The Study of Racialism Discussion of U.S. Racialism Please read The Rules before posting.    FAQ   Search     Register     Log in  ' Fulani admixture          The Study of Racialism Forum Index -> Molecular Anthropology and Genetics Author Message Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Mon 15 Oct 2007 13:28    Post subject: Fulani admixture [This thread was split off from The Mulatto Haven in the "Issues for Biracial Americans" forum -- FWS] I always thought the Fulani were mixed with berbers more-so than arabs. Now when we say mixture, would it be considered a significant mixture (roughly 50% west african) or are we talking only a small mixture (mostly west african)? Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5376 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Mon 15 Oct 2007 14:05    Post subject: Grasshoppa wrote: I always thought the Fulani were mixed with berbers more-so than arabs. Yes. That is what I meant. Mulan had suggested "Arab/Semitic bloodlines" and I was just trying to clarify that North Africans in general (including Berbers) have roughly the same Arab/Semitic ancestry, either from the Carthaginian empire (recall that Carthage was a Phoenician colony) or from recent Muslim conquest. Grasshoppa wrote: Now when we say mixture, would it be considered a significant mixture (roughly 50% west african) or are we talking only a small mixture (mostly west african)? I must defer to William or someone else more knowlegable on the phylogeography of west and northwest Africa. To my knowledge, the only admixture study that sampled people in this region was Heather Collins-Schramm's study, which distinguihsed between people in Zaire and those in Nigeria (the latter had more admixture from north of the Sahara--Hausa, I would guess). Again, I simply do not know. Back to top William Moderator Joined: 30 Mar 2005 {Posts: 1082 } Location: New Jersey Posted: Mon 15 Oct 2007 15:55    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: Grasshoppa wrote: I always thought the Fulani were mixed with berbers more-so than arabs. Yes. That is what I meant. Mulan had suggested "Arab/Semitic bloodlines" and I was just trying to clarify that North Africans in general (including Berbers) have roughly the same Arab/Semitic ancestry, either from the Carthaginian empire (recall that Carthage was a Phoenician colony) or from recent Muslim conquest. Grasshoppa wrote: Now when we say mixture, would it be considered a significant mixture (roughly 50% west african) or are we talking only a small mixture (mostly west african)? I must defer to William or someone else more knowlegable on the phylogeography of west and northwest Africa. To my knowledge, the only admixture study that sampled people in this region was Heather Collins-Schramm's study, which distinguihsed between people in Zaire and those in Nigeria (the latter had more admixture from north of the Sahara--Hausa, I would guess). Again, I simply do not know. Go to the molecular forum for a study on northwest Africans that may be of interest, although I don't see anything specific in it about Fulani, who are a little south of the region. Back to top MisterLawyer Moderator Joined: 02 May 2006 {Posts: 443 } Location: Île-de-France Posted: Mon 15 Oct 2007 17:46    Post subject: Here is a link to a paper that states 8.1% of Fulani mtDNA is of North African/Eurasian origin. Quote: 15 sequences (8.1%) of North African/Eurasian origin (U5, V, J1b, and one sequence corresponding to the Cambridge Reference Sequence) [H] The rest were various L1, L2, and L3 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_200602/ai_n17186281/pg_4 Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5376 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Mon 15 Oct 2007 18:10    Post subject: I guess this pretty well answers grasshoppa's question if we take mtDNA to be a fair sampling of the overall Fulani genome. It would suggest 8 percent Berber, a half a percent European, and 91.5 percent sub-Saharan African. I am assuming that U5 is pretty well definitive for Berbers (and their descendants in Iberia). Back to top William Moderator Joined: 30 Mar 2005 {Posts: 1082 } Location: New Jersey Posted: Mon 15 Oct 2007 18:39    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: I guess this pretty well answers grasshoppa's question if we take mtDNA to be a fair sampling of the overall Fulani genome. It would suggest 8 percent Berber, a half a percent European, and 91.5 percent sub-Saharan African. I am assuming that U5 is pretty well definitive for Berbers (and their descendants in Iberia). Actually, the abstract says the L's amount to 79.6%, and the western Eurasian haplotypes amount to 8.1%. I guess the study itself would show what the other 12.3% is. I haven't read it in its entirety. Thanks to Mr. Lawyer for posting it. Quote: Hum Biol. 2006 Feb;78(1):9-27.Links MtDNA of Fulani nomads and their genetic relationships to neighboring sedentary populations.Cerný V, Hájek M, Bromová M, Cmejla R, Diallo I, Brdicka R. Department of Anthropology and Environment, Institute of Archeology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague. Despite the large size of the contemporary nomadic Fulani population (roughly 13 million people), the genetic diversity and degree of differentiation of Fulanis compared to other sub-Saharan populations remain unknown. We sampled four Fulani nomad populations (n = 186) in three countries of sub-Saharan Africa (Chad, Cameroon, and Burkina Faso) and analyzed sequences of the first hypervariable segment of the mitochondrial DNA. Most of the haplotypes belong to haplogroups of West African origin, such as L1b, L3b, L3d, L2b, L2c, and L2d (79.6% in total), which are all well represented in each of the four geographically separated samples. The haplogroups of Western Eurasian origin, such as J1b, U5, H, and V, were also detected but in rather low frequencies (8.1% in total). As in African hunter-gatherers (Pygmies and Khoisan) and some populations from central Tunisia (Kesra and Zriba), three of the Fulani nomad samples do not reveal significant negative values of Fu's selective neutrality test. The multidimensional scaling of FST genetic distances of related sub-Saharan populations and the analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) show clear and close relationships between all pairs of the four Fulani nomad samples, irrespective of their geographic origin. The only group of nomadic Fulani that manifests some similarities with geographically related agricultural populations (from Guinea-Bissau and Nigeria) comes from Tcheboua in northern Cameroon. PMID: 16900879 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=16900879&ordinalpos=11&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum Back to top Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Tue 16 Oct 2007 12:25    Post subject: I'd also like to know where the remaining 12% came from. After reading the study, I cannot find anything addressing the remaining 12%. Maybe I'm missing something? Thank you Mister Lawyer for the info. Back to top Melani23 Suspended Joined: 30 Aug 2005 {Posts: 1193 } Location: USA Posted: Tue 16 Oct 2007 15:22    Post subject: I spoke to Nigerian friend who once told me the Fulani are 'mixed'. From the evidence above, their genetic 'admixture' from non-SSA sources is what? 8% 20% ?????? Some of Fulani I've seen in pictures range in looks from Eric Benot (and darker) to Beyonce. Some even had wavy strightish hair. Thanks, Back to top Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Tue 16 Oct 2007 17:21    Post subject: All of the fulani I've seen had kinky to frizzy hair. I saw a program on the discovery channel about the Wodaabe and most of the people wore braids. The hair itself was obviously more frizzy or kinky than wavy. I have however seen some Taureg that looked like northern Africans, but then again Tauregs are actually a berber group. Back to top Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Sat 20 Oct 2007 14:08    Post subject: William wrote: fwsweet wrote: I guess this pretty well answers grasshoppa's question if we take mtDNA to be a fair sampling of the overall Fulani genome. It would suggest 8 percent Berber, a half a percent European, and 91.5 percent sub-Saharan African. I am assuming that U5 is pretty well definitive for Berbers (and their descendants in Iberia). Actually, the abstract says the L's amount to 79.6%, and the western Eurasian haplotypes amount to 8.1%. I guess the study itself would show what the other 12.3% is. I haven't read it in its entirety. Thanks to Mr. Lawyer for posting it. William, are there L's that have a non-West African origin? Quote: Most of the haplotypes belong to haplogroups of West African origin, such as L1b, L3b, L3d, L2b, L2c, and L2d... They didn't say that those were all the L's, just that those were all of the West African haplogroups. If I'm wrong then the only other influence could be European, correct? Back to top William Moderator Joined: 30 Mar 2005 {Posts: 1082 } Location: New Jersey Posted: Mon 22 Oct 2007 15:32    Post subject: Grasshoppa wrote: William, are there L's that have a non-West African origin? The abstract said that most of the haplotypes are of West African origin (the L's mentioned). All of the L's are ultimately sub-Saharan African in origin. There are some that tend to be concentrated more in eastern and southern Africa. There are a few individual sub-haplotypes of L1b that were found only in Europe (2 in Spain, one in Germany, and one in Russia, if memory serves), and had no direct matches in sub-Saharan Africa. This can mean one of two things: a) that these specific lineages are sub-Saharan in origin but simply haven't been found yet there; or, b) that these specific lineages developed in Europe from the ancestral sub-Saharan L1b lineages that arrived in Europe from sub-Saharan Africa. Even if the latter is true, the ancestral L1b's from which they developed are certainly sub-Saharan in origin. Another source of confusion is L3*. Some researchers were not able to properly distinguish L3* from M and N lineages in their studies, and lumped these into default categories they called L3*, and added the cautionary note that some of the lineages in this default category may not be sub-Saharan in origin. This is because some may have been M's or N's. Sometimes researchers will call such a default category L3/M/N, and this lessens the confusion. All true L3* lineages are definitely sub-Saharan in origin. Back to top Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Thu 25 Oct 2007 03:05    Post subject: William wrote: Grasshoppa wrote: William, are there L's that have a non-West African origin? The abstract said that most of the haplotypes are of West African origin (the L's mentioned). All of the L's are ultimately sub-Saharan African in origin. There are some that tend to be concentrated more in eastern and southern Africa. That's what I thought. I noticed that they said 79% were of west african origin, which doesn't necessarily mean that there were no other sub-Saharan haplogroups. What I don't understand is why they wouldn't mention the other 12%. Back to top William Moderator Joined: 30 Mar 2005 {Posts: 1082 } Location: New Jersey Posted: Fri 26 Oct 2007 14:31    Post subject: Grasshoppa wrote: William wrote: Grasshoppa wrote: William, are there L's that have a non-West African origin? The abstract said that most of the haplotypes are of West African origin (the L's mentioned). All of the L's are ultimately sub-Saharan African in origin. There are some that tend to be concentrated more in eastern and southern Africa. That's what I thought. I noticed that they said 79% were of west african origin, which doesn't necessarily mean that there were no other sub-Saharan haplogroups. What I don't understand is why they wouldn't mention the other 12%. Have you read the entire study? I haven't yet. As for East African genes, there is a genetic relatedness at the HLA level between the Fulani, Rimaibe, and Mossi of West Africa and the Amhara, Oromo, and Nuba of East Africa. It is uncertain if the West African groups originated in East Africa (which certainly has been proposed) or if the relatedness goes back to a common origin in a much earlier time, before the Bantu expansion caused various related populations to become split from one another. Check out this study, which concerns itself mainly with showing a sub-Saharan genetic component in Greeks, but does contain some data on the subject at hand. Back to top Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Thu 15 May 2008 04:56    Post subject: I forgot about this thread. I'm still interested in the genetics of the Fulani. If any of you find any new info about the fulani, please share. Here are some interesting things I found in the article that MisterLawyer posted (although I must admit that I found quite a bit of the scientific talk confusing): Quote: No F^sub ST^ distance between any pair of Fulani nomads is statistically significant (data not shown). Considering the actual geographic distances between the Fulani groups in the Chad basin and those in the West African savanna (about 2,000 km), this finding is extremely interesting. On the other hand, the sampled Fulani groups differ from all other neighboring settled populations, including the Fulbe (Fulani) reported by Watson et al. (1997); the only exception to this is the Fulani sample from Tcheboua (Cameroon), which is not differentiated from three populations of the Central Sahel (the Hausa, Fulbe, and Yoruba). Another interesting tidbit: Quote: According to our own anthropological examination (data not shown), the non-sub-Saharan haplogroups are not carried by "West Eurasian-like" individuals, as might be anticipated, but were rather detected in common "Fulani type" peoples. So, I guess some people exaggerate their admixture. I've heard of Nigerians calling the Fulani "white" people. As a joke acknowledging the admixture of the fulani, but it seems it is less than they make it out to be (or even that I assumed). But still, isn't it possible that Y-chromosome results could be different? Could a greater non-SSA influence become apparent then? Or is it likely that they're relatively the same as the mtDNA results? I still could not find any explanation for the remaining 12%. I can't fathom why they'd mention the West Eurasian 8% but not the remaing 12%. I would love to see some more Fulani studies, especially one that addresses admixture in the Wodaabe of Niger. The wodaabe have frequent contact with the Tuareg, a berber group with obvious SSA admixture. I would like to see how they compare with the Fulani that were examined in this article. Back to top Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Thu 15 May 2008 05:26    Post subject: Here are some images of the Wodaabe: Back to top Charles_Rigaud New User Joined: 12 Aug 2006 {Posts: 26 } Location: Yazoo City, Mississippi Posted: Sun 15 Jun 2008 12:01    Post subject: Fulani are SSA with a variety of phenotypes, they are not a "mixed" people. From looking at some of the threads here no one appears to have a concrete definition of what mixed is supposed to entail. Back to top Grasshoppa Mentor Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States Posted: Sun 15 Jun 2008 16:14    Post subject: Charles_Rigaud wrote: Fulani are SSA with a variety of phenotypes, they are not a "mixed" people. From looking at some of the threads here no one appears to have a concrete definition of what mixed is supposed to entail. By using the term "mixed" in this case, I'd assume we were talking about non-SSA ancestry specific markers and non-SSA originated haplogroups. But I definitely see what you're saying when you say there is no concrete definition of being "mixed". Maybe william or frank can enlighten us. Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5376 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Sun 15 Jun 2008 18:21    Post subject: Charles_Rigaud wrote: From looking at some of the threads here no one appears to have a concrete definition of what mixed is supposed to entail. I think it depends on the context. In the ethicity forums it usually seems to denote someone with grandparents from both of the U.S. endogamous populations (Black and White). In the political forums it seems to refer to someone of the "multiracial" ethno-political self identity. Here in molecular anthropology it usually seems to denote someone who carries some markers distinctive of sub-Saharan Africa (an L3 mtDNA, for example) but also carries markers unique to Europe (an R1b Y chromosome, for instance). For example, both Mark Shriver and Rick Kittles are "mixed" in the latter sense, as are most inhabitants of this hemisphere. Regarding the Fulani, I suspect (but cannot say for sure) that the term was meant to denote historical interbreeding between the native inhabitants and Muslim traders from North Africa. Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         The Study of Racialism Forum Index -> Molecular Anthropology and Genetics All times are GMT Page 1 of 1 Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group