into Africa. As for mtdna H in Berbers however, my personal take on it is from an ice age refugiuum that existed in Iberia, but also could have existed in NW Africa, so I would think that it was from slightly before the beginning of the Holocene.

P.S to the O.P there is no evidence that E-M215 originated any further south than the modern day border of Ethiopia. Almost all lineages in Tanzania and generally south of Ethiopia are either of the E-M293, or E-M78 (Maasai for instance) type, both subclades of E-M35. Same withthe Borana of Kenya, they are almost all E-V32 with small trace of the newly characterized V257*, which is ancestral to E-M81, see Trombetta '11 for reference.

[Mattyas3]

^^How come you accept that Eurasian gene flow in Maghreb Berbers is very ancient but you reject the same to be true for Egyptians? Why the double standard? Is it because Berbers didn't build pyramids? ;) Probably yes. Most genetic studies I've read showed modernday Egyptians the same as the old ones. If the ancestral language of the Berbers came from the Nile Valley (as supposed earlier) then it was from a population rather akin to modern Egyptians.

[EclectYummination]

This covers Saharan and Sahelian Berber speakers as well? I don't think so.

I say an Eastern Sahara (think Teda) origins model works best.


P.S to the O.P there is no evidence that E-M215 originated any further south than the modern day border of Ethiopia. Almost all lineages in Tanzania and generally south of Ethiopia are either of the E-M293, or E-M78 (Maasai for instance) type, both subclades of E-M35. Same withthe Borana of Kenya, they are almost all E-V32 with small trace of the newly characterized V257*, which is ancestral to E-M81, see Trombetta '11 for reference.

Hey, I probably meant M35 not M215 as far as originating in that whole region. 35's the one found clear down into Khoisan speakers, right? The whole reclassification and redoing of the nomenclature even in terms of the specific mutations was annoying IMO. But M215 is pretty old, idn't? I still agree with Ethiopia for it though.

[Doctoris Scientia]

^^How come you accept that Eurasian gene flow in Maghreb Berbers is very ancient but you reject the same to be true for Egyptians? Why the double standard? Is it because Berbers didn't build pyramids? ;)

Well one, coastal NW Africans have always clustered intermediately between Western Eurasians and other Africans, the Egyptians have not. The entrance points for Western Eurasian gene-flow into the Maghreb would've differed from their counterparts in Egypt. There's a possibility of European settlement along the NW African coast, how they're related to modern North Africans remains a mysterious given that the Eurasian maternal ancestry in NW Africa remains largely undifferentiated from their Iberian counterparts.

I wouldn't call that very ancient either.

[Aware_Dog]

@Eclect: M35* found in the Khoisans prior to 2008 has been reclassified to M293, a child clade of EM35. See Henn et. al 2008.

[EclectYummination]

@ Doctoris: Right and the Egyptian Eurasian ancestry is much less European I think. Compared to Maghrebian (Central Berberia, I guess).


M35* found in the Khoisans prior to 2008 has been reclassified to M293, a child clade of EM35.

Interesting.

[Doctoris Scientia]

Probably yes. Most genetic studies I've read showed modernday Egyptians the same as the old ones. If the ancestral language of the Berbers came from the Nile Valley (as supposed earlier) then it was from a population rather akin to modern Egyptians.

The Ancient Egyptians have never been genetically compared to their modern counterparts. Anthropologically they don't cluster with one another, with the Ancient Egyptians forming a cluster with people to the south of Egypt.

[EclectYummination]

The Ancient Egyptians have never been genetically compared to their modern counterparts. Anthropologically they don't cluster with one another, with the Ancient Egyptians forming a cluster with people to the south of Egypt.

"Anthropologically" is pretty vague, and this isn't the thread for it [ Ancient Ejippedshun's equas Cacasoids (http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=426) ].

[Doctoris Scientia]

@ Doctoris: Right and the Egyptian Eurasian ancestry is much less European I think. Compared to Maghrebian (Central Berberia, I guess).

Interesting.

The Eurasian affinity in Egypt is largely Levantine like, while that of NW Africa has a stronger Iberian association.

---------- Post added 2011-07-30 at 23:08 ----------


"Anthropologically" is pretty vague, and this isn't the thread for that.

As in crania and body plans... The Ancient Egyptians were Holocene-Saharo-Tropical-African variants, in contrast to Modern Egyptians who like their fellow NW Africans are "Intermediate-Africans", i.e. or mixed.

[Mattyas3]

It's not about when they came to Africa, they've always been in Africa. The correction questions would be...

When did they acquire European admixture/ancestry?
Perhaps were you there at that time. I do believe in "past" second lives. markers as U6 and M1 you mentioned show a very early arrival of "non-Africans" from West Asia into North Africa , nothing recent we could think of.

[Doctoris Scientia]

Perhaps were you there at that time. I do believe in "past" second lives. markers as U6 and M1 you mentioned show a very early arrival of "non-Africans" into North Africa , nothing recent we could think of.

There's no concrete evidence that would force us to have to identify U6 and M1 with "Eurasia", given recent evidence they're very much indigenous. Anyways, the U6 and M1 subclades found in North Africa are of East African origin, no matter of ultimate origin.

Berber speakers and cultures are not found in Eurasia, and most definitely never have. I don't need a time machine to state the obvious.

[beyoku]

"Anthropologically" is pretty vague, and this isn't the thread for it [ Ancient Ejippedshun's equas Cacasoids (http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=426) ].

Actually I think it is. Since I am someone of a Data whore I am going to go ahead and make the point that I believe that it is COMPLIMENTARY, not exactly explanatory that we can view some of that data and come up with a hypothesis. I think the data itself should be used because its actually there. I see people arguing over who looked like what at what time but lets bring the actual hard data into the equation.

That said:

http://img446.imageshack.us/img446/244/cv29hu.jpg

http://www.femininebeauty.info/images/brace.2.gif

We can clearly see that there is some type if "CLINE" that leads to Modern Mediterranean. I am not sure why no one points this out. I clearly see how this data supports MY Hypothesis though. Also, assuming we can associate phenotype not exactly with gene frequencies but where certain makers supposedly ORIGINATE, I can see how this data is complementary to migration patters of North West African Male and female ancestors. I am not sure how much more skeletal data is out there.

Also seeing the early data of E-M81 known as the "Berber Maker" if find it pretty appropriate to associate that cranial data, and the genetic data, with this linguistic hypothesis.

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/1448/westboundprotoafrisans.jpg

The only thing that is off is the dating of the bones.

[Falsetruth]

The Eurasian affinity in Egypt is largely Levantine like, while that of NW Africa has a stronger Iberian association.

---------- Post added 2011-07-30 at 23:08 ----------



As in crania and body plans... The Ancient Egyptians were Holocene-Saharo-Tropical-African variants, in contrast to Modern Egyptians who like their fellow NW Africans are "Intermediate-Africans", i.e. or mixed.

nope, ancient egyptians where similar to what they are today, caucasoid with minor sub saharan admixture. and its the modern horners that are admixed "intermediate-africans".

[beyoku]

nope, ancient egyptians where similar to what they are today, caucasoid with minor sub saharan admixture. and its the modern horners that are admixed "intermediate-africans".

They must have really fucked you up as a baby. :(

[EclectYummination]

@be,

Now what kinda comment is that?

Anyway, thanks, Falsetruth for exemplifying why not to make an infinitely long off-topic arguement on this thread.


http://img446.imageshack.us/img446/244/cv29hu.jpg

http://www.femininebeauty.info/images/brace.2.gif


Umm, from the top pic I'd say that going by the horizontal variate 1 the Eastern (NEA) provinence is congruent with linguistics and paternal lineages. (The Algerian Neolithic and prehistoric-to-today's NE Africa)

The only thing I don't really agree with is that you automatically associate todays Maghrebians and Saharans with the "modern Mediterraneans" instead of with modern Iberians/Europeans (basques), though, it's all Mediterranean, I guess. Then again, as coastal North Africa is on the Med. Sea, did they also sample from Berbers?

Interestingly, with the crossroads that the mediterranean is, going by variate 1 the modern and prehistoric mediteranean are both near to eachother, though not so in the second figure.

And if you say "dayta" one more gin..

[beyoku]

"Dayta" :)

You are correct, and I think this is spot on:


Umm, from the top pic I'd say that going by the horizontal variate 1 the Eastern (NEA) provinence is congruent with linguistics and paternal lineages. (The Algerian Neolithic and prehistoric-to today's NE Africa)


As far as the dendrogram it is somewhat of a caveat. If you go to this thread (http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?t=20436) you can see the full dendrogram before the cluster were grouped and named. This too gives a good impression of how North West Africa and southern Europe "Merge" together. I would post the image but the site seems to be having issues with images.

[Falsetruth]

They must have really fucked you up as a baby. :(

thats ironic coming from you fag :lol:

[EclectYummination]

When I see Humanist, I'm going to ask him about this:


Going by Dienekes' divide by three approach (notwithstanding his "Y-STR boycott (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/08/y-str-variance-of-busby-et-al-2011.html)"), the Mendez et al. MRCA of 5.5 Ky becomes ~1.8 Ky. However, this does not necessarily mean this is when it entered the Lemba gene pool. If in fact it was received by the Lemba.

A divide by 3 approach, this sounds interesting. What would this give us for E-M81 in the Maghreb, if say, it truly originates in the Eastern Sahara in a group also ancestral to groups like the Teda, Beja, and Siwa?

How long ago does this lineage date to again? Somewhere 'round 6kya? (checking back thru the thread on this now) It's funny, I had heard it saw a significant boost & spread around 2k years ago. Hmm.

[Flashrad]

E-M81 is much older than the 5.6 kyas you think it is. Otherwise, it wouldn't have a well-definded pattern in Iberia, where it increases in frequency (and also diversity) as you move west.

A group ancestral to Beja, Teda and Siwa? LOL, Siwa is no 20% E-M35, it's mainly B2 and R1b (28% each).
Beja are J1 at 40% and nothing is known for the Teda.

Also, why do you like to claim that ''european'' mtDNA in Berbers is recent? It's complete non-sense. Do you really think european slaves would end up in moroccan mountains or in the Mzab valley? It's older than 10,000 years for sure as shown by Taforalt remains. Also, mtDNA V might actually be of north african origin. And who can confirm H1's origin in Iberia?

[EclectYummination]

E-M81 is much older than the 5.6 kyas you think it is.


Substantiation?


LOL, Siwa is no 20% E-M35, it's mainly B2 and R1b (28% each).

So it's 50% B2 & R1b. The germane thing here is the language, they don't speak Nilo-Saharan I don't think, do they? Neither do they speak Chadic.

I did however say a group ancestral to all these, so you have me there. I'd forgotten what the Siwa were. Thank for refreshing my memory. I do however remember an Eastern group, I think the Beja, being possibly related either with Haratin Berbers or Siwa.


Beja are J1 at 40% and nothing is known for the Teda.

Doubt it, I'd like to see substantiation here as well.


Also, why do you like to claim that ''european'' mtDNA in Berbers is recent?

No need to get upset, I speculated about it being there since prehistoric times as well, the *real* picture maybe more of a blend than a neat and pristine clear-cut one.

MtDNA H I took to be European / Eurasian / East European / West Eurasian.

And I would not at all be averse to Eurasian mtDNA in North Africa before "recent" times, whatever that is. Especially if it's recent historic times. However, IMO it seems to have gotten there in historic times and I'd bet the documented trade in NorthWest Eurasian female slaves was the culprit, that's just my opinion.

I don't think the Moroccan Pirates thing had to have been the start, and also you can't ignore the impact of generational / successive polygamy (polygyny).

[Flashrad]

Substantiation?



So it's 50% B2 & R1b. The germane thing here is the language, they don't speak Nilo-Saharan I don't think, do they? Neither do they speak Chadic.

I did however say a group ancestral to all these, so you have me there. I'd forgotten what the Siwa were. Thank for refreshing my memory. I do however remember an Eastern group, I think the Beja, being possibly related either with Haratin Berbers or Siwa.



Doubt it, I'd like to see substantiation here as well.



No need to get upset, I speculated about it being there since prehistoric times as well, the *real* picture maybe more of a blend than a neat and pristine clear-cut one.

MtDNA H I took to be European / Eurasian / East European / West Eurasian.

And I would not at all be averse to Eurasian mtDNA in North Africa before "recent" times, whatever that is. Especially if it's recent historic times. However, IMO it seems to have gotten there in historic times and I'd bet the documented trade in NorthWest Eurasian female slaves was the culprit, that's just my opinion.

I don't think the Moroccan Pirates thing had to have been the start, and also you can't ignore the impact of generational / successive polygamy (polygyny).

Siwa Berbers were either berberized or had absorbed so much fopreign genes that you can't consider them ethnic Berbers. Haratin Berbers are not particularly related to Beja and Siwa ; they are Berbers with recent WEST AFRICAN admixture. E1b1a would be significant among them while it would be almost absent in the Beja.
The Beja really are 40% J1 but I don't remember the study.

''European mtDNA'' is definitely of prehistoric origin. Berbers (who have more H than ''Arabs'') live in the Mountains and no Northwest european slaves could ever have gotten there and the pirates were mostly in Algeria and Tunisia were the Ottoman ruled. Plus, there are no northwest european clades in Morocco and if they had an impact in North Africa, you would see much more blond hair but you don't.

Historic events simply cannot explain the presence of these clades in North Africa, especially not in Morocco. They are ancient as shown by the Guanches, the Taforalt remains and the libyan Tuaregs.

[EclectYummination]

Haratin Berbers are not particularly related to Beja and Siwa ; they are Berbers with recent WEST AFRICAN admixture.

I was using Haratin loosely, speaking of Saharan Berbers in general, and so I'd heard this of East Saharans in general but I'm just relating hearsay, nothing I've checked out (that I remember), and so you know what I really should moreso check my shit rather than babble off with my moth as I'm speaking loosely now and not based on studies or anything.

Anyway of course I would not be talking about the fugging West African ancestry but the sig Berber lineage, that E-M81, E-M35 derivative.

I would be talking about a possible link between North East Africa / East Africa and North Africa, which like NOBODY disputes there was / is.

---------- Post added 2012-03-04 at 17:05 ----------

By the way


Haratin Berbers are not particularly related to Beja and Siwa ;

I'm aware that Beja aren't even classified as Berbers, or, at least to my knowledge they weren't (other than with some people related to these peoples saying so in their very personal unprofessional unconventional and simple opinion).

They however are supposed to have some kind of ancient relation ship as Nile Valley Africans.


they are Berbers with recent West African admixture. E1b1a would be significant among them while it would be almost absent in the Beja.

I'm aware. On the flip side I believe the Siwa have like quite different lineages than say coastal mediterranean sea-hugging Maghrebian Berbers (Riffian and Kabyle). I believe their maternal's alot different.


The Beja really are 40% J1 but I don't remember the study.

I doubt this to be the case were I to look up info on the issue.


Berbers (who have more H than ''Arabs'')

You bet they do, and old news to me, Riffians and Kabyles (the most authentic Berbers to you) have much more H than do Middle Eastern Arabs or even Egyptians. Sort of makes me curious as to where and how it entered, if it was so successful in general including in the Maghreb (just now got curious typing this).


''European mtDNA'' is definitely of prehistoric origin.

Even so, it's from Eastern Europe, Russia, or something and not indigenous nor were either of those areas where Berber language came from, no where outside even of Africa is it spoken, it is only spoken in Saharan, Africa, and on its edges (the Maghrebian coast North of the Sahara, and Sahel South of the Sahara).

live in the Mountains and no Northwest european slaves could ever have gotten there and the pirates were mostly in Algeria and Tunisia were the Ottoman ruled. Plus, there are no northwest european clades in Morocco and if they had an impact in North Africa[/quote]

No NorthWest European clades? Well I never really said H was North West European, but if it isn't cladistic yet perhaps that's because it's so new and thus has had so little time to form.


They are ancient as shown by the Guanches, the Taforalt remains and the libyan Tuaregs.

You're going by art? You do know that there is South Nigerian art where the artists depict differing ethnicities of same complection as both very light / tan / creamy vs. very dark / brown chocolate (mm, I'm hungry for cookies).

Conflating all this with lineage, you don't appear very different from Clyde Winters and his Olmecs.

---------- Post added 2012-03-04 at 17:16 ----------

By the way, I responded to this below, with only "Substantiation?". Here's my reasoning.


E-M81 ... in Iberia increases in frequency (and also diversity) as you move west.

So they mainly settled in the West and it thus eminates outwards, big whoop, as for what I said about the lineages age, see A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa.

[Lol_Race]

Doubt it, I'd like to see substantiation here as well.
Hassan et al. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18618658) found J1 in 36% of the 42 Beja samples.

[Flashrad]

I was using Haratin loosely, speaking of Saharan Berbers in general, and so I'd heard this of East Saharans in general but I'm just relating hearsay, nothing I've checked out (that I remember), and so you know what I really should moreso check my shit rather than babble off with my moth as I'm speaking loosely now and not based on studies or anything.

Anyway of course I would not be talking about the fugging West African ancestry but the sig Berber lineage, that E-M81, E-M35 derivative.

I would be talking about a possible link between North East Africa / East Africa and North Africa, which like NOBODY disputes there was / is.

---------- Post added 2012-03-04 at 17:05 ----------

By the way



I'm aware that Beja aren't even classified as Berbers, or, at least to my knowledge they weren't (other than with some people related to these peoples saying so in their very personal unprofessional unconventional and simple opinion).

They however are supposed to have some kind of ancient relation ship as Nile Valley Africans.



I'm aware. On the flip side I believe the Siwa have like quite different lineages than say coastal mediterranean sea-hugging Maghrebian Berbers (Riffian and Kabyle). I believe their maternal's alot different.



I doubt this to be the case were I to look up info on the issue.



You bet they do, and old news to me, Riffians and Kabyles (the most authentic Berbers to you) have much more H than do Middle Eastern Arabs or even Egyptians. Sort of makes me curious as to where and how it entered, if it was so successful in general including in the Maghreb (just now got curious typing this).



Even so, it's from Eastern Europe, Russia, or something and not indigenous nor were either of those areas where Berber language came from, no where outside even of Africa is it spoken, it is only spoken in Saharan, Africa, and on its edges (the Maghrebian coast North of the Sahara, and Sahel South of the Sahara).

live in the Mountains and no Northwest european slaves could ever have gotten there and the pirates were mostly in Algeria and Tunisia were the Ottoman ruled. Plus, there are no northwest european clades in Morocco and if they had an impact in North Africa.

No NorthWest European clades? Well I never really said H was North West European, but if it isn't cladistic yet perhaps that's because it's so new and thus has had so little time to form.



You're going by art? You do know that there is South Nigerian art where the artists depict differing ethnicities of same complection as both very light / tan / creamy vs. very dark / brown chocolate (mm, I'm hungry for cookies).

Conflating all this with lineage, you don't appear very different from Clyde Winters and his Olmecs.


By the way, I responded to this below, with only "Substantiation?". Here's my reasoning.


So they mainly settled in the West and it thus eminates outwards, big whoop, as for what I said about the lineages age, see A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa.


Siwa Berbers are extremely different in both Y-DNA and mtDNA from Maghrebians and even Egyptians. And why always Riffians and Kabyles? You know, Siwa are very different from them but they are even more distant to interior, mountainous and saharan Berbers. With 1% H, they sure are different. nd in case you don't know, E-M81 in Siwa is 1%! This is lower than Egypt, Iberia, Senegal, Jordan, Lebanon, Italia, France, and even Somalia!

Riffians and Kabyles are not authentic Berbers (especially not the Kabyles, these guys are 15% J1 and R1b) nor do they have the highest H in Northwest Africa. It is mountain Berbers from Morocco who are both. And when I said Arabs, I was talking about North African Arabs (the ones you could possibly blame for slavery but not the Berbers).

Where did you get Russia from? H in the Maghreb is related to Iberia (H1 and H3) and to Middle-east/East Africa.

In case you don't know, E-M81 in Siwa is 1%! This is lower than Iberia, Egypt, Senegal, Jordan, Lebanon, Italia, France and even Somalia!

Going by art?!? I'm going by genetics. Taforalt remains (12,000 years ago) from north-eastern Morocco were tested for their mtDNA and Guess what? H/V/HV, U and JT. For the Guanches, they were high in H too. And finally the one that will surprise you the most, the libyan Tuaregs : H1 reached 60%!!!

I think all this is enough to show you how ancient H really is in North Africa.

[beyoku]

Riffians and Kabyles are not authentic Berbers (especially not the Kabyles, these guys are 15% J1 and R1b) nor do they have the highest H in Northwest Africa..

OOOHHH, im telling Particula!. He is going to :rant: and be :mad: at you!

[paypay]

Siwa Berbers were either berberized or had absorbed so much fopreign genes that you can't consider them ethnic Berbers. Haratin Berbers are not particularly related to Beja and Siwa ; they are Berbers with recent WEST AFRICAN admixture. E1b1a would be significant among them while it would be almost absent in the Beja.
The Beja really are 40% J1 but I don't remember the study.

''European mtDNA'' is definitely of prehistoric origin. Berbers (who have more H than ''Arabs'') live in the Mountains and no Northwest european slaves could ever have gotten there and the pirates were mostly in Algeria and Tunisia were the Ottoman ruled. Plus, there are no northwest european clades in Morocco and if they had an impact in North Africa, you would see much more blond hair but you don't.

Historic events simply cannot explain the presence of these clades in North Africa, especially not in Morocco. They are ancient as shown by the Guanches, the Taforalt remains and the libyan Tuaregs.


what about the theory forwarded by some members here that the modern population is not representative of the people who lived in the atlas mountains 2000 years ago because of migrations to the south ? does it make any sense ?

[EclectYummination]

Siwa Berbers were either berberized or had absorbed so much fopreign genes that you can't consider them ethnic Berbers.


Siwa Berbers are extremely different in both Y-DNA and mtDNA from Maghrebians and even Egyptians.

I'm aware; ignore the Siwa comment made at the end of the previous page. Now that I went back and read the post I remember why I posted it. I posted it hurriedly and in making a simple observation in terms of perported origin and possible expansion time for the lineage E-M81, and in attempting to tie the origin of this lineage with the origin of the language, I end up conflating this very beginnings of the lineage with the origination of two East Saharan groups which I proceed to mis-identify only naming one in my named three.


Siwa Berbers were either berberized or had absorbed so much fopreign genes that you can't consider them ethnic Berbers.

Ethnic Berbers. I see what this is. You're looking at this from an ethnic perspective while I look into this lending more wait to language.


And in case you don't know, E-M81 in Siwa is 1%! This is lower than Egypt, Iberia, Senegal, Jordan, Lebanon, Italia, France, and even Somalia!

.. in how many of which nations is Berber even spoken in.

So, this shows us that just because major E-M81 groups tend to speak Berber, doesn't mean all Berber speakers (Siwa) have to be major M81 bearers.


Where did you get Russia from? H in the Maghreb is related to Iberia (H1 and H3) and to Middle-east/East Africa.

Are East Africa, the Middle-East, or even Iberia, home to mtDNA H?


And why always Riffians and Kabyles? With 1% H, they sure are different.

Are you taking H to be the key determining factor for when it comes to being a Berber speaker, and possibly for helping trace the origins for the Northern African language?


Riffians and Kabyles are not authentic Berbers (especially not the Kabyles, these guys are 15% J1 and R1b) nor do they have the highest H in Northwest Africa. It is mountain Berbers from Morocco who are both.

The whole North African mtDNA landscape is rather patchy, and it's funny, reading your posts, how you note the Berber regions are so different from one another, so we got our Siwa, Kabyle, Riffian, West Saharan, Mountain, and East Saharans.

Because of how patchy North Africa is in this regard, it makes it a bit sillier using mtDNA to try and trace the language.


And when I said Arabs, I was talking about North African Arabs

That is significant.

It could be partially influenced by lifestyles though. I read somewhere that the Berbers practised polygamy, and Berbers would have been the main ones involved in such a significant scale of trade in European female slaves I might add.


(the ones you could possibly blame for slavery but not the Berbers).

That's nice.


Going by art?!? I'm going by genetics. Taforalt remains (12,000 years ago) from north-eastern Morocco were tested for their mtDNA and Guess what?

Well I can guess it isn't that they had any E-M81 if they tested for Y-DNA. In the Maghreb the language was likely spread there by E-M81 bearers.

It is significant however how ancient mtDNA H is there.

Thanx.

[EclectYummination]

origination of two East Saharan group

Forgot to mention these; the story was something to do with an ancient group of people possibly related or ancestral to both the Beja (M78 bearers) and Eastern Tuareg, which is possible through M35.


Hassan et al. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18618658) found J1 in 36% of the 42 Beja samples.

Ok, so 15 Bejas. It turns out right after I read his post I looked it up and, based on this study that was not new to me, finding 40% J in a mixed group (the Amhara or something), people were saying that about Beja in general.

The thing about J though is in some places it is like Neolithic or pre-Neolithic, like E is outside of Africa often Neolithic or even Mesolithic (pre-"Neolithic") (common places for E are Greece or the North Middle East), including East Africa, whereas most of the J in certain areas including North Africa is attributed to the Islamic period's Arab migrations (J-M267 evidently underwent expansion during that time in both Arabia and North Africa). I wonder then if the Beja's story is more like the Ethiopian's or the other North Africans, since they live in North East Africa.

[EclectYummination]

mixed group (the Amhara or something), people were saying that about Beja in general.

Which - and I may not have felt the need to state this obvious thing of the Amhara - I forgot to say are Ethiopians, and may get culturally/spiritually, ancestrally or otherwise "associated" with the Beja, but are not the Sudanese ethnic to which I was referring.

[EclectYummination]

If one takes it that I think the Berber language mainly spread within only the last 2,000 years, scrap that thought.

There were archaeological finds that 6,000 years ago non-desert adapted civilization-complexes and settlements were raided or clashed with Saharan nomadic desert people from the North, which obviously is analogous to what the Tuareg did and continued doing through the course of the history of the Malian / Songhaian sub-Saharan Africa complexes.

This still doesn't mean there wasn't a greater expansion that happened say, around the time of Roman and / or Carthaginian civilizations. Actually, this would fit perfectly within the time-frame for such an expansion, with civilization settled sedimentary living & industry being associated with higher populations / population expansion.

It is indisputable almost, now that I look at it really. Just look at a population density map of Africa or its Northern half. Less people live in more desert, more nomadic regions like the Sahara and more live near the more industrialized regions of its outer-edges.

[EclectYummination]

So, in sum, from everything gathered here, the language most probably appeared in the vicinity of the Eastern Sahara just in time for the Bronze Age, as Eastern Saharan Berber speakers are the ones with the most pristine ties back to East Africa, home to the Afrisan [Afro-asiatic] macro language-phylum from which Berber sprang.

And that the Caucasus / West Eurasian genetic input only later came in to the scene.

All that I just typed is true, at least, based on the evidence. A quick review of information, followed up with substantiation from sources:


North African pattern of Y-chromosomal variation is largely of Neolithic origin.


- Arredi et. al. 2004, A Predominantly Neolithic Origin fo Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1216069/)


The Tuaregs are a semi-nomadic pastoralist people of northwest Africa. Their origins are still a matter of debate due to the scarcity of genetic and historical data. Here we report the first data on the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) genetic characterization of a Tuareg sample from Fezzan (Libyan Sahara). A total of 129 individuals from two villages in the Acacus region were genetically analysed. Both the hypervariable regions and the coding region of mtDNA were investigated. Phylogeographic investigation was carried out in order to reconstruct human migratory shifts in central Sahara, and to shed light on the origin of the Libyan Tuaregs. Our results clearly show low genetic diversity in the sample, possibly due to genetic drift and founder effect associated with the separation of Libyan Tuaregs from an ancestral population. Furthermore, the maternal genetic pool of the Libyan Tuaregs is characterized by a major "European" component shared with the Berbers that could be traced to the Iberian Peninsula, as well as a minor 'south Saharan' contribution possibly linked to both Eastern African and Near Eastern populations.


- Ottoni et. al. 2009, First genetic insight into Libyan Tuaregs: a maternal perspective. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19476452)

Which, this is the link that would link with them linguistically, as speakers of Afroasiatic, which was what that title of my / this thread asks about.

Case closed.

Well, before we say case closed too early, some things that were interesting about the dates given in terms of the African and European genes:


The eight identical L0a1a haplotypes were characterised
by a reversion at np 16223 and HVS-II mutations at nps
146 and 150. They could be possibly attributed to L0a1a-
64T clade encompassing mainly Eastern and Central Africa
(2 haplotypes in Egypt, 1 in Sudan and 1 in Chad) and,
more interestingly, one Israeli mtDNA (samples L407, L408,
L259p and L553 in Behar et al., 2008). Coalescence time in
this clade was 14,678 years (SD 4,811).


- Ottoni et. al. 2009

Here we have haplotypes possibly attributed to a clade characterised here as mainly Eastern & Central African, that is dated at 14.7 k years.

Oh, and there (above) is where you actually see what they meant by possibly "Middle Eastern", which is that this clade was found in Egypt and the Sudan and Chad which are nearby.

Another interesting thing is this non-Afroasiatic lineage:


The network of H1 haplotypes (Fig. 3) shows that the CRS-3010 haplotype, which is the central node of the network, is widely distributed in northern African populations, including the Berbers and the Tuaregs, while the Eurasian samples show much more diversity. In order to include in our comparative analysis other north African populations that
have not been typed for the H1 marker (i.e., the transition at np 3010), a comparison of the HVS-I H-CRS haplotype frequencies among the African populations was carried out (Table 3). Again, results show that this haplotype is well spread in northwestern Africa, especially among some Berber groups, where it may account for more than 15%
of their mtDNA pool. The coalescence age of H1 variation in the Tuareg sample was estimated to be 1800 years (SE 1550). More remarkably, after focusing exclusively on the H1-CRS, we calculated that with a 95% probability the age of a clade that shows 72 times no mutations is not older than
850 years.

So it's not to diverse in North Africa and doesn't appear to be quite old there, as I think may have previously been stated.