Africa : East Africans "genetically most diverse"

panafrica

Well-Known Member
REGISTERED MEMBER
Aug 24, 2002
10,227
194
The Diaspora
Searching for evidence that Africa is the cradle of modern humans, scientists have found that no region in the world has a larger genetic diversity than East Africa and Ethiopia. Except from being a good omen for public health in the region, the evidence points to that the region indeed has the world's longest human population history.

In a letter published in the latest issue of the scientific journal 'Current Biology', three researchers announced this important evidence on how modern mankind spread to colonise the entire globe. The three, Franck Prugnolle, Andrea Manica and François Balloux, had been studying the diversity of human genetic material from several world regions.

A leading theory for the origin of modern humans, the so-called "recent African origin" model, postulates that the ancestors of all modern humans originated in East Africa and that, around 100,000 years ago, some modern humans left the African continent and subsequently colonised the world. They displaced previously established human species such as Neanderthals in Europe and Homo erectus in Asia, without mixing with them, the model holds.

According to the three scientists, this scenario was now supported by "the observation that human populations from Africa are genetically the most diverse and that the genetic diversity of non-African populations is negatively correlated with their genetic differentiation towards populations from Africa."

Their analysis of genetic material had found that "geographic distance from East Africa along ancient colonisation routes is an excellent predictor for the genetic diversity of present human populations, with those farther from Ethiopia being characterised by lower genetic variability."

In other words, one East African is significantly more genetically different from another East African than a European is from another European. Least genetic diversity is found among Native Americans. The double American continent also was the last to be colonised by humans, in line with the evidence presented.

This result had implied that information regarding the geographic coordinates of present populations alone was sufficient for predicting their genetic diversity. "This finding adds compelling evidence for the 'recent African origin' model," the scientists conclude.

Such a relationship between location and genetic diversity was indeed "only compatible with an African origin of modern humans and subsequent spread throughout the world, accompanied by a progressive loss of neutral genetic diversity as new areas were colonised," they further write.

The highlands of East Africa and Ethiopia thus again are cited as the most probable cradle of modern mankind. While Neanderthals were roaming in Europe some 100,000 years ago, the first real modern humans developed in these highlands. Archaeological evidence has suggested the same for several decades.

To the disappointment of the remaining white supremacists, the great genetic diversity in East Africa only can be seen as an asset. The greater the diversity, the lesser chance for genetic mutations. Further, during the exit from Africa and the subsequent colonisation, genetic possibilities were rather lost than gained. Finally, scientists still disagree whether the emigrated colonists mixed with Neanderthals and Homo erectus when reaching their areas of settlement.

http://www.afrol.com/articles/15984
 

Ralfa'il

Well-Known Member
REGISTERED MEMBER
Mar 25, 2005
1,781
16
Pan

Not to stray too much from your article, but East Africa is so diverse for a number of reasons...

But mainly because of the major influx of Middle Eastern peoples who immigrated into the region over the years.

The first major immigration was that of thousands of Hebrews around 500 B.C. when Jerusalem was destroyed and sacked by the Chaldeans/Babylonians and many reminants of the Children of Israel took refuge by going down into Africa.

This is how the Ark of the Covenant ended up down in Ethiopia, and it's also why most of the Ethiopians, Eritreans, and Somalis look so much different from the other black Africans with thier thin features and wavy/curly hair.

They are mostly Asiatic with various amounts of indeginous African blood from mixing in with the indigenous African Bantu, Dinka, and other tribes.



Then later on from the 600's onward Arabs came and dwelled among the local black populations adding further to the mixture.

This was especially the case in Somalia.
 

Charlie_Bass

Well-Known Member
BANNED
Apr 1, 2005
94
0
Ralfa'il said:
Pan

Not to stray too much from your article, but East Africa is so diverse for a number of reasons...

But mainly because of the major influx of Middle Eastern peoples who immigrated into the region over the years.

The first major immigration was that of thousands of Hebrews around 500 B.C. when Jerusalem was destroyed and sacked by the Chaldeans/Babylonians and many reminants of the Children of Israel took refuge by going down into Africa.

This is how the Ark of the Covenant ended up down in Ethiopia, and it's also why most of the Ethiopians, Eritreans, and Somalis look so much different from the other black Africans with thier thin features and wavy/curly hair.

They are mostly Asiatic with various amounts of indeginous African blood from mixing in with the indigenous African Bantu, Dinka, and other tribes.



Then later on from the 600's onward Arabs came and dwelled among the local black populations adding further to the mixture.

This was especially the case in Somalia.


That is incorrect, Ethiopians aren't mixed with Dinka, Bantu, and are sure as heck not mostly Asiatic. Amhara are the most mixed of Ethiopians with 35% paternal Middle-eastern ancestry based on classic genetic markers. Oromos, the other Ethiopian group have only 13% and lower. Somalis have a grand total of 13% Middle-Eastern mixture. East Africans look different mostly due to environmental and climatic selection, not mixture with Arabs, do you truly know anything about African diversity?
 

Ralfa'il

Well-Known Member
REGISTERED MEMBER
Mar 25, 2005
1,781
16
"Charlie"

You join this community and waste you very first post on attempting to correct me on something we virtually agree with?




I said

Not to stray too much from your article, but East Africa is so diverse for a number of reasons...

But mainly because of the major influx of Middle Eastern peoples who immigrated into the region over the years
.



And you retaliated

"That is incorrect, Ethiopians aren't mixed with Dinka, Bantu, and are sure as heck not mostly Asiatic. Amhara are the most mixed of Ethiopians with 35% paternal Middle-eastern ancestry based on classic genetic markers. Oromos, the other Ethiopian group have only 13% and lower. Somalis have a grand total of 13% Middle-Eastern mixture. East Africans look different mostly due to environmental and climatic selection, not mixture with Arabs, do you truly know anything about African diversity?"

Aside from having the nerve to try and narrow down the percentage of admixture of entire tribes as if one could ever accurately do it....we both agree that East AFricans are mixed as a result of Middle Eastern influx.

So how am I incorrect....

Because I didn't put a whole lot of questionable percentages and figures on the board?


The mixed ancestry of AfroAmericans only go back a few centuries yet is would still be insane for us to attempt to narrow down the percentage of our admixture because we are so divers.
How can yo attempt to do it with people such as East Africans who've had a history of race mixing going back thousands of years?






You seem to be in conflict with not only me but yourself as well...

You say that East Africans contain a percentage of Middle Eastern ancestry yet you claim I'm incorrect in that ancestry being Hebrew and Arab.

So what Middle Eastern ancestry were they mixed?





And one more thing....


If the Ahmara are mixed with 35% of Middle Eastern ancestry, that means they must be 65% of someting else.

If the Somalis are 13% of Middle Eastern ancestry, then they are 87% of something else.

Since you claim I was wrong about the Bantu, Dinka, and other black African tribes being in the mix....who else made up the other large percentage of their ancestry?
 

Charlie_Bass

Well-Known Member
BANNED
Apr 1, 2005
94
0
Ralfa'il said:
"Charlie"

You join this community and waste you very first post on attempting to correct me on something we virtually agree with?




I said

Not to stray too much from your article, but East Africa is so diverse for a number of reasons...

But mainly because of the major influx of Middle Eastern peoples who immigrated into the region over the years
.



And you retaliated

"That is incorrect, Ethiopians aren't mixed with Dinka, Bantu, and are sure as heck not mostly Asiatic. Amhara are the most mixed of Ethiopians with 35% paternal Middle-eastern ancestry based on classic genetic markers. Oromos, the other Ethiopian group have only 13% and lower. Somalis have a grand total of 13% Middle-Eastern mixture. East Africans look different mostly due to environmental and climatic selection, not mixture with Arabs, do you truly know anything about African diversity?"

Aside from having the nerve to try and narrow down the percentage of admixture of entire tribes as if one could ever accurately do it....we both agree that East AFricans are mixed as a result of Middle Eastern influx.

So how am I incorrect....

Because I didn't put a whole lot of questionable percentages and figures on the board?


The mixed ancestry of AfroAmericans only go back a few centuries yet is would still be insane for us to attempt to narrow down the percentage of our admixture because we are so divers.
How can yo attempt to do it with people such as East Africans who've had a history of race mixing going back thousands of years?






You seem to be in conflict with not only me but yourself as well...

You say that East Africans contain a percentage of Middle Eastern ancestry yet you claim I'm incorrect in that ancestry being Hebrew and Arab.

So what Middle Eastern ancestry were they mixed?





And one more thing....


If the Ahmara are mixed with 35% of Middle Eastern ancestry, that means they must be 65% of someting else.

If the Somalis are 13% of Middle Eastern ancestry, then they are 87% of something else.

Since you claim I was wrong about the Bantu, Dinka, and other black African tribes being in the mix....who else made up the other large percentage of their ancestry?

I never said East Africans are completely pure, no one is pure racially or genetically. The east African soma-type is not due to mixing, its due to variation and adaptation. Your statement that Ethiopians are mixed with Bantus and Dinka is simply untrue, there is no historical evidence to confirm this.
 

Is Trump Going to Prison?

  • yes

  • no


Results are only viewable after voting.

Latest profile posts

HODEE wrote on nevar's profile.
Blessings ~ Georgia Peach
cherryblossom wrote on watzinaname's profile.
Dropping by to say, "Hi!" ,sister Watz. Hope all is well.
Top