Quantifying the Sub-Saharan African slave contribution to the DNA in the Azores, Madeira, Canaries

[Sikeliot]

Madeira is around 13% according to two studies. Azores around 3.4%, consistent with countrywide. Canary Islands are 14%. Studies names and links can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_admixture_in_Europe

Based on autosomal DNA, every Madeiran I have on 23andme scores above 0.5% SSA, with the highest at 5%. I did find one on GEDmatch scoring around 7%. Canarians, on many GEDmatch calculators, average 5% SSA.

It is highly unlikely that in Madeira nor Portugal proper, any of this is Moorish. Moorish influence in Portugal and Spain is almost strictly maternal, and 13% of y-dna that is Sub-Saharan even exceeds that of some North African countries themselves. As for the Canary Islands, some of it could be from the Guanches, because they were North African and the Spanish settlers to the islands mostly male.

My guess is roughly 1 Madeiran in 8 is descended on their maternal line from a West African slave woman, and the autosomal contribution to the island's DNA should average 3-5% if we did an island-wide study. This is roughly consistent with the 10% of the island's population that was enslaved prior to 1775, when slavery was outlawed there. As for Canarians, it is harder to say because of the Guanches.

This study deals with African input in Madeira: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.616.21&rep=rep1&type=pdf

[Ibericus]

You are mixing things up. The mtDNA U6 is north-african, not Sub-Saharan. And it has been found in a paleolithic sample from Romania, so it's ultimate origin is Eurasian.

[Sikeliot]

You are mixing things up. The mtDNA U6 is north-african, not Sub-Saharan. And it has been found in a paleolithic sample from Romania, so it's ultimate origin is Eurasian.

The 13% figure for Madeira is for mtdna L, subclades specific to Sub-Saharan Africa. Not sure about the Canarian figure.

[Ibericus]

The 13% figure for Madeira is for mtdna L, subclades specific to Sub-Saharan Africa. Not sure about the Canarian figure.
The canarian 14% is for mtDNA U6. Anyways, I would not look up on Wikipedia for genetics, because it's super-manipulated by people with an agenda.

[Damião de Góis]

The 13% figure for Madeira is for mtdna L, subclades specific to Sub-Saharan Africa. Not sure about the Canarian figure.

It's 13%, if you consider that sample of 16 people for the city of Funchal and apply it for the whole island. For Madeira as a whole (sample n=153) it's 4%, so you are distorting data and giving false information:

http://oi64.tinypic.com/2yv743t.jpg

https://www.isfg.org/files/255d8b38d625f6dbca8eaa8fd7ab6b42ead81389.06000239_ 226571967103.pdf

But this is the 3rd or 4th time i mention this.

[Sikeliot]

It's 13%, if you consider that sample of 16 people for the city of Funchal and apply it for the whole island. For Madeira as a whole (sample n=153) it's 4%, so you are distorting data and giving false information:

http://oi64.tinypic.com/2yv743t.jpg

https://www.isfg.org/files/255d8b38d625f6dbca8eaa8fd7ab6b42ead81389.06000239_ 226571967103.pdf

But this is the 3rd or 4th time i mention this.

No, go to the link on Wikipedia and the number of samples was in the 100s, and it gives the link to the study. Add up L1, L2 and L3 and except for Porto Santo it exceeds 10% in each case.

[Bell Beaker]

Are you going to start to post Madeirans instead of Sicilians? :rolleyes:

[Sikeliot]

Y'all in serious denial. That chart above shows clearly that with the exception of Porto Santo, all of Madeira exceeds 10% in mtdna L.

[Damião de Góis]

No, go to the link on Wikipedia and the number of samples was in the 100s, and it gives the link to the study.

Fernandes et al 2006 is exactly the one i linked. So Ibericus was right and they were manipulating data.

[Ibericus]

that Wikipedia article omit the studies in which there is very low to none mtDNA L for Spain, like the study of Rhouda et al. 2006 in which there was 0% in a sample of 686 spaniards, or the Plaza 2003 study with just 0.40% in a sample of 250 , or the or they omit other countries of Europe in which it has been found. Take a look at this for more :

http://anthrospain.blogspot.com.es/2012/02/mtdna-l-in-europe-and-spain.html

[Sikeliot]

Fernandes et al 2006 is exactly the one i linked. So Ibericus was right and they were manipulating data.

No. Add up L1, 2, and 3 for all of the Madeira regions. None of them are 4% as you said not even Porto Santo. They all exceed 10%. Who do you think you're fooling? Do you think we don't have eyes?

[Bell Beaker]

Post the data

mtDNA L in Europe and Spain

Here is a compilation from many different studies, for the frequencies of the maternal Sub-Saharan haplogroup mtDNA L, for countries from all around Europe. At the bottom, there is a compilation for the total of Spain. We'll see that spanish percentages are similar to other countries and/or regions of Europe.

For some obscure reasons, on the Wikipedia articles "mtDNA L in Europe", and "African admixture in Europe" there is only Iberia and Italy as european countries having mtDNA L, we will see here that this is not the case, there is in all corners of the continent. And I advise you if you dare to edit those articles, you'll probably get blocked.


Slovaks n = 2/207 0.97% Malyarchuk et al.2006

Czechs n = 1/279 0.36% Malyarchuk et al., 2008

German-Danish n = 1/161 0.62% Richards et al. 1996
Germany n = 1/335 0.30% Achilli et al 2007
Germany n = 4/333 1.20% Pliss et al. 2005

Albania n = 1/42 2.38% Belledi et al. 2000
Bosnia n=1/144 0.70% Achilli et al 2007
Bulgaria n=1/141 0.71% Achilli et al 2007
Balkans n= 1/556 0.18% Regueiro et al. 2012 + King et al. 2011


Poland n = 1/542 0.20% Achilli et al 2007
Poland n = 1/436 0.22% Malyarchuk et al., 2002
Poles n = 1/849 0.12% Malyarchuk et al., 2008


British n=1/100 1.00% Piercy et al. 1993
England n = 2/335 0.60% Achilli et al 2007
England n = 1/142 0.70% Helgason et al., 2001
Great Britain n = 1/114 0.90 % García et al. 2011
Scotland n = 1/891 0.10 % García et al. 2011


Finnish n = 1/50 2.00% Sajantila et al. 1995
Finland n = 1/121 0.83% Achilli et al 2007
Finns n = 3/580 0.52% Pliss et al. 2005


Norway n = 1/74 1.40% Passarino et al 2002
Norwegians n = 2/397 0.50% Pliss et al. 2005


Russia n = 2/683 0.29% Malyarchuk et al. 2008


France n = 1/332 0.30% Achilli et al 2007
France n = 5/692 0.72% Richards et al. 2007
France n = 3/433 0.69% García et al. 2011
France n = 2/320 0.63% Pliss et al. 2005
France 1.40% Gónzalez et al. 2003


Switzerland n=1/228 0.44% Achilli et al 2007


Crete, Greece n= 2/202 0.99% Achilli et al 2007


Italy n = 8/411 1.94% Plaza et al. 2003, Romano et al. 2003

NW Italy n = 100 2.00% Brisighelli et al. 2012

Sardinian n = 2/69 2.90% Di Rienzo and Wilson 1991
Sardinia n =2/370 0.54% Achilli et al 2007

Sicily n= 1/106 0.94% Cali et al. 2001
Sicily n = 2/105 1.90% Achilli et al 2007
Sicily n = 3/465 0.65% Plaza et al. 2003, Romano et al. 2003
South Italy n = 2/313 0.64% Boattini et al. 2013 + Stefania Sarno et al. 2014

Tuscany n= 6/322 1.86% Achilli et al 2007
Marche (Italy) n=8/813 0.98% Achilli et al 2007
Latium(Italy) n=4/138 2.90% Achilli et al 2007
Murlo (Italy) n = 1/86 1.16% Achilli et al 2007
Volterra (Italy) n = 3/114 2.63% Achilli et al 2007
Casentino (Italy) n = 2/122 1.64% Achilli et al 2007
Campania n = 3/313 0.32% Achilli et al 2007



Spain Total n = 51 / 4.329 1.18% From here :

Spain n = 15/813 1.84% Achilli et al 2007
Spain, n = 0/686 0.00% Rhouda 2006
Spain n = 0/233 0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain n = 1/251 0.40% Plaza et al. 2003
Spain n = 9/312 2.90% Álvarez et al. 2007
Spain n = 1/108 0.90% Casas et al. 2006 *
Spain n = 2/226 0.88% Maca-Meyer et al. 2003
Spain n = 15/742 2.02% García et al. 2011
Spain (Basques) n = 0/462 García et al. 2011
Spain, Zamora Province** n =10/214 4.67% Álvarez et al. 2010
Spain, n = 8/496 1.61% Pereira et al. 2005

http://anthrospain.blogspot.com.es/2012/02/mtdna-l-in-europe-and-spain.html

Somewhere in Europe, a time ago.

http://blogs.dnalc.org/oldimages/pedigree.jpg

[Damião de Góis]

No. Add up L1, 2, and 3 for all of the Madeira regions. None of them are 4% as you said not even Porto Santo. They all exceed 10%. Who do you think you're fooling? Do you think we don't have eyes?

I was only looking at L1, which is the most obvious "slave" haplogroup. L3 is apparently north african.
Don't know about L2 but summing them and labeling them as "slave haplogroups" doesn't seem very accurate.

[Sikeliot]

I was only looking at L1, which is the most obvious "slave" haplogroup. L3 is apparently north african.
Don't know about L2 but summing them and labeling them as "slave haplogroups" doesn't seem very accurate.

L3 exists in the New World in black people.

[Damião de Góis]

L3 exists in the New World in black people.

Then they are probably not slave descendants. Those were overwhelmingly west african.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Interpolation_maps_for_L3b%2C_L3d%2C_L3e%2C_L3f_L3 h%2C_L3i%2C_L3x_and_L3w_haplogroups.png/800px-Interpolation_maps_for_L3b%2C_L3d%2C_L3e%2C_L3f_L3 h%2C_L3i%2C_L3x_and_L3w_haplogroups.png

[Sikeliot]

Then they are probably not slave descendants. Those were overwhelmingly west african.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Interpolation_maps_for_L3b%2C_L3d%2C_L3e%2C_L3f_L3 h%2C_L3i%2C_L3x_and_L3w_haplogroups.png/800px-Interpolation_maps_for_L3b%2C_L3d%2C_L3e%2C_L3f_L3 h%2C_L3i%2C_L3x_and_L3w_haplogroups.png


Most slaves in Madeira were Senegambian. It is unlikely for mtdna L there to be North African when Moorish input was on the male line.

[Damião de Góis]

Most slaves in Madeira were Senegambian. It is unlikely for mtdna L there to be North African when Moorish input was on the male line.

Says who? Next time read about the peopling of Madeira before attempting this:


A produção de açúcar atraiu à ilha comerciantes judeus, genoveses e portugueses, vindo a constituir-se num dinamizador da economia insular. A produção da cultura sacarina cresceu de tal forma que surgiu uma grande necessidade de mão-de-obra. Para satisfazer esta carência foram levados para a ilha escravos originários das Canárias, de Marrocos, Mauritânia e, mais tarde, de outras zonas de África. A cultura da cana e a indústria da produção de açúcar desenvolver-se-iam até ao século XVII, seguindo-se a indústria da transformação — as alçapremas — fazendo a extracção do suco para, depois, vir a fazer-se o recozer dos meles como então se chamava à fase da refinação.

I'm having a feeling of déjà vu btw. I'm pretty sure this is the 50th time i'm discussing this, so no matter what i say you won't learn anything.

[Sikeliot]

Says who? Next time read about the peopling of Madeira before attempting this:



I'm having a feeling of déjà vu btw. I'm pretty sure this is the 50th time i'm discussing this, so no matter what i say you won't learn anything.


First they brought Guanches from the Canary Islands, then they went to Senegambia and Angola.

[Profileid]

Iberians proving yet again they're the most easily trolled people ever to exist.
The funny thing's Sik isn't even trying. He has no reason to africanize Iberians, he's just posting genetic data.

[Bell Beaker]

Iberians proving yet again they're the most easily trolled people ever to exist.
The funny thing's Sik isn't even trying. He has no reason to africanize Iberians, he's just posting genetic data.

We are warm and we like to make novelas out of a simple discussion.

We are hot headed, and of course the Italians are our rivals in that matter. :lol:

[Sikeliot]

Iberians proving yet again they're the most easily trolled people ever to exist.
The funny thing's Sik isn't even trying. He has no reason to africanize Iberians, he's just posting genetic data.

Seriously. It should be well known by now; 1 in 8 people from Madeira, on their maternal line, traces to West Africa.

[Profileid]

Seriously. It should be well known by now; 1 in 8 people from Madeira, on their maternal line, traces to West Africa.

They think, for some reason, there are people out there with an agenda to make Iberians into blacks. Nevermind these are islanders basically living in Africa anyways.
The fact their minds go straight to conspiracies when they hear something they don't like reminds me of arabs. Really quite fitting.

[Damião de Góis]

How did a genetics/history topic managed to atract brown whales? Someone threw chicken into the water?

[Sikeliot]

They think, for some reason, there are people out there with an agenda to make Iberians into blacks. Nevermind these are islanders basically living in Africa anyways.
The fact their minds go straight to conspiracies when they hear something they don't like reminds me of arabs. Really quite fitting.

It does not make Madeirans into blacks but it definitely puts them in the category with many white US southerners, South African whites ,etc.

[Profileid]

How did a genetics/history topic managed to atract brown whales? Someone threw chicken into the water?

Stay butthurt portunigger

[Damião de Góis]

Stay butthurt portunigger

I'm not. You came here looking for chicken in the water though.

[Profileid]

I'm not. You came here looking for chicken in the water though.

You, Gitano Viejo, alnorty,Ibericus...
Why do you all suck at insults so much?

[Damião de Góis]

You, Gitano Viejo, alnorty,Ibericus...
Why do you all suck at insults so much?

The real question is why any of this concerns brown whales from afar.

[Enflamme]

Iberians proving yet again they're the most easily trolled people ever to exist.
The funny thing's Sik isn't even trying. He has no reason to africanize Iberians, he's just posting genetic data.

:rolleyes:

[Sikeliot]

Can you classify this Sicilian + he can pass in North Africa?

There are no Sicilians posted in this thread and rarely, if ever, do I ask if one of them can pass in North Africa.

[Ibericus]

Iberians proving yet again they're the most easily trolled people ever to exist.
The funny thing's Sik isn't even trying. He has no reason to africanize Iberians, he's just posting genetic data.
you can thumb down me all you want, but what I said is true, Sikeliot confused the study of Canarians for sub-saharan, when it was the north-african maternal line. He himself admitted it.

[Sikeliot]

Any SSA ancestry in Canarias, Madeirans etc is not as recent as these of US southerners or Afrikaaners.

10% of Madeira was made up of black slaves, so you are wrong.

[Sikeliot]

Even although that was true, how could I be wrong? we would be speaking of 1500-1600, while US Southerners and Afrikaaners mix would be around 1700-1800.

Madeira is far more isolated/received less subsequent gene flow except from Portugal.

[RN97]

Said the part Roma-nian :lol:
She is like 100000k different ethnicites and out of all that you decide to attack her on the ethnicity that she is that is the genetically closest one to Spaniards, you wannabe German.... :picard2:

[RN97]

Dont be butthurt, just makes me laugh when she calls me Gypsy, being herlsef Romanian in part. Not that I claim all Romanians have Gypsy ancestry (all the opposite) but you know what it is said about Romanians...

Funny that you have called me wannabe German, I never claim be German or whatever, unlike Etain :laugh2:

Ah, and no, Spaniards are not more close genetically to Romanians than to English, Irish, Germans etc

]
Not going to even claim to undetstand those results, but Spaniards are western Europeans and so are all those other groups. Point was that both are south European and share quite a bit of neolithic ancestry. Most PCA maps I found, Spaniards were closer to Romanians than to NW Europeans. I don't know how accurate they are. You can also claim that Romanians are closer to Czechs than to Italians, but I'm sure most Romanians don't quite see it that way...
http://i.imgur.com/VYMAiHc.png
http://i.imgur.com/uT66OP8.png