![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
At the suggestion of User:PDeitiker I have created a new article for E-M78 ( E1b1b1a). Eventually this should allow us to safely reduce the size of the E-M78 section in this article. Have a look at how many sub-section levels we have and you will understand why this was becoming a necessity according to the normal way in which Wikipedia evolves.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 14:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Halder et al A panel of ancestry informative markers for estimating individual biogeographical ancestry and admixture from four continents: utility and applications. The study states,
We observed patterns of apportionment similar to those described previously using sex and autosomal markers, such as European admixture for African Americans (14.3%) and Mexicans (43.2%), European (65.5%) and East Asian affiliation (27%) for South Asians, and low levels of African admixture (2.8-10.8%) mirroring the distribution of Y E3b haplogroups among various Eurasian populations.
Another study by Auton et al, Global distribution of genomic diversity underscores rich complex history of continental human populations, Supplementary material
Our analyses also have direct relevance to current debates in human population genetics regarding the extent of historical gene flow among Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Our observation of a north–south gradient in diversity with the highest estimates of diversity in the southern part of the continent is consistent with the initial founding of Europe from the Middle East, the influence of Neolithic farmers within the last 10,000 yr, or migrations south followed by a recolonization of Europe after the last glacial maximum. The unusually high number of haplotypes in South Western Europe is indicative of recurrent gene flow into these regions. Furthermore, when we considered the extent of haplotype sharing with the HapMap YRI population in Europe, we found that the South and South-Western subpopulations showed the highest proportion of shared haplotypes. If gene flow had occurred solely through the Middle East, we would expect the South-Eastern subpopulations to have the highest haplotype diversity and sharing of YRI haplotypes. These two results therefore suggest that while the initial migrations into Europe came via the Middle East, at least some degree of subsequent gene flow has occurred directly from Africa. A potential concern is that the HapMap YRI are not representative of diversity in North Africa, and the levels of haplotype sharing must be interpreted with this in mind. It is currently unclear how patterns of genetic diversity in the Yoruba are representative of the wider region, although genetic similarity appears to decline with distance. Nonetheless, the haplotype sharing between Europe and the YRI are suggestive of gene flow from Africa, albeit from West Africa and not necessarily North Africa. Future studies will hopefully be able to better resolve this question by comparing haplotypes from further populations around the Mediterranean.
Wapondaponda ( talk) 05:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
A comparison of Cw allele frequencies among several populations of different origins, Mandenka, Swiss, English, Ashkenazi Jews from the UK and Japanese, reveals a high genetic heterogeneity among them, but also a much closer relationship between Mandenka, Europeans and Ashkenazi than between any of these populations and Japanese. The results possibly support a close historical relationship between Africans and Europeans as compared to East Asiatics.
Wapondaponda ( talk) 05:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
If Genographic project is unreliable why does it link to so many articles about mtdna and y-dna in so many articles on this wiki(such as haplogroup H mtdna and Haplogroup R1B y-dna ect?) The Count of Monte Cristo ( talk) 05:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
SOPHIAN, also, please do not insert your answers into your original posts! How on Earth can anyone follow that? OK, so you say this source is cited on the R1b and H articles? Is it used to source anything controversial? And why should we care if it is used on another article? What is your point? Do you have ANY other argument for using this source? -- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 06:30, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
The sub-haplogroup E (E-M40), defined by M40/SRY4064 and M96, was also suggested originated in Africa, and later dispersed to Middle East and Europe about 20,000 years ago.
Then let spencer change his site and notice he uses the word was. The Count of Monte Cristo ( talk) 22:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
I know you think he should change his site just like you probably want everyone who is not afrocentric to change however he does not appear to be afrocentric so he does not change his site. And remember he said was also suggested originated in Africa, and later dispersed to Middle East and Europe about 20,000 years ago not is also suggested originated in Africa, and later dispersed to Middle East and Europe about 20,000 years ago The Count of Monte Cristo ( talk) 23:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
SOPHIAN, it is not Spencer Wells' website as such. It is just an old National Geographic webpage. He probably had next to nothing to do with that selection of text, which I believe was copied from 10 year old text which FT DNA used to use when DE and E and E-M35 were all still new concepts. It is silly to say "let him change his site" if he has appeared in public and explained himself clearly. The internet is full of old information. If you really think everyone is being unfair, then please go and defend your case here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard ?-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 07:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Does this haplogroup E1b1b have any impact on determining how much a person looks like one of the racial social-constructs or not? A certain debate here Ancient Egyptian Race Controversy may be greatly impacted by the POV assumption that inheritance of this haplotype may indicate whether one is part of the racial group black or the Caucasoid skeletal group. If an inheritance of this haplogroup has no bearing on this, I do not think relying on it as an indicator of one's race is valid. I'm sure in ancient times, in areas bordering on the concentrated inheritance boundary people on both sides of any exclusive grouping would have high preponderance of this haplogroup or the converse. -- Panehesy ( talk) 20:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Language/Region | Frequency |
---|---|
Cushitic/ Amhara | 32 - 81% |
Egyptian languages | 38 - 60% |
Berber languages | 70 - 91% |
Semitic languages/non Jewish | 7 - 29% |
Omotic languages | 75% |
Ashkenazim | 22% |
Sephardim | 30% |
Why do we have to mention only that E1b1b is found in Jewish males. It is found in almost all Afroasiatic speakers, so I see no reason why we should single out one ethnic group. I suggest that we mention all Afroasiatic ethnic groups or none in the lead. Better non in the lead and a description of frequencies in the body of the article. Wapondaponda ( talk) 20:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Soon I will add a Compromise to the info box East africa(Majority view) Near East (Minority View) The Count of Monte Cristo. ( talk) 15:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
please tell me. The Count of Monte Cristo. ( talk) 05:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers.
If you want to quote a reliable source find a peer reviewed scientific publication. Articles published by notable publishers such as Nature Magazine or Oxford University Press. You may use Google scholar to search for such information. The sources supporting the African origin are all recent mainstream peer reviewed scientific publications. So the editors won't accept anything of lower quality for any other theory. We need studies that have methods, materials, results discussion and conclusion and even the data they have used to reach their conclusions. Natgeo doesn't have all this. If you find such a study, present it to the community and if it is appropriate, we can add it to the article. At the moment, this is what everyone has been doing. Information from just any website won't do. Wapondaponda ( talk) 05:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
reminder to self or others. we need these refs... http://www.haplozone.net/wiki/index.php?title=El-Sibai_et_al._%282009%29 http://www.haplozone.net/wiki/index.php?title=Zalloua_et_al._%282008b%29 http://www.haplozone.net/wiki/index.php?title=Zalloua_et_al._%282008a%29 -- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 09:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Can this talk page be unprotected now so that unregistered users can make comments? We can quickly restore protection if necessary. -- TS 20:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
This particular article by Ana Gonzalez et al., Mitochondrial DNA variation in Jordanians and their genetic relationship to other Middle East populations is the mtDNA analysis of the same Jordanian samples analyzed by Isolates in a corridor of migrations: a high-resolution analysis of Y-chromosome variation in Jordan authored by Flores et al. 2005, which is cited in this article. Interestingly Gonzalez et al. state
On the contrary, Dse shows the highest south-Saharan African maternal influence (19%) in the Middle East and also the highest frequency of Y-chromosome E-M123 south-Saharan African lineages (31%). Furthermore, analysis of G6PD in the same region showed that the rate of G6PD deficiency and the south-Saharan A- variant have a higher incidence in the Dse than in Amm, which was attributed to selection against malaria and to a probable African ancestral origin for the Dse population (Karadsheh et al. 2005). These autosomal data are also in agreement with the lower variation and higher south-Saharan influence found for uniparental markers in Dse. Another striking feature of the Dse male genetic composition was its overwhelming frequency of ancestral Y-chromosome R*M173 lineages (40%) that are very scarce or absent in the rest of the area (2% in Amman, 1% in Anatolia). Until now similar frequencies have only been found in northern Cameroon (Cruciani et al. 2002), which suggested the possibility that Dse and Cameroon are isolated remains of a past broad human expansion (Flores et al. 2005).
The also suggest:
Taking Y-chromosome markers A-M13 and E-M123 as a signature of male south-Saharan African gene flow into Jordan (Flores et al. 2005), this amounts to 6% in Amm and 31% in the Dse, a percentage not significantly different from the respective 10% and 19% female contributions.
Cruciani 2004 hypothesize that E-M123 originated in the Levant and migrated back to Ethiopia. However, E-M123 has been found alongside, haplogroup A and haplogroup L lineages in the Dead Sea region. Haplogroup A is frequent in Ethiopia, and the L lineages detected are Northeast African specific. This is consistent with Northward migration of E-M123 lineages from South of the Sahara to the Levant, rather than the other way around. The article also has some information on the haplogroup M1. Wapondaponda ( talk) 10:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
A new study just out concerning the Arabian peninsula. Saudi Arabian Y-Chromosome diversity and its relationship with nearby regions. Some stuff I agree with, others I disagree. On E-M123
So, from an Arabian Peninsula perspective, E1-M123 could have come from Ethiopia, across the Horn of Africa, or from the Levant, or even from both sources,
On the dates, the study counters the Richards et al. suggestion that African lineages in the region are due to the slave trade, instead arguing for a preshistoric entrance of these lineages into Arabia, along with other E clades On haplogroup DE, the study, for the first time suggests an Arabian origin of haplogroup DE. The author himself is Arabian I gather. Wapondaponda ( talk) 10:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I have also posted to this effect on the E1b1b1 article. Please note that nearly everything on what remains of E1b1b is about E1b1b1, except maybe about one sentence worth of information. With the current state of scientific knowledge, the two subjects can not be handled separately in any reasonable way that would match Wikipedia norms and policies. Please see WP:MERGE.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
From WP:MERGE, under rationales for merging: - Overlap – There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap. Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on Flammability. Text – If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. For instance, parents or children of a celebrity who are otherwise unremarkable are generally covered in a section of the article on the celebrity, and can be merged there.
I have removed some of the material which was ONLY about E1b1b1, currently in a separate article. What is left is entirely the same as equivalent passages in the E1b1b1 article. I repeat that I see no rationale for having such duplication.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
The above article has been listed for deletion. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Y-DNA haplogroups by ethnic groups. Wapondaponda ( talk) 04:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
E1b1b doesnt reach 80% in Maghreb , but only in some Berber groups of Middle-Atlas.
For example , in Algiers (capital of Algeria) or Oran (second city of Algeria) , E1b1b is up to 44% , and other haplogroups can also be found (J = 35% , F=10% R1b=11%) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
195.132.96.27 (
talk)
14:55, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
So, in some parts of the Maghreb, it is lower, and in some parts higher. In some parts it gets up to 80%.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 16:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8JHP-4XMTJX4-1&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1440450800&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=e96f699ccdba9ac59616162d945156ca Investigation of population structure in the Victorian Italian and Greek population using Y chromosome STR haplotype analysis Department of Genetics, Thank you Southernaussie ( talk) 16:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC).
Check this out: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1305414/Hitler-descended-Jews-Africans-DNA-tests-reveal.html
It is quite interesting. However, more reliable source would be needed. Miraceti ( talk) 20:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Amongst recent editing on this article I notice a slow edit war of deletions of the Coffman-Levy quote from JOGG. User:Jayjg has been deleting on the basis of WP:RS. Relevant to understanding Jayjg's position are some other discussions:-
It is as clear as I think it will ever be that by implying that JOGG citations can be deleted without even considering content is ignoring the RS/N consensus (and I would say also ignoring all normal WP policies concerning how to edit by consensus, as well as common sense). HOWEVER, a less tendentious argument Jayjg has offered is clearly needing consideration, and that is that JOGG material can indeed sometimes come under WP:REDFLAG, meaning that it is too controversial and technical and would need a more technical source. JOGG is not by default a strong technical source for genetics as such. In this particular case (as I have tried to discuss on Jayjg's talk page) there is however nothing technical or controversial as it was just a passage about word usage which maybe did not even need sourcing.
As a next step however, I have not resisted the deletion, but instead replaced the passage with a similar one with no special sourcing. My justification for doing this, which anyone who reads through the archives of this article will understand, is that the Coffman-Levy quote itself sounded more controversial and complicated than it really was, which led to many different debates over the history of this article about what the passage was trying to say, and in a way maybe that is what has led to Jayjg's deletion. So to avoid future problems it seems simpler to just simplify the text so that it just observes what needs to be observed.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 09:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
There are edits being made by User:Southernaussie which really need discussion here on the article talk page. (I'd try already giving some comments, but actually it is not even always clear what these edits are trying to achieve.) They are messy, leaving things "broken" and a big part of the edits involves blanked inline comments. That is not the correct way to propose things. Please don't put comments into the real article. Use this talk page. That is what it is for. Looking forward to discussion.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 06:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Pereira; et al. (2010).
"Linking the sub-Saharan and West Eurasian gene pools: maternal and paternal heritage of the Tuareg nomads from the African Sahel" (PDF). {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Explicit use of et al. in: |last=
(
help); line feed character in |title=
at position 76 (
help)
This paper was published early this year, though only the abstract was available for free. There is a free copy online now. The study has some new stats, for E-M81, E3a and R1b among others.
Wapondaponda (
talk)
17:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
This seems notable enough to be mentioned that these three all belong to the, rather sparse for European, Y-haplogroup E1b1b. 66.243.215.2 ( talk) 03:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
The substructure of EM215 in ISOGG currently shows 2 main bifurcating subclades and not 4 as implied in the introduction piece of this article. These 2 subclades are E-M35.1 and E-M281. E-M35.1 itself has 4 primary subclades that we know of as of now: E-Z827, E-V68, E-V92 and E-V6, of which the first two contain the vast majority of known E-M215 lineages, this is the current substructure, and is somewhat correctly explained in the main article, however the introduction is misleading to this fact, when trying to revert, WP editor: Andrew Lancaster would not allow. Another issue is the nitpicking of ethnic groups with high frequency of E1b1b and displaying them in the introduction section, this is simply arbitrary, as there are multitudes of Ethnic groups in the horn of Africa with high levels of E1b1b. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 21:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
the older version | your proposal |
---|---|
E-M215 is especially common among Oromos and Somalis in the Horn of Africa, as well as Berbers, Egyptians and Tuareg in North Africa. It is also frequently observed in West Asia, from where it spread into the Balkans and the rest of Europe. E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-V68, E-V257, E-M123, E-M293, the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa. | E-M215 has two common subclades: E-M35.1 and E-M281, in turn, E-M35.1 has 4 common subclades: E-V68,E-Z827,E-V6 and E-V92, of which the two subclades, E-V68 and E-Z827, contain the vast majority of E-M215 bearers. |
And now to summarize the edit summaries (which are a bad way to have a discussion):
Thirdly, to address your points, in as far as I understand them from your comments so far:
My conclusion: I think what you really need to justify is your assertion that a paragraph in the intro about highest frequency areas is "nitpicking" and "simply arbitrary". That seems to be your real issue? But isn't it one of the most basic things anyone coming to this article will want to know before they start reading further? Isn't it indeed how a lot of published articles start out when they introduce discussion of a specific clade? Please comment on this.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 16:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Andrew, you should not simply assume which of the 2 separate issues is my biggest concern, as I have not given you any premise to undertake this assumption, in any event I will start with issue # 2, the arbitrary nitpicking and display of geographical and ethinic groups with high levels of E-M35.
First of all let's start with the horn of Africa, the Cruciani '04 article shows E-M215 being present in both the Amhara and Wolayta at equal levels with the Ethiopian Oromo, although it is true that higher levels were seen in the Borana oromo and Somalis, but why aren't the Wolayta and Amhara also stated if the Oromo, without any specification, are included, there are close to 100 Ethno-lingusitic groups in the horn of Africa, with E-M215/M35 SNP tests being carried out on only a handful of these groups, why then would the Oromos and Somalis be nitpicked? The fact that the lineage itself likely originates in this area is further reason that it would be widespread throughout the whole region, is it not?
Going on to Berbers, which type of Berbers? Siwa Berbers in Egypt have much less E-M215 than North West African Berbers for instance, again arbitrary. Why specify some and not specify others.
Next, let's go to Egyptians, again which Egyptians? Studies have shown different frequencies of E-M215 throughout Egypt, why no specifics and nitpicking on the Egyptians?
Next let's look at the Balkans, is E-M215 spread evenly throughout the Balkans, why aren't their populations pulled apart like those from Africa, surely, the frequency of E-M215 in Kosovar Albanians and Greeks is not at the same level as that of say Croatians is it?
So all the above is to say that the best way to relay this information is to display or link to the actual population samples that have been surveyed thus far (like it shows in the E-V68 Wikipedia page for instance) and/or may be even an interpolated or contour map of the frequency of E-M215 (like that shown in the Cruciani '04 publication) and just simply leave it at that, any other verbal description of what is 'common', mind you common is undefined here, is it 50%, 30% , 80%??, is unnecessary and simply will cause more confusion.
Now let me go to issue # 1, the issue which you wrongly thought was less important to me, lets revisit the sentence again: “E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-V68, E-V257, E-M123, E-M293, the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa. “
Why am I insisting that current knowledge of E-M215's substructure should be unambiguously incorporated in the above sentence? Because the sentence makes little sense without incorporating the substructure, in-fact, I could re-write the above sentence as :
“E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-M78, E-M81, E-M34, E-M293.....”
and be equally correct, so which subclade to choose? well the more downstream you go the more ambiguity is introduced, therefore, the correct and only choice is to start from as close to the root of the tree being described as possible, that is, as much as current knowledge can afford us.
One last thing with respect to the sentence “the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa”, although true, it makes it seem as if the others are not spread from Ethiopia to North Africa/Levant, which is the wrong impression, because we know that both E-V68 and E-M123 are spread from Ethiopia to NA/Levant as well, hence why I omitted it. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 19:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, I have explained at length both issues of (a) substructure and (b) Pointing to arbitrary ethnic groups in the lead.
Incidentally, I went through a few haplogroup articles here on WP, like R1b,R1a and E1b1a and this is the only article that I have seen thus far that proposes to include nitpicked ethnic groups in the lead, with out exception, all the articles show MACRO-REGIONAL distributions of the relevant lineage.
That being said, I see no point of repeating the arguments I stated over again, however I will acknowledge a couple of points that were raised by you (1) The usage of the word 'common' in the context of my proposal is unnecessary (2) some type of a general frequency snapshot of E-M215 carriers around the world can be useful if included, therefore here is my new proposal:
138.88.60.165 ( talk) 22:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, here is a new draft, in case it helps:--
Andrew Lancaster (
talk)
15:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
the older version | my new proposal |
---|---|
E-M215 is especially common among Oromos and Somalis in the Horn of Africa, as well as Berbers, Egyptians and Tuareg in North Africa. It is also frequently observed in West Asia, from where it spread into the Balkans and the rest of Europe. E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-V68, E-V257, E-M123, E-M293, the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa. | E-M215 is especially common in the Horn of Africa, and in North Africa, for example amongst some Berbers and Egyptian poulations. It is also frequently observed in parts of West Asia, the Mediterranean and Balkans, from which areas it is thought to have spread into Europe. Two of the most common variants of E-M215 in modern populations are E-V68 and E-V257. South of the Horn of Africa however E-M293 is the main variant found, stretching as far as South Africa |
Note that I see no point trying to write out a description of the family tree in the lead, because this is exactly what the body of the article does, and we should avoid repetition.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 15:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Its not a bad idea, I never said it was a bad idea, however what is a bad idea is the way you are choosing to describe it, which I termed as nitpicking and arbitrary, I have no problem using Macro-Regional descriptions that roughly depict E-M215's distribution like in most other WP haplogroup pages, alternatively or additionally, an interpolated or contour map for E-M215 can also be used, I see that other WP haplogroup pages use this as well. I have also told you to stop assuming what my real (and by implication not so real) concerns are, but you seem intent on continuing to assume so, I have raised 2 issues that I would like to be BOTH addressed equally, so I will again ask you to stop assuming which one you think is more important. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
And you must have not looked very hard at what I wrote. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Yet, you see a point in mentioning about frequencies in the lead ? even-though the body of the article describes where E-M215 variants are found in detail as well. This makes no sense. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
My Original Proposal | My Modified Proposal |
---|---|
E-M215 has two common subclades: E-M35.1 and E-M281, in turn, E-M35.1 has 4 common subclades: E-V68,E-Z827,E-V6 and E-V92, of which the two subclades, E-V68 and E-Z827, contain the vast majority of E-M215 bearers. | E-M215 has two basal branches: E-M35.1 and E-M281, in turn, E-M35.1 has four branches: E-V68, E-Z827, E-V6 and E-V92, of which the first two, E-V68 and E-Z827, contain the vast majority of E-M215 bearers whom are to be more frequently observed in the East, South and North of Africa and to a lesser extent in the Near East and Europe. |
I have redone my proposal in the table format above 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Not only have I explained above, but I have also incorporated it into my modified proposal. Please read again. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 19:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I see that you have decided to go ahead and edit the page, you have also put in a semblance of substructure, which is good, however, I would like to change the reference to the Horn of Africa to Eastern Africa, (a) for directional uniformity with Northern Africa, (b) most studies use Eastern Africa (Cruciani '04, Cruciani '07) when discussing E-M215. I would also like to take out the reference to Egyptians and Berbers, for reasons discussed above, the Macro-Regional description: North Africa is enough. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 20:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
138.88.60.165 above and in your reverting you are demanding I produce sources. Sources for what? What point of disagreement between us needs sourcing? If your demand is not clear, we can make no progress. As far as I can see...
So I think this is not a serious sourcing question. Perhaps your edit demands amount to trying to argue the following:
If you want, we can take this to WP:RSN. But please check if this is really your position.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 06:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Outside of direct quotes, I think it is wise to distinguish between these branches as one is a descendant of the other. Even with direct quotes, the article text should explain which (likely E-M35.1) is meant.-- RebekahThorn ( talk) 01:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Recent discussion about the edit demands in the lead of 138.88.60.165 (presumably the same as User:Causteau) has been on WP:RSN, because 138.88.60.165 claimed that the demands concerning the words "Horn of Africa" versus "East Africa" were sourcing policy based. Discussion there has been unanimously against the position of 138.88.60.165. Other issues now arise with 138.88.60.165's latest edit. I will simply list the obvious problems:
Now that the lead has has been modified to exclude the "Horn of Africa" term, the body needs to follow, I see 10 instances of the use of the terminology "Horn of Africa" throughout the body that need to be changed to the consistent term that is aligned with all other publications on E-M215, i.e., "East Africa". Egenetics ( talk) 19:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
(0) E-V68 and E-Z827 are [...] most frequently observed in North Africa and the northern part of East Africa; and to a lesser extent in Southern Africa, the Middle East and Europe.
(1)The E-M215 clade is presently found in various forms in the Horn of Africa, North Africa, parts of Eastern, Western, and Southern Africa, West Asia, and Europe (especially the Mediterranean and the Balkans).[2][3][11][12]
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(2)E1b1b1b* (E-M35*). By latest definition in Trombetta et al. 2011, now rare outside Horn of Africa.
Comments: What this translates to is that the remaining 15 E-M35* chromosomes are also being described as being from East Africa, this will remain so even after resolution/refinement.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(3)E1b1b1a1 (E-M78). North Africa, Horn of Africa, West Asia, Europe. (Formerly "E1b1b1a".)
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use for E-M78 as well.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(4)although other branches still exist in the Horn of Africa, such as E-V6
Comments: Sources are again self explanatory for what we should use for E-V6 as well.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(5)E-M123 is less common but widely scattered, with significant populations in specific parts of the Horn of Africa, the Levant, Arabia, Iberia, and Anatolia.
Comments: Sources corroborate using East Africa for E-M123/M34 as well.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(6)Many smaller subclades, such as those defined by mutations V6, V42 and V92, appear to be unique to the Horn of Africa region.
Comments: For this case I suggest we use Ethiopia, directly.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(7)E-M78 is a commonly occurring subclade, widely distributed in North Africa, the Horn of Africa, West Asia, (the Middle East and Near East) "up to Southern Asia",[1] and all of Europe.[23]
Comments: See (3)- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(8)But there is no autochthonous presence of E-M81 in the Near East, indicating that M81 most likely emerged from its parent clade M35 either in the Maghreb, or possibly as far south as the Horn of Africa.[15]
Comments: Already discussed above- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(9)Semino et al. 2004 had proposed the Horn of Africa as a possible place of origin of E-M78.
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(10)Cruciani et al. 2007 were able to study more data, including populations from North Africa who were not represented in the Semino et al. 2004 study, and found evidence that the E-M78 lineages in the Horn of Africa were relatively recent branches (see E-V32 below).
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Since my argument for using East Africa is in essence to stick with what the sources say, I will just simply quote relevant source/s for each of the points as my argument.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: External link in |chapterurl=
(
help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) (
help)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
At the suggestion of User:PDeitiker I have created a new article for E-M78 ( E1b1b1a). Eventually this should allow us to safely reduce the size of the E-M78 section in this article. Have a look at how many sub-section levels we have and you will understand why this was becoming a necessity according to the normal way in which Wikipedia evolves.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 14:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Halder et al A panel of ancestry informative markers for estimating individual biogeographical ancestry and admixture from four continents: utility and applications. The study states,
We observed patterns of apportionment similar to those described previously using sex and autosomal markers, such as European admixture for African Americans (14.3%) and Mexicans (43.2%), European (65.5%) and East Asian affiliation (27%) for South Asians, and low levels of African admixture (2.8-10.8%) mirroring the distribution of Y E3b haplogroups among various Eurasian populations.
Another study by Auton et al, Global distribution of genomic diversity underscores rich complex history of continental human populations, Supplementary material
Our analyses also have direct relevance to current debates in human population genetics regarding the extent of historical gene flow among Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Our observation of a north–south gradient in diversity with the highest estimates of diversity in the southern part of the continent is consistent with the initial founding of Europe from the Middle East, the influence of Neolithic farmers within the last 10,000 yr, or migrations south followed by a recolonization of Europe after the last glacial maximum. The unusually high number of haplotypes in South Western Europe is indicative of recurrent gene flow into these regions. Furthermore, when we considered the extent of haplotype sharing with the HapMap YRI population in Europe, we found that the South and South-Western subpopulations showed the highest proportion of shared haplotypes. If gene flow had occurred solely through the Middle East, we would expect the South-Eastern subpopulations to have the highest haplotype diversity and sharing of YRI haplotypes. These two results therefore suggest that while the initial migrations into Europe came via the Middle East, at least some degree of subsequent gene flow has occurred directly from Africa. A potential concern is that the HapMap YRI are not representative of diversity in North Africa, and the levels of haplotype sharing must be interpreted with this in mind. It is currently unclear how patterns of genetic diversity in the Yoruba are representative of the wider region, although genetic similarity appears to decline with distance. Nonetheless, the haplotype sharing between Europe and the YRI are suggestive of gene flow from Africa, albeit from West Africa and not necessarily North Africa. Future studies will hopefully be able to better resolve this question by comparing haplotypes from further populations around the Mediterranean.
Wapondaponda ( talk) 05:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
A comparison of Cw allele frequencies among several populations of different origins, Mandenka, Swiss, English, Ashkenazi Jews from the UK and Japanese, reveals a high genetic heterogeneity among them, but also a much closer relationship between Mandenka, Europeans and Ashkenazi than between any of these populations and Japanese. The results possibly support a close historical relationship between Africans and Europeans as compared to East Asiatics.
Wapondaponda ( talk) 05:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
If Genographic project is unreliable why does it link to so many articles about mtdna and y-dna in so many articles on this wiki(such as haplogroup H mtdna and Haplogroup R1B y-dna ect?) The Count of Monte Cristo ( talk) 05:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
SOPHIAN, also, please do not insert your answers into your original posts! How on Earth can anyone follow that? OK, so you say this source is cited on the R1b and H articles? Is it used to source anything controversial? And why should we care if it is used on another article? What is your point? Do you have ANY other argument for using this source? -- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 06:30, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
The sub-haplogroup E (E-M40), defined by M40/SRY4064 and M96, was also suggested originated in Africa, and later dispersed to Middle East and Europe about 20,000 years ago.
Then let spencer change his site and notice he uses the word was. The Count of Monte Cristo ( talk) 22:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
I know you think he should change his site just like you probably want everyone who is not afrocentric to change however he does not appear to be afrocentric so he does not change his site. And remember he said was also suggested originated in Africa, and later dispersed to Middle East and Europe about 20,000 years ago not is also suggested originated in Africa, and later dispersed to Middle East and Europe about 20,000 years ago The Count of Monte Cristo ( talk) 23:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
SOPHIAN, it is not Spencer Wells' website as such. It is just an old National Geographic webpage. He probably had next to nothing to do with that selection of text, which I believe was copied from 10 year old text which FT DNA used to use when DE and E and E-M35 were all still new concepts. It is silly to say "let him change his site" if he has appeared in public and explained himself clearly. The internet is full of old information. If you really think everyone is being unfair, then please go and defend your case here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard ?-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 07:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Does this haplogroup E1b1b have any impact on determining how much a person looks like one of the racial social-constructs or not? A certain debate here Ancient Egyptian Race Controversy may be greatly impacted by the POV assumption that inheritance of this haplotype may indicate whether one is part of the racial group black or the Caucasoid skeletal group. If an inheritance of this haplogroup has no bearing on this, I do not think relying on it as an indicator of one's race is valid. I'm sure in ancient times, in areas bordering on the concentrated inheritance boundary people on both sides of any exclusive grouping would have high preponderance of this haplogroup or the converse. -- Panehesy ( talk) 20:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Language/Region | Frequency |
---|---|
Cushitic/ Amhara | 32 - 81% |
Egyptian languages | 38 - 60% |
Berber languages | 70 - 91% |
Semitic languages/non Jewish | 7 - 29% |
Omotic languages | 75% |
Ashkenazim | 22% |
Sephardim | 30% |
Why do we have to mention only that E1b1b is found in Jewish males. It is found in almost all Afroasiatic speakers, so I see no reason why we should single out one ethnic group. I suggest that we mention all Afroasiatic ethnic groups or none in the lead. Better non in the lead and a description of frequencies in the body of the article. Wapondaponda ( talk) 20:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Soon I will add a Compromise to the info box East africa(Majority view) Near East (Minority View) The Count of Monte Cristo. ( talk) 15:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
please tell me. The Count of Monte Cristo. ( talk) 05:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers.
If you want to quote a reliable source find a peer reviewed scientific publication. Articles published by notable publishers such as Nature Magazine or Oxford University Press. You may use Google scholar to search for such information. The sources supporting the African origin are all recent mainstream peer reviewed scientific publications. So the editors won't accept anything of lower quality for any other theory. We need studies that have methods, materials, results discussion and conclusion and even the data they have used to reach their conclusions. Natgeo doesn't have all this. If you find such a study, present it to the community and if it is appropriate, we can add it to the article. At the moment, this is what everyone has been doing. Information from just any website won't do. Wapondaponda ( talk) 05:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
reminder to self or others. we need these refs... http://www.haplozone.net/wiki/index.php?title=El-Sibai_et_al._%282009%29 http://www.haplozone.net/wiki/index.php?title=Zalloua_et_al._%282008b%29 http://www.haplozone.net/wiki/index.php?title=Zalloua_et_al._%282008a%29 -- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 09:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Can this talk page be unprotected now so that unregistered users can make comments? We can quickly restore protection if necessary. -- TS 20:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
This particular article by Ana Gonzalez et al., Mitochondrial DNA variation in Jordanians and their genetic relationship to other Middle East populations is the mtDNA analysis of the same Jordanian samples analyzed by Isolates in a corridor of migrations: a high-resolution analysis of Y-chromosome variation in Jordan authored by Flores et al. 2005, which is cited in this article. Interestingly Gonzalez et al. state
On the contrary, Dse shows the highest south-Saharan African maternal influence (19%) in the Middle East and also the highest frequency of Y-chromosome E-M123 south-Saharan African lineages (31%). Furthermore, analysis of G6PD in the same region showed that the rate of G6PD deficiency and the south-Saharan A- variant have a higher incidence in the Dse than in Amm, which was attributed to selection against malaria and to a probable African ancestral origin for the Dse population (Karadsheh et al. 2005). These autosomal data are also in agreement with the lower variation and higher south-Saharan influence found for uniparental markers in Dse. Another striking feature of the Dse male genetic composition was its overwhelming frequency of ancestral Y-chromosome R*M173 lineages (40%) that are very scarce or absent in the rest of the area (2% in Amman, 1% in Anatolia). Until now similar frequencies have only been found in northern Cameroon (Cruciani et al. 2002), which suggested the possibility that Dse and Cameroon are isolated remains of a past broad human expansion (Flores et al. 2005).
The also suggest:
Taking Y-chromosome markers A-M13 and E-M123 as a signature of male south-Saharan African gene flow into Jordan (Flores et al. 2005), this amounts to 6% in Amm and 31% in the Dse, a percentage not significantly different from the respective 10% and 19% female contributions.
Cruciani 2004 hypothesize that E-M123 originated in the Levant and migrated back to Ethiopia. However, E-M123 has been found alongside, haplogroup A and haplogroup L lineages in the Dead Sea region. Haplogroup A is frequent in Ethiopia, and the L lineages detected are Northeast African specific. This is consistent with Northward migration of E-M123 lineages from South of the Sahara to the Levant, rather than the other way around. The article also has some information on the haplogroup M1. Wapondaponda ( talk) 10:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
A new study just out concerning the Arabian peninsula. Saudi Arabian Y-Chromosome diversity and its relationship with nearby regions. Some stuff I agree with, others I disagree. On E-M123
So, from an Arabian Peninsula perspective, E1-M123 could have come from Ethiopia, across the Horn of Africa, or from the Levant, or even from both sources,
On the dates, the study counters the Richards et al. suggestion that African lineages in the region are due to the slave trade, instead arguing for a preshistoric entrance of these lineages into Arabia, along with other E clades On haplogroup DE, the study, for the first time suggests an Arabian origin of haplogroup DE. The author himself is Arabian I gather. Wapondaponda ( talk) 10:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I have also posted to this effect on the E1b1b1 article. Please note that nearly everything on what remains of E1b1b is about E1b1b1, except maybe about one sentence worth of information. With the current state of scientific knowledge, the two subjects can not be handled separately in any reasonable way that would match Wikipedia norms and policies. Please see WP:MERGE.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
From WP:MERGE, under rationales for merging: - Overlap – There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap. Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on Flammability. Text – If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. For instance, parents or children of a celebrity who are otherwise unremarkable are generally covered in a section of the article on the celebrity, and can be merged there.
I have removed some of the material which was ONLY about E1b1b1, currently in a separate article. What is left is entirely the same as equivalent passages in the E1b1b1 article. I repeat that I see no rationale for having such duplication.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
The above article has been listed for deletion. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Y-DNA haplogroups by ethnic groups. Wapondaponda ( talk) 04:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
E1b1b doesnt reach 80% in Maghreb , but only in some Berber groups of Middle-Atlas.
For example , in Algiers (capital of Algeria) or Oran (second city of Algeria) , E1b1b is up to 44% , and other haplogroups can also be found (J = 35% , F=10% R1b=11%) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
195.132.96.27 (
talk)
14:55, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
So, in some parts of the Maghreb, it is lower, and in some parts higher. In some parts it gets up to 80%.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 16:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8JHP-4XMTJX4-1&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1440450800&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=e96f699ccdba9ac59616162d945156ca Investigation of population structure in the Victorian Italian and Greek population using Y chromosome STR haplotype analysis Department of Genetics, Thank you Southernaussie ( talk) 16:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC).
Check this out: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1305414/Hitler-descended-Jews-Africans-DNA-tests-reveal.html
It is quite interesting. However, more reliable source would be needed. Miraceti ( talk) 20:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Amongst recent editing on this article I notice a slow edit war of deletions of the Coffman-Levy quote from JOGG. User:Jayjg has been deleting on the basis of WP:RS. Relevant to understanding Jayjg's position are some other discussions:-
It is as clear as I think it will ever be that by implying that JOGG citations can be deleted without even considering content is ignoring the RS/N consensus (and I would say also ignoring all normal WP policies concerning how to edit by consensus, as well as common sense). HOWEVER, a less tendentious argument Jayjg has offered is clearly needing consideration, and that is that JOGG material can indeed sometimes come under WP:REDFLAG, meaning that it is too controversial and technical and would need a more technical source. JOGG is not by default a strong technical source for genetics as such. In this particular case (as I have tried to discuss on Jayjg's talk page) there is however nothing technical or controversial as it was just a passage about word usage which maybe did not even need sourcing.
As a next step however, I have not resisted the deletion, but instead replaced the passage with a similar one with no special sourcing. My justification for doing this, which anyone who reads through the archives of this article will understand, is that the Coffman-Levy quote itself sounded more controversial and complicated than it really was, which led to many different debates over the history of this article about what the passage was trying to say, and in a way maybe that is what has led to Jayjg's deletion. So to avoid future problems it seems simpler to just simplify the text so that it just observes what needs to be observed.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 09:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
There are edits being made by User:Southernaussie which really need discussion here on the article talk page. (I'd try already giving some comments, but actually it is not even always clear what these edits are trying to achieve.) They are messy, leaving things "broken" and a big part of the edits involves blanked inline comments. That is not the correct way to propose things. Please don't put comments into the real article. Use this talk page. That is what it is for. Looking forward to discussion.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 06:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Pereira; et al. (2010).
"Linking the sub-Saharan and West Eurasian gene pools: maternal and paternal heritage of the Tuareg nomads from the African Sahel" (PDF). {{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Explicit use of et al. in: |last=
(
help); line feed character in |title=
at position 76 (
help)
This paper was published early this year, though only the abstract was available for free. There is a free copy online now. The study has some new stats, for E-M81, E3a and R1b among others.
Wapondaponda (
talk)
17:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
This seems notable enough to be mentioned that these three all belong to the, rather sparse for European, Y-haplogroup E1b1b. 66.243.215.2 ( talk) 03:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
The substructure of EM215 in ISOGG currently shows 2 main bifurcating subclades and not 4 as implied in the introduction piece of this article. These 2 subclades are E-M35.1 and E-M281. E-M35.1 itself has 4 primary subclades that we know of as of now: E-Z827, E-V68, E-V92 and E-V6, of which the first two contain the vast majority of known E-M215 lineages, this is the current substructure, and is somewhat correctly explained in the main article, however the introduction is misleading to this fact, when trying to revert, WP editor: Andrew Lancaster would not allow. Another issue is the nitpicking of ethnic groups with high frequency of E1b1b and displaying them in the introduction section, this is simply arbitrary, as there are multitudes of Ethnic groups in the horn of Africa with high levels of E1b1b. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 21:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
the older version | your proposal |
---|---|
E-M215 is especially common among Oromos and Somalis in the Horn of Africa, as well as Berbers, Egyptians and Tuareg in North Africa. It is also frequently observed in West Asia, from where it spread into the Balkans and the rest of Europe. E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-V68, E-V257, E-M123, E-M293, the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa. | E-M215 has two common subclades: E-M35.1 and E-M281, in turn, E-M35.1 has 4 common subclades: E-V68,E-Z827,E-V6 and E-V92, of which the two subclades, E-V68 and E-Z827, contain the vast majority of E-M215 bearers. |
And now to summarize the edit summaries (which are a bad way to have a discussion):
Thirdly, to address your points, in as far as I understand them from your comments so far:
My conclusion: I think what you really need to justify is your assertion that a paragraph in the intro about highest frequency areas is "nitpicking" and "simply arbitrary". That seems to be your real issue? But isn't it one of the most basic things anyone coming to this article will want to know before they start reading further? Isn't it indeed how a lot of published articles start out when they introduce discussion of a specific clade? Please comment on this.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 16:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Andrew, you should not simply assume which of the 2 separate issues is my biggest concern, as I have not given you any premise to undertake this assumption, in any event I will start with issue # 2, the arbitrary nitpicking and display of geographical and ethinic groups with high levels of E-M35.
First of all let's start with the horn of Africa, the Cruciani '04 article shows E-M215 being present in both the Amhara and Wolayta at equal levels with the Ethiopian Oromo, although it is true that higher levels were seen in the Borana oromo and Somalis, but why aren't the Wolayta and Amhara also stated if the Oromo, without any specification, are included, there are close to 100 Ethno-lingusitic groups in the horn of Africa, with E-M215/M35 SNP tests being carried out on only a handful of these groups, why then would the Oromos and Somalis be nitpicked? The fact that the lineage itself likely originates in this area is further reason that it would be widespread throughout the whole region, is it not?
Going on to Berbers, which type of Berbers? Siwa Berbers in Egypt have much less E-M215 than North West African Berbers for instance, again arbitrary. Why specify some and not specify others.
Next, let's go to Egyptians, again which Egyptians? Studies have shown different frequencies of E-M215 throughout Egypt, why no specifics and nitpicking on the Egyptians?
Next let's look at the Balkans, is E-M215 spread evenly throughout the Balkans, why aren't their populations pulled apart like those from Africa, surely, the frequency of E-M215 in Kosovar Albanians and Greeks is not at the same level as that of say Croatians is it?
So all the above is to say that the best way to relay this information is to display or link to the actual population samples that have been surveyed thus far (like it shows in the E-V68 Wikipedia page for instance) and/or may be even an interpolated or contour map of the frequency of E-M215 (like that shown in the Cruciani '04 publication) and just simply leave it at that, any other verbal description of what is 'common', mind you common is undefined here, is it 50%, 30% , 80%??, is unnecessary and simply will cause more confusion.
Now let me go to issue # 1, the issue which you wrongly thought was less important to me, lets revisit the sentence again: “E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-V68, E-V257, E-M123, E-M293, the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa. “
Why am I insisting that current knowledge of E-M215's substructure should be unambiguously incorporated in the above sentence? Because the sentence makes little sense without incorporating the substructure, in-fact, I could re-write the above sentence as :
“E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-M78, E-M81, E-M34, E-M293.....”
and be equally correct, so which subclade to choose? well the more downstream you go the more ambiguity is introduced, therefore, the correct and only choice is to start from as close to the root of the tree being described as possible, that is, as much as current knowledge can afford us.
One last thing with respect to the sentence “the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa”, although true, it makes it seem as if the others are not spread from Ethiopia to North Africa/Levant, which is the wrong impression, because we know that both E-V68 and E-M123 are spread from Ethiopia to NA/Levant as well, hence why I omitted it. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 19:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, I have explained at length both issues of (a) substructure and (b) Pointing to arbitrary ethnic groups in the lead.
Incidentally, I went through a few haplogroup articles here on WP, like R1b,R1a and E1b1a and this is the only article that I have seen thus far that proposes to include nitpicked ethnic groups in the lead, with out exception, all the articles show MACRO-REGIONAL distributions of the relevant lineage.
That being said, I see no point of repeating the arguments I stated over again, however I will acknowledge a couple of points that were raised by you (1) The usage of the word 'common' in the context of my proposal is unnecessary (2) some type of a general frequency snapshot of E-M215 carriers around the world can be useful if included, therefore here is my new proposal:
138.88.60.165 ( talk) 22:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, here is a new draft, in case it helps:--
Andrew Lancaster (
talk)
15:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
the older version | my new proposal |
---|---|
E-M215 is especially common among Oromos and Somalis in the Horn of Africa, as well as Berbers, Egyptians and Tuareg in North Africa. It is also frequently observed in West Asia, from where it spread into the Balkans and the rest of Europe. E-M215 has at least four common subclades: E-V68, E-V257, E-M123, E-M293, the last of which spreads from Ethiopia to South Africa. | E-M215 is especially common in the Horn of Africa, and in North Africa, for example amongst some Berbers and Egyptian poulations. It is also frequently observed in parts of West Asia, the Mediterranean and Balkans, from which areas it is thought to have spread into Europe. Two of the most common variants of E-M215 in modern populations are E-V68 and E-V257. South of the Horn of Africa however E-M293 is the main variant found, stretching as far as South Africa |
Note that I see no point trying to write out a description of the family tree in the lead, because this is exactly what the body of the article does, and we should avoid repetition.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 15:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Its not a bad idea, I never said it was a bad idea, however what is a bad idea is the way you are choosing to describe it, which I termed as nitpicking and arbitrary, I have no problem using Macro-Regional descriptions that roughly depict E-M215's distribution like in most other WP haplogroup pages, alternatively or additionally, an interpolated or contour map for E-M215 can also be used, I see that other WP haplogroup pages use this as well. I have also told you to stop assuming what my real (and by implication not so real) concerns are, but you seem intent on continuing to assume so, I have raised 2 issues that I would like to be BOTH addressed equally, so I will again ask you to stop assuming which one you think is more important. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
And you must have not looked very hard at what I wrote. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Yet, you see a point in mentioning about frequencies in the lead ? even-though the body of the article describes where E-M215 variants are found in detail as well. This makes no sense. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
My Original Proposal | My Modified Proposal |
---|---|
E-M215 has two common subclades: E-M35.1 and E-M281, in turn, E-M35.1 has 4 common subclades: E-V68,E-Z827,E-V6 and E-V92, of which the two subclades, E-V68 and E-Z827, contain the vast majority of E-M215 bearers. | E-M215 has two basal branches: E-M35.1 and E-M281, in turn, E-M35.1 has four branches: E-V68, E-Z827, E-V6 and E-V92, of which the first two, E-V68 and E-Z827, contain the vast majority of E-M215 bearers whom are to be more frequently observed in the East, South and North of Africa and to a lesser extent in the Near East and Europe. |
I have redone my proposal in the table format above 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 18:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Not only have I explained above, but I have also incorporated it into my modified proposal. Please read again. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 19:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I see that you have decided to go ahead and edit the page, you have also put in a semblance of substructure, which is good, however, I would like to change the reference to the Horn of Africa to Eastern Africa, (a) for directional uniformity with Northern Africa, (b) most studies use Eastern Africa (Cruciani '04, Cruciani '07) when discussing E-M215. I would also like to take out the reference to Egyptians and Berbers, for reasons discussed above, the Macro-Regional description: North Africa is enough. 138.88.60.165 ( talk) 20:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
138.88.60.165 above and in your reverting you are demanding I produce sources. Sources for what? What point of disagreement between us needs sourcing? If your demand is not clear, we can make no progress. As far as I can see...
So I think this is not a serious sourcing question. Perhaps your edit demands amount to trying to argue the following:
If you want, we can take this to WP:RSN. But please check if this is really your position.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 06:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Outside of direct quotes, I think it is wise to distinguish between these branches as one is a descendant of the other. Even with direct quotes, the article text should explain which (likely E-M35.1) is meant.-- RebekahThorn ( talk) 01:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Recent discussion about the edit demands in the lead of 138.88.60.165 (presumably the same as User:Causteau) has been on WP:RSN, because 138.88.60.165 claimed that the demands concerning the words "Horn of Africa" versus "East Africa" were sourcing policy based. Discussion there has been unanimously against the position of 138.88.60.165. Other issues now arise with 138.88.60.165's latest edit. I will simply list the obvious problems:
Now that the lead has has been modified to exclude the "Horn of Africa" term, the body needs to follow, I see 10 instances of the use of the terminology "Horn of Africa" throughout the body that need to be changed to the consistent term that is aligned with all other publications on E-M215, i.e., "East Africa". Egenetics ( talk) 19:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
(0) E-V68 and E-Z827 are [...] most frequently observed in North Africa and the northern part of East Africa; and to a lesser extent in Southern Africa, the Middle East and Europe.
(1)The E-M215 clade is presently found in various forms in the Horn of Africa, North Africa, parts of Eastern, Western, and Southern Africa, West Asia, and Europe (especially the Mediterranean and the Balkans).[2][3][11][12]
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(2)E1b1b1b* (E-M35*). By latest definition in Trombetta et al. 2011, now rare outside Horn of Africa.
Comments: What this translates to is that the remaining 15 E-M35* chromosomes are also being described as being from East Africa, this will remain so even after resolution/refinement.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(3)E1b1b1a1 (E-M78). North Africa, Horn of Africa, West Asia, Europe. (Formerly "E1b1b1a".)
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use for E-M78 as well.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(4)although other branches still exist in the Horn of Africa, such as E-V6
Comments: Sources are again self explanatory for what we should use for E-V6 as well.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(5)E-M123 is less common but widely scattered, with significant populations in specific parts of the Horn of Africa, the Levant, Arabia, Iberia, and Anatolia.
Comments: Sources corroborate using East Africa for E-M123/M34 as well.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(6)Many smaller subclades, such as those defined by mutations V6, V42 and V92, appear to be unique to the Horn of Africa region.
Comments: For this case I suggest we use Ethiopia, directly.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(7)E-M78 is a commonly occurring subclade, widely distributed in North Africa, the Horn of Africa, West Asia, (the Middle East and Near East) "up to Southern Asia",[1] and all of Europe.[23]
Comments: See (3)- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(8)But there is no autochthonous presence of E-M81 in the Near East, indicating that M81 most likely emerged from its parent clade M35 either in the Maghreb, or possibly as far south as the Horn of Africa.[15]
Comments: Already discussed above- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(9)Semino et al. 2004 had proposed the Horn of Africa as a possible place of origin of E-M78.
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
(10)Cruciani et al. 2007 were able to study more data, including populations from North Africa who were not represented in the Semino et al. 2004 study, and found evidence that the E-M78 lineages in the Horn of Africa were relatively recent branches (see E-V32 below).
Comments: Sources are self explanatory for what we should use.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Since my argument for using East Africa is in essence to stick with what the sources say, I will just simply quote relevant source/s for each of the points as my argument.- Egenetics ( talk) 05:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: External link in |chapterurl=
(
help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) (
help)