posted
I have been looking for this study but so far only found the abstract, maybe someone has a link to the full study?
Urban et al 2021: Human mitochondrial haplogroups and ancient DNA preservation across Egyptian history
quote: Egypt represents an ideal location for genetic studies on population migration and admixture due to its geographic location and rich history. However, there are only a few reliable genetic studies on ancient Egyptian samples. In a previous study, we assessed the genetic history of a single site: Abusir el-Meleq from 1388 BCE to 426 CE. We now focus on widening the geographic scope to give a general overview of the population genetic background, focusing on mitochondrial haplogroups present among the whole Egyptian Nile River Valley. We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study. Our results indicate very low rates of modern DNA contamination independent of the tissue type. Although authentic ancient DNA was recovered from different tissues, a reliable recovery was best achieved using teeth or petrous bone material. Moreover, the rate for successful ancient DNA retrieval between Egyptian mummies and skeletal remains did not differ significantly. Our study provides preliminary insights into population history across different regions and compares tissue-specific DNA preservation for mummies and skeletal remains from the Egyptian Nile River Valley.
posted
it has not been published yet and it confirms that the samples from Abusir were generally representative and not foreigners contrary to the unsupported claims made by that Djehuti.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ And what claims are those pray tell?? How about you post an actual quote of mine.
You sure ? You never said or implied that they were foreigners and not representative ?
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I've always maintained that it's a possibility they were since the samples come from the Late Period known to have larger foreign presence. I didn't say they were foreign for certain since we have to compare them with older samples from say the Old Kingdom or prior.
You see unlike you, I don't jump to conclusions until I have more evidence, and unlike you I don't twist or distort what others actually say.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I've always maintained that it's a possibility they were since the samples come from the Late Period known to have larger foreign presence. I didn't say they were foreign for certain since we have to compare them with older samples from say the Old Kingdom or prior.
You see unlike you, I don't jump to conclusions until I have more evidence, and unlike you I don't twist or distort what others actually say.
How come their MtDNA and autosomal results were very different from what exist in modern day Sub-Saharan Africa ?
Also is it a coincidence that they match the profile of modern egyptians ? I thought Arabs hugely impacted the country what's going on ?
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: How come their mtDNA and autosomal results were very different from what exist in modern day Sub-Saharan Africa?
You're only partially right. You say "modern day" Sub-Sahara which betrays the fact that the genomic landscape today is obviously different from what existed in ancient times, especially prehistoric times. But even modern Sub-Sahara today is the most genetically diverse region in the planet of which we don't have full genomic profile of which begs the question why you make such general assumptions about the region.
That said, we don't even have a full genomic history of Egypt itself, much less 'Sub-Sahara'. People like the authors of the Abusir study and yourself are quick to make the Abusir representative of all ancient Egyptians of all areas of Egypt of all time periods before the Islamic era with out proper comparison of samples from other areas of the country within the same period let alone from other periods. So how can you make any generalizations then??
Take for example the predynastic Adaïma sample that was discussed here. According to that study the predominant mtDNA lineage found there was L0f, to which the authors described: Haplogroup L0f, present at 3% among Muslims, is currently common in Africa from the south among the Khoisans and almost absent elsewhere. Its presence in Adaïma is intriguing because the slave trade did not go back as far. In this case, we can ask ourselves if we would not have there the vestige of a population "proto-Khoisan" partly at the origin of populations predynastic. Also in this case, further investigations should be carried out. In conclusion of these first genetic studies, it appears that in the case of Adaïma, the contemporary population seems to have been greatly influenced by events recent events involving the valley. The invasions Arabs could have brought bloodlines Middle Eastern which have become predominant for the masculine and quite present for the women. At the same time, the Coptic communities seem to have largely integrated paternal lines originating from Ethiopia certainly via the churches with which they were in touch. If among the Copts, the men seem to have married women who for a many originated from Mediterranean Christian communities, Muslims may have contracted many marriages with sub-Saharan women originating or descending from the slave trade. AT from the paternal lines, it is almost impossible to find the origin dynastic and predynastic populations. With regard to maternal lines, the contemporary population present in the two communities of mitochondrial haplogroups which could refer to the epipalaeolithic or even beyond and which in the two cases have an extra-African origin. This is reminiscent of these epipalaeolithic with extra-African origins often mentioned on their morphological characters. For the Neolithic and predynastic contributions, the analyses of contemporary populations are for the moment of little help; either the morphological analyzes overestimate changes during these periods; either the current traces are tenuous, such as that evoking the remains of a “proto-Khoisan” population.
So you see at least the authors of the Adaima study are wise enough to not make any general assumptions about the entire Egyptian populace without adequate data.
quote:Also is it a coincidence that they match the profile of modern Egyptians? I thought Arabs hugely impacted the country what's going on?
Match the profile of moderns how so?
According to the Nat Geo sample done on modern Egyptians (sampled in Cairo), you have this below:
17% of 'Arabian' ancestry is still significant and if you combine that with the 'Jewish', 'Asia-Minor', and 'South European' ancestries, you get a combined total of 27% Non-African or Eurasian ancestry. Though I fail to see how the Abusir sample somehow "matches" this modern one.
Also, if you know about Egyptian history then you would know that Egypt has been receiving Asiatic immigration since dynastic times far prior to the Arab-Islamic period. Which again begs the question if the Abusir sample reflects such immigration especially since that region was known to be an Asiatic settlement by the Late Period.
quote:
*Yawn* As for the FSTs, how many times must it be explained to your dumb ass that since Africa is the most diverse, of course there is going to greater genetic distance between some populations than others!
^ Note that in the PCA map above North Africans are genetically closer to West Eurasians than they are to South Africans all the way on the left side which are labeled only as 'Africans' and all those samples in between are other "Sub-Saharan" Africans.
Here is the Loosdrecht et al. PCA again
^ IDB Yoruba have shorter genetic distance to North Africans than to South African Aborigines. You cannot just racially divide Africans into one "Sub-Saharan" monolith and the other into "North Africa" and claim the latter is related to Eurasians only. That's not how population genetics works. We keep telling you this over and over again but your deranged ass won't listen.
quote: The thing about the old racialist model where we were all usually divided into four mega-races known as Mongoloids, Negroids, Caucasoids and Australoids--is that, even though the anthropologists who originally devised this worldview weren't familiar with the Human genome, it is very based around Genetic Drift and divides Humans up almost like they are "proto-subspecies" of sorts ("biological races" are the level right below subspecies, usually).
For example, there was a Caucasoid race and then, via some intermediaries, "Aethiopids" and "Nordids" developed and Somalis and Danes developed from these two sub-races respectively. There might, at times, be some acknowledgement of admixture playing a part (Aethiopids are sometimes acknowledged to be slightly "Negroid" influenced, for instance. Or Maasais are noted to be an "Aethiopid+Negroid" mixture of some sort) but the model is still very dependent on the idea that Human phenotypic and thus genomic diversity was mainly shaped by natural selection and this is partly where it falls short.
By this logic, you would have to explain the differences between West Eurasians, as they are in that regional PCA above, as being mostly caused due to the formation of sub-races. I.e. There was a single ancestral West Eurasian population (Caucasoid race) and Northern Europeans formed as a sub-race of this population because their ancestors were separated from the ancestors of "Arabs" for tens of thousands of years and then natural selection & mutations, and therefore genetic drift, took place and that's mainly why we see genetic diversity here.
Instead, none of these West Eurasian populations are separate/discrete races from one another. They in fact share *very recent* ancestry from, for now, what look to be three or so core pre-historic populations. Villabruna-related West Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers (VHGs a.k.a "WHGs"), Ancient North Eurasian-related peoples (ANEs) and the theoretical "Basal Eurasians".
They are, in large part, the product of admixture and not simply genetic drift where there was a Population X and then Populations Y and Z descend from it, were separate for a long time, then developed different mutations that altered the genotypes and phenotypes of a few of them, and then went through natural selection and genetic drift to select for those traits and become distinct entities.
It's as I've been saying all along that West Eurasians are mixed and part of that mixture comes from Africans in the form of ANA (Ancestral North African) as well as Basal Eurasian which also appears to be African in origin as well. This is why the same Nat Geo study on modern Egyptians also found these results for...
Lebanese
By the way 'Arabian' ancestry can be misleading because that also includes Basal Eurasian.
Ethio-helix goes on to write:
quote: Nevertheless, I suppose one could argue that certain populations are genuinely "discrete" in that they have not shared certain ancestries in well over 35,000 years. For instance, this can be said about West-Central Africans when compared to East Asians but here things do get a bit dicey as well since, while you can assume they're discrete from one another, they themselves are probably not, to some great extent, "pure" or mostly pure entities.
By that I mean... They too are probably, in some part, the result of admixture rather than mostly or entirely being linear developments from a singular ancestral population which is how the old racialist model might paint things.
For example, the quite diverse mtDNA profiles (simply based on their non-M&N lineages) of groups like Omotic speaking Southwestern Ethiopians, Niger-Congo speaking West-Central Africans and Nilo-Saharan speaking Southern Sudanese people tend to imply that they are probably the result of admixture between distinct pre-historic populations within Africa itself. [note]
Some of these ancestral populations were possibly even as distinct from each other as the San are from modern West-Central Africans (time divergence appears greater than the time-divergence between West-Central Africans and the Han-Chinese, and genetic drift (based on Fst) is comparable to the drift between the Han-Chinese and the English).
**Groups that would count as "Negroids" within Africa should also not be seen as some sort of genetic monolith. They're not**... And even the old racialist model didn't truly imply as much. There's often a West-Central African cluster ("Niger-Congo" above) and an East African-cluster ("Nilo-Saharan" above) in ADMIXTURE runs, for instance. The Fst between these two clusters, as an example, is a little over 1/2 the Fst between the East Asian and European clusters above.
Also, based on Haplotypic data, the time divergence between some of these "African" ancestries (i.e. the African elements in Somalis and the African elements in Yorubas) implies they possibly haven't shared ancestry in over 30,000-40,000 years or so which is comparable to the, so far, supposed time-divergence between ENAs and the ancestors of European Hunter-Gatherers.
So this begs the question, why Antalas do you keep spouting the same pig sh*t, over and over and over and over and over again, like a broken record??
Is it because you suffer from a mental illness?
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: You're only partially right. You say "modern day" Sub-Sahara which betrays the fact that the genomic landscape today is obviously different from what existed in ancient times, especially prehistoric times. But even modern Sub-Sahara today is the most genetically diverse region in the planet of which we don't have full genomic profile of which begs the question why you make such general assumptions about the region.
That said, we don't even have a full genomic history of Egypt itself, much less 'Sub-Sahara'. People like the authors of the Abusir study and yourself are quick to make the Abusir representative of all ancient Egyptians of all areas of Egypt of all time periods before the Islamic era with out proper comparison of samples from other areas of the country within the same period let alone from other periods. So how can you make any generalizations then??
You clearly don't know what you're talking about smh...the few prehistoric samples we have actually do have MtDNAs that are found in SSA today. Or are you suggesting that prehistoric sub-Saharan Africans had a predominantly Eurasian genetic makeup, similar to the Abusir samples ? XD
I am not making sweeping statements. I am informing you that the 90 mummies from Abusir, displays a significant presence of Eurasian MtDNAs. Moreover, the newly analyzed samples from various regions in Egypt, spanning 4000 years of history, yield comparable results to the Abusir samples.
This was already highlighted before :
quote: On top of this historical information offering an explanation for the observed mtDNA data are now additional, recently published, mtGenomes from Africa, and Egypt in particular. MtDNA haplotypes recently obtained from ancient human remains from sub-Saharan Africa belong only to haplogroup L subgroups [65,88]. However, nearly all of the remains excavated in the Northern part of the continent belong to Eurasian mtDNA lineages [63,67,74,89,90]. In fact, of the 114 mtDNA genomes now available from northern African ancient human remains, only one belongs to an African lineage (L3 observed in a skeleton from Abusir el-Meleq [74]). The deep presence of Eurasian mtDNA lineages in Northern Africa has, therefore, been clearly established with these recent reports and offers further support for the authenticity of the Eurasian mtDNA sequence observed in the Djehutynakht mummy
While you consistently come up with excuses, I consistently provide valid and reliable data to support my claims.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Match the profile of moderns how so?
According to the Nat Geo sample done on modern Egyptians (sampled in Cairo), you have this below:
17% of 'Arabian' ancestry is still significant and if you combine that with the 'Jewish', 'Asia-Minor', and 'South European' ancestries, you get a combined total of 27% Non-African or Eurasian ancestry. Though I fail to see how the Abusir sample somehow "matches" this modern one.
Also, if you know about Egyptian history then you would know that Egypt has been receiving Asiatic immigration since dynastic times far prior to the Arab-Islamic period. Which again begs the question if the Abusir sample reflects such immigration especially since that region was known to be an Asiatic settlement by the Late Period.
quote:*Yawn* As for the FSTs, how many times must it be explained to your dumb ass that since Africa is the most diverse, of course there is going to greater genetic distance between some populations than others!
^ Note that in the PCA map above North Africans are genetically closer to West Eurasians than they are to South Africans all the way on the left side which are labeled only as 'Africans' and all those samples in between are other "Sub-Saharan" Africans.
Here is the Loosdrecht et al. PCA again
^ IDB Yoruba have shorter genetic distance to North Africans than to South African Aborigines. You cannot just racially divide Africans into one "Sub-Saharan" monolith and the other into "North Africa" and claim the latter is related to Eurasians only. That's not how population genetics works. We keep telling you this over and over again but your deranged ass won't listen.
But just to pull some excerpts: [QUOTE] The thing about the old racialist model where we were all usually divided into four mega-races known as Mongoloids, Negroids, Caucasoids and Australoids--is that, even though the anthropologists who originally devised this worldview weren't familiar with the Human genome, it is very based around Genetic Drift and divides Humans up almost like they are "proto-subspecies" of sorts ("biological races" are the level right below subspecies, usually).
For example, there was a Caucasoid race and then, via some intermediaries, "Aethiopids" and "Nordids" developed and Somalis and Danes developed from these two sub-races respectively. There might, at times, be some acknowledgement of admixture playing a part (Aethiopids are sometimes acknowledged to be slightly "Negroid" influenced, for instance. Or Maasais are noted to be an "Aethiopid+Negroid" mixture of some sort) but the model is still very dependent on the idea that Human phenotypic and thus genomic diversity was mainly shaped by natural selection and this is partly where it falls short.
By this logic, you would have to explain the differences between West Eurasians, as they are in that regional PCA above, as being mostly caused due to the formation of sub-races. I.e. There was a single ancestral West Eurasian population (Caucasoid race) and Northern Europeans formed as a sub-race of this population because their ancestors were separated from the ancestors of "Arabs" for tens of thousands of years and then natural selection & mutations, and therefore genetic drift, took place and that's mainly why we see genetic diversity here.
Instead, none of these West Eurasian populations are separate/discrete races from one another. They in fact share *very recent* ancestry from, for now, what look to be three or so core pre-historic populations. Villabruna-related West Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers (VHGs a.k.a "WHGs"), Ancient North Eurasian-related peoples (ANEs) and the theoretical "Basal Eurasians".
They are, in large part, the product of admixture and not simply genetic drift where there was a Population X and then Populations Y and Z descend from it, were separate for a long time, then developed different mutations that altered the genotypes and phenotypes of a few of them, and then went through natural selection and genetic drift to select for those traits and become distinct entities.It's as I've been saying all along that West Eurasians are mixed and part of that mixture comes from Africans in the form of ANA (Ancestral North African) as well as Basal Eurasian which also appears to be African in origin as well. This is why the same Nat Geo study on modern Egyptians also found these results for...
Lebanese
By the way 'Arabian' ancestry can be misleading because that also includes Basal Eurasian.
Ethio-helix goes on to write: [QUOTE] Nevertheless, I suppose one could argue that certain populations are genuinely "discrete" in that they have not shared certain ancestries in well over 35,000 years. For instance, this can be said about West-Central Africans when compared to East Asians but here things do get a bit dicey as well since, while you can assume they're discrete from one another, they themselves are probably not, to some great extent, "pure" or mostly pure entities.
By that I mean... They too are probably, in some part, the result of admixture rather than mostly or entirely being linear developments from a singular ancestral population which is how the old racialist model might paint things.
For example, the quite diverse mtDNA profiles (simply based on their non-M&N lineages) of groups like Omotic speaking Southwestern Ethiopians, Niger-Congo speaking West-Central Africans and Nilo-Saharan speaking Southern Sudanese people tend to imply that they are probably the result of admixture between distinct pre-historic populations within Africa itself. [note]
Some of these ancestral populations were possibly even as distinct from each other as the San are from modern West-Central Africans (time divergence appears greater than the time-divergence between West-Central Africans and the Han-Chinese, and genetic drift (based on Fst) is comparable to the drift between the Han-Chinese and the English).
**Groups that would count as "Negroids" within Africa should also not be seen as some sort of genetic monolith. They're not**... And even the old racialist model didn't truly imply as much. There's often a West-Central African cluster ("Niger-Congo" above) and an East African-cluster ("Nilo-Saharan" above) in ADMIXTURE runs, for instance. The Fst between these two clusters, as an example, is a little over 1/2 the Fst between the East Asian and European clusters above.
Also, based on Haplotypic data, the time divergence between some of these "African" ancestries (i.e. the African elements in Somalis and the African elements in Yorubas) implies they possibly haven't shared ancestry in over 30,000-40,000 years or so which is comparable to the, so far, supposed time-divergence between ENAs and the ancestors of European Hunter-Gatherers.
So this begs the question, why Antalas do you keep spouting the same pig sh*t, over and over and over and over and over again, like a broken record??
Is it because you suffer from a mental illness? [/QB]
As I have emphasized multiple times, you appear to be stuck in 2005 when it comes to genetic studies and have seemingly disregarded most of the research conducted in the past decade. You're literally bringing that outdated Nat Geo experience XD
Lebanese as 44% "arabian", 11% NA, 10% Asia Minor meanwhile Haber et al. 2017 clearly highlights how Bronze Age Sidonian samples plot with modern levantines (93% similar) :
quote:The Bronze Age Sidon samples (Sidon_BA) overlap with present-day Levantines and were positioned between the ancient Levantines (Natufians/Neolithic) and ancient Iranians (Neolithic/Chalcolithic). The overlap between the Bronze Age and present-day Levantines suggests a degree of genetic continuity in the region.
quote:We found that the Lebanese can be best modeled as Sidon_BA 93% ± 1.6% and a Steppe Bronze Age population 7% ± 1.6%
So your assertion regarding modern Egyptians holds no significance whatsoever. The remaining portion of your response is merely irrelevant rambling about Fst distances among Africans, which has no correlation to the content of my previous statement.
Again How come the Abusir samples match the current profile and are quite close to middle easterners instead of their east african samples ? :
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ LOL Hey idiot, you claim I'm somehow "stuck in 2005" because I used an old Nat-Geo finding just for a quick example?! You still FAIL to refute the main points I raise as far as population genetics!
Look, I already made my points. There's a saying that when one argues with crazy fool, he becomes a crazy fool also. Well I refuse to become one.
You've already been debunked multiple times in multiple threads, there is nothing left for me to say.
I suggest you go seek professional help is all.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The study in the OP has found its way to Wikipedia. But still not the full study
quote: A follow-up study by Scheunemann & Urban et al. (2021) was carried out collecting samples from six excavation sites along the entire length of the Nile valley spanning 4000 years of Egyptian history. Samples from 17 mummies and 14 skeletal remains were collected, and high quality mitochondrial genomes were reconstructed from 10 individuals. According to the authors the analyzed mitochondrial genomes matched the results from the 2017 study at Abusir el-Meleq.
posted
^ Is there a link to that follow up study. All the DNA samples they have on ancient Egyptian remains and I've only heard rumors here and there until some years ago when some results were leaked on Forumbiodiversity and then here showing the following.
quote: OK A-M13, L3f Ok A-M13, L0a1 OK B-M150, L3d OK E-M2, L3e5 OK E-M2, L2a1 OK E-M123, L5a1 OK E-M35, R0a OK E-M41, L2a1 OK E-M41, L1b1a OK E-M75, M1 OK E-M78, L4b OK J-M267, L3i OK R-M173, L2 OK T-M184, L0a
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Is there a link to that follow up study. All the DNA samples they have on ancient Egyptian remains and I've only heard rumors here and there until some years ago when some results were leaked on Forumbiodiversity and then here showing the following.
I have not been able to find a link to the full study, only to an abstract.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ All the DNA samples they have on ancient Egyptian remains and I've only heard rumors here and there until some years ago when some results were leaked on Forumbiodiversity and then here showing the following.
OK A-M13, L3f Ok A-M13, L0a1 OK B-M150, L3d OK E-M2, L3e5 OK E-M2, L2a1 OK E-M123, L5a1 OK E-M35, R0a OK E-M41, L2a1 OK E-M41, L1b1a OK E-M75, M1 OK E-M78, L4b OK J-M267, L3i OK R-M173, L2 OK T-M184, L0a
Shall be interesting to see if Schuenemann et al will post their full study, or if it is published somewhere, where to find it. It was originally a talk at the 9th International Symposium on Biomolecular Archaeology, June1st – 4th 2021 in Toulouse, FRANCE.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
That symposium seems to have been very interesting. Many fascinating subjects were presented
ISBA9 9th International Symposium on Biomolecular Archaeology, June 1st – 4th 2021 (Toulouse, France)
Subjects that were presented were, among many others, Egyptian DNA through times, the genetic makeup of Hyksos and studies of DNA from Nubia during different time periods.
Next conference will be held in Estonia in September this year. Subjects which will be presented are for example The peopling of the Canary Islands, Northwest African Neolithic, and how Genomes from Pastoral Neolithic Sahara reveal ancestral north African lineage.
posted
That is an older study. The study I am searching for were presented at the above mentioned conference in 2021. It seems it has not been published yet:
Urban Christian, Neukamm Judith, Eppenberger Patrick, Brändle Martin, Rühli Frank and Schuenemann Verena 2021: Human mitochondrial hapologroups and ancient DNA preservation across Egyptian history
quote: Egypt represents an ideal location for genetic studies on population migration and admixture due to its geographic location and rich history. However, there are only a few reliable genetic studies on ancient Egyptian samples. In a previous study, we assessed the genetic history of a single site: Abusir el-Meleq from 1388 BCE to 426 CE. We now focus on widening the geographic scope to give a general overview of the population genetic background, focusing on mitochondrial haplogroups present among the whole Egyptian Nile River Valley. We collected 81 tooth, hair, bone, and soft tissue samples from 14 mummies and 17 skeletal remains. The samples span approximately 4000 years of Egyptian history and originate from six different excavation sites covering the whole length of the Egyptian Nile River Valley. NGS based ancient DNA 8 were applied to reconstruct 18 high-quality mitochondrial genomes from 10 different individuals. The determined mitochondrial haplogroups match the results from our Abusir el-Meleq study. Our results indicate very low rates of modern DNA contamination independent of the tissue type. Although authentic ancient DNA was recovered from different tissues, a reliable recovery was best achieved using teeth or petrous bone material. Moreover, the rate for successful ancient DNA retrieval between Egyptian mummies and skeletal remains did not differ significantly. Our study provides preliminary insights into population history across different regions and compares tissue-specific DNA preservation for mummies and skeletal remains from the Egyptian Nile River Valley.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ All the DNA samples they have on ancient Egyptian remains and I've only heard rumors here and there until some years ago when some results were leaked on Forumbiodiversity and then here showing the following.
OK A-M13, L3f Ok A-M13, L0a1 OK B-M150, L3d OK E-M2, L3e5 OK E-M2, L2a1 OK E-M123, L5a1 OK E-M35, R0a OK E-M41, L2a1 OK E-M41, L1b1a OK E-M75, M1 OK E-M78, L4b OK J-M267, L3i OK R-M173, L2 OK T-M184, L0a
Shall be interesting to see if Schuenemann et al will post their full study, or if it is published somewhere, where to find it. It was originally a talk at the 9th International Symposium on Biomolecular Archaeology, June1st – 4th 2021 in Toulouse, FRANCE.
Egyptsearch member beyoku was the first to post the above in forum biodiversity, 10 years ago
It seems suspicious that in 2013 there would be full genome data on 21 male mummies, 14 Old Kingdom, both their male and female DNA
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The conference in Estonia is not so far away from Sweden, but probably I will not be able to attend it. Hopefully there will be some other nice conferences in my neighborhood soon.
Conferences are educational and fun and one meets many interesting people.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ All the DNA samples they have on ancient Egyptian remains and I've only heard rumors here and there until some years ago when some results were leaked on Forumbiodiversity and then here showing the following.
OK A-M13, L3f Ok A-M13, L0a1 OK B-M150, L3d OK E-M2, L3e5 OK E-M2, L2a1 OK E-M123, L5a1 OK E-M35, R0a OK E-M41, L2a1 OK E-M41, L1b1a OK E-M75, M1 OK E-M78, L4b OK J-M267, L3i OK R-M173, L2 OK T-M184, L0a
Shall be interesting to see if Schuenemann et al will post their full study, or if it is published somewhere, where to find it. It was originally a talk at the 9th International Symposium on Biomolecular Archaeology, June1st – 4th 2021 in Toulouse, FRANCE.
Egyptsearch member beyoku was the first to post the above in forum biodiversity, 10 years ago
It seems suspicious that in 2013 there would be full genome data on 21 male mummies, 14 Old Kingdom, both their male and female DNA
Djehuti says those results were leaked. Are there any published studies with those genomes?
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
^ so since Cairo Scene is not National Geographic and the alleged link to National Geographic study is not functioning on this article, this cannot be proven to be from National Geographic
There are peer reviewed articles on modern Egyptian and Tunisians in science journals
Claims that these charts are based on Nat Geo's discontinued Genographic project are unsubstantiated. They could be based on something that the project put out or it could also be misconstrued information. The pie charts have no credit to Nat Geo either so one of these online magazines may have created them. No details, what type of testing, sample info, etc
And what constitutes the vague "North African" as per genetics? Many geneticists would call "North African DNA" not entirely DNA indigenous to Africa, particularly on the female side _________________________________
Mitochondrial DNA analysis of Tunisians reveals a mosaic genetic structure with recent population expansion S. Frigi 2021
The analysis of Y-chromosome lineages has shown a high frequency of two specific North African haplogroups (E-M78 and E-M81), although their origins have been controversial since some studies suggested a Paleolithic component (Bosch et al., 2001), whereas others pointed to a Neolithic origin (Arredi et al., 2004, Cruciani et al., 2004, Cruciani et al., 2007, Cruciani et al., 2010, Semino et al., 2004). Moreover, the significantly greater presence of the prominently Arab Y-chromosome J-M267 haplogroup in the cosmopolitan samples, when compared to the rural ones, pointed to a substantial male-biased Arab influence in North Africa and in the Levant (Capelli et al., 2006, Ennafaa et al., 2011, Fadhlaoui-Zid et al., 2011), although it is probable that the diffusion of Islam only reinforced previous human displacements (Chiaroni et al., 2010, Tofanelli et al., 2009).
Interestingly enough, wide geographical longitudinal gradients were detectable in North Africa by analysing mtDNA. Some mtDNA lineages, such as haplogroups U6 (Maca-Meyer et al., 2003a; Olivieri et al., 2006, Pennarun et al., 2012, Pereira et al., 2010), M1 (González et al., 2007, Olivieri et al., 2006, Pennarun et al., 2012, Quintana-Murci et al., 1999) and X1 (Reidla et al., 2003), had their ancestral roots in the Middle East, but expanded in North Africa since Paleolithic times with instances of secondary dispersion in this area. Other haplogroups, such as haplogroups U5b1b (Achilli et al., 2005), H1 and H3 (Cherni et al., 2009, Ennafaa et al., 2009, Ottoni et al., 2010) and V (Torroni et al., 2001) seem to have reached North Africa from Iberia in a post-last glacial maximum expansion. In concordance, a study that analysed ancient DNA, extracted from Iberomaurusian bone remains recovered in Taforalt (Morocco), detected the presence of haplogroups U6, V, T and probably H, pointing to a Paleolithic genetic continuity in North-western Africa (Kéfi et al., 2005). More recently, Kéfi et al. (2015), using a sample of 815 Tunisian mtDNA sequences, demonstrated the mosaic pattern of the genetic structure of Tunisians.
The haplogroup distribution among the total number of studied individuals showed a dominance of Eurasian lineages (D, F, H, HV, I, J, K, N, R, T, U*, V, W and X) with a combined frequency of 66.9% (N=465/695), followed by Sub-Saharan lineages (macro-haplogroup L) with a combined frequency of 23.0% (N=160/695). North African-specific sub-haplogroups (U6a, U6a1a1, U6c and M1) were clearly under-represented (7.1%; N=49/695). The haplogroups of 21 individuals (19 Berbers and two Arabs; 3.0%) were not classifiable based on the current data
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Results of maternal lineages in the Egyptian community within 327 genetic samples, where the results are led by the L strain with 24.8%, followed by the H strain with 23.5%, then U by 9.48%, then T by 8.26%, then M by 6.73% from the completion of te completion of the Egyptian Genome Project http:// Egyptian-genome .or"
The European, African, and Asian ancestry components of Egyptians are further supported by mitochondrial haplogroup assessment from mtDNA sequencing of 217 individuals in addition to haplogroups of the same 110 Egyptian individuals described earlier, for which 100 haplogroups are available from the literature22. mtDNA sequencing revealed that Egyptians have haplogroups most frequently found in Europeans (e.g., H, V, T, J, etc.; >60%), Africans (e.g., L with 24.8%) or Asians/East Asians (e.g., M with 6.7%) (Supplementary Fig. 42). Overall, this supports the admixture and PCA analysis and the notion that Egypt’s transcontinental geographical location shaped Egyptian genetics. Lastly, we characterized the Egyptian population with respect to ROH. The distribution of overall length of ROHs larger than 5 Mb is comparable for the Egyptian population and Middle Eastern populations and, to lesser extent, also for other North African and Western Asian populations. In comparison, Europeans and Sub-Saharan Africans have usually shorter ROHs, see Fig. 2b. Abundance of long ROHs is typical for the Greater Middle East21 and reflects the common practice of consanguineous marriages in this region. gyptRef is a reference genome for Egyptian and North African populations to complement the Genome Reference Consortium human genome (GRCh).
The EgyptRef project was initiated by the genetics and systems biology divisions of LIED, Lübeck University, Germany and MERC, Mansoura University, Egypt.
EgyptRef was published on September 18th, 2020 in Nature Communications, see the manuscript here!
I. Wohlers, A. Künstner, M. Munz, M. Olbrich, A. Fähnrich, V. Calonga-Solís, C. Ma, M. Hirose, S. El-Mosallamy, M. Salama, H. Busch & S. Ibrahim. An integrated personal and population-based Egyptian genome reference. Nat Commun 11, 4719 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17964-1[/I]
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic