...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » Ancient Egyptian DNA from 1300BC to 426 AD (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 25 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  ...  23  24  25   
Author Topic: Ancient Egyptian DNA from 1300BC to 426 AD
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hassan et al (2008) tested 445 Sudanese men (back before South Sudan split off).

E1b1a1-M2 was found only in the Hausa sample (who of course come from far to the west); 17% E-M2, n=32.

None of the Nilo-Saharans or Afro-Asiatic speaking groups had any M2, and even the Fulani and Kordofanians lacked it as well.

M2 is not at all common in Northeast Africa.

Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
@Ish Gebor
I should have been more clear, but if you notice, I was addressing the source you posted. It wasn't directed at you, just at people who try to pretend like you can sample Upper Egyptian samples and get fest of South African and Great Lakes aDNA. Maybe you can find that in some immigrant sample, but as far as ethnic Egyptians, that is completely ruled out by the source you posted and all the other data. One can either say they're more African versions of the recently sampled Natufians and ENF groups, who are partly African themselves, or (playing devil's advocate) one can try to argue that they're tropically adapted, dark skinned Eurasian immigrants a la Raxter and Irish. The latter camp are delusional also, but not more delusional than the DNA Tribes camp. At least they can cite data with a faint semblance to what they're saying. Keita's work doesn't even support the DNA Tribes camp. So who credible represents them in academia? No one. They are going out on a limb and selectively posting pictures of ancient statues, not actual physical anthropologists or geneticists who agree with them.

Whoever adheres to a literal interpretation of DNA Tribes, it's game over for them. They are just suspending disbelief at this point.

@Sudaniya

Noted.

Tukuler demonstrated that the Tribes test was pulling on Dwarves and San. DnaConsultants confirmed that they had African derived genes. Where do you think people are delusional? Is it the Horn vs the rest of Africa? What did the STR test miss?
No one is talking about the Horn, except as a useful proxy in a global context. But when you zoom in and look at the region, the Horn lags behind also when compared to ancient Nubians.

The pharaonic STRs have a global distribution unlike SSA-specific STR alleles. DNA consultants' "rare genes" from SSA are confined to single regions. In this regard they differ from the pharaonic alleles. The global distribution of the pharaonic alleles obviously means that they were once abundant in North Africa. Instead, people exploit the fact that North Africa is admixed today. Note also that Mota was said to have Pygmy ancestry. Closer inspection reveals that it isn't even Pygmy ancestry. It's simply 'shared' with Pygmies. How do you know the same thing doesn't apply here? DNA Tribes never accounted for these effects.

In the end, this doesn't really matter, because you'd still have to explain why the skeletal remains point in the other direction. We're supposed to reconcile all the data. A literal interpretation of DNA Tribes requires one to ignore >90% of all the available data.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
^ In the meanwhile I hope for Tukuler to update us on this.

Not sure what I sshould update? But I'll be as helpful as I can.


quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
but aren't those dates before the Greco-Roman period?

These are radiocarbon dates. These have a margin off.
centuries BC[/i]

BP
Based on the radiocarbon level of 1950.
These dates never correspond to the calendar
because the half-life age originally used was
inaccurate and atmospheric radiocarbon
concentration is not a constant.

C14 years BP
Raw uncalibrated radiocarbon date never to be
confused for an actual calendar year. Not much
useful to others not professionally educated in
research science.

calBP
Tree rings are used to calibrate radiocarbon
years for regular calendar year dates (still in
regards to 1950).

calBC & calAD
These are our calendar year expressions of calBP

quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Somebody asked about this a while
but i can't find the post to reply. Don't
laugh too hard at my %age guesses
for pre-Ptolemaic.

http://i65.tinypic.com/2h51jle.jpg

Slide by Schuenemann from report in press.
Can't wait? Go to her AAPA presentation on
April 20.

I meant the presentation.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You do know -_M2 is OLDER in and probably more diverse in EAST Africa compared to WEST Africa. Plus they carry different haplotypes. Implications?
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
Hassan et al (2008) tested 445 Sudanese men (back before South Sudan split off).

E1b1a1-M2 was found only in the Hausa sample (who of course come from far to the west); 17% E-M2, n=32.

None of the Nilo-Saharans or Afro-Asiatic speaking groups had any M2, and even the Fulani and Kordofanians lacked it as well.

M2 is not at all common in Northeast Africa.


Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@Punos

I agree.

@Lioness

There is E1b1a in Sudan:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VXvE_FobHfI/ULP1DPtkcyI/AAAAAAAAAEQ/ub5tMTa92L8/s1600/NRY_Language.PNG

Just not a lot.

EDIT:
The Nilo Saharan Anuak sample that is responsible for most of that E1b1a is from western Ethiopia:

 -

http://ethiohelix.blogspot.nl/2012/11/extensive-doctoral-thesis-on-ethiopian.html

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
@Ish Gebor
I should have been more clear, but if you notice, I was addressing the source you posted. It wasn't directed at you, just at people who try to pretend like you can sample Upper Egyptian samples and get fest of South African and Great Lakes aDNA. Maybe you can find that in some immigrant sample, but as far as ethnic Egyptians, that is completely ruled out by the source you posted and all the other data. One can either say they're more African versions of the recently sampled Natufians and ENF groups, who are partly African themselves, or (playing devil's advocate) one can try to argue that they're tropically adapted, dark skinned Eurasian immigrants a la Raxter and Irish. The latter camp are delusional also, but not more delusional than the DNA Tribes camp. At least they can cite data with a faint semblance to what they're saying. Keita's work doesn't even support the DNA Tribes camp. So who credible represents them in academia? No one. They are going out on a limb and selectively posting pictures of ancient statues, not actual physical anthropologists or geneticists who agree with them.

Whoever adheres to a literal interpretation of DNA Tribes, it's game over for them. They are just suspending disbelief at this point.

@Sudaniya

Noted.

Ok, point taken.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
@Ish Gebor
I should have been more clear, but if you notice, I was addressing the source you posted. It wasn't directed at you, just at people who try to pretend like you can sample Upper Egyptian samples and get fest of South African and Great Lakes aDNA. Maybe you can find that in some immigrant sample, but as far as ethnic Egyptians, that is completely ruled out by the source you posted and all the other data. One can either say they're more African versions of the recently sampled Natufians and ENF groups, who are partly African themselves, or (playing devil's advocate) one can try to argue that they're tropically adapted, dark skinned Eurasian immigrants a la Raxter and Irish. The latter camp are delusional also, but not more delusional than the DNA Tribes camp. At least they can cite data with a faint semblance to what they're saying. Keita's work doesn't even support the DNA Tribes camp. So who credible represents them in academia? No one. They are going out on a limb and selectively posting pictures of ancient statues, not actual physical anthropologists or geneticists who agree with them.

Whoever adheres to a literal interpretation of DNA Tribes, it's game over for them. They are just suspending disbelief at this point.

@Sudaniya

Noted.

 -
 -
Ramses III

 -
Ramses III


 -
Pentaweret


quote:

The same study determined that the mummy of an unknown man buried with him was a good candidate for Ramesses's son Pentaweret although it could not determine his cause of death. Both mummies shared Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a and 50% of their genetic material, which Zink stated "is typical of a father-son relationship."



E1b1a

Nilo-Saharan 29.7% (Wood 2005)

Oromo, Ethiopia 62% (Hassan 2008)

Ethiopia 48.8

South Sudan (Nilotic) 0% (Hassan 2008)

West Sudan (Darfur) 0% (Hassan 2008)
______________________________________

Is this correct that Sudan is 0% E1b1a ??

Here I propose a group that comes closer in phenotype, genotype and geographically. Even culturally.


 -


http://www.travel-pictures-gallery.com/images/mali/timbuktu/timbuktu-0007.jpg

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
You do know -_M2 is OLDER in and probably more diverse in EAST Africa compared to WEST Africa.

I don't know that. As far as I know the opposite is true. Surprise me with some actual evidence.

(And I don't mean evidence that the distant ancestor of M2 split from M329 40 000 years ago in East Africa.)

Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
No one is talking about the Horn, except as a useful proxy in a global context. But when you zoom in and look at the region, the Horn lags behind also when compared to ancient Nubians.

Ancient Nubian what? STRs?

quote:

The pharaonic STRs have a global distribution unlike SSA-specific STR alleles. DNA consultants' "rare genes" from SSA are confined to single regions. In this regard they differ from the pharaonic alleles. The global distribution of the pharaonic alleles obviously means that they were once abundant in North Africa. Instead, people exploit the fact that North Africa is admixed today.

Which goes back to Dwarves and San being a part of the ancient Sahara and modern SSA. It explains some or most of the STR results some or most of the “rare genes” and the low STR scores.

quote:
Note also that Mota was said to have Pygmy ancestry. Closer inspection reveals that it isn't even Pygmy ancestry. It's simply 'shared' with Pygmies. How do you know the same thing doesn't apply here? DNA Tribes never accounted for these effects.

In the end, this doesn't really matter, because you'd still have to explain why the skeletal remains point in the other direction. We're supposed to reconcile all the data. A literal interpretation of DNA Tribes requires one to ignore >90% of all the available data.

You should rephrase that as DNA Tribes and DNA Consultants. What is a literal interpretation? Tribes's test focuses most heavily on what the ancestry mostly is. The fact that they still had some non-African MLI scores is telling. In that sense I see what you might mean by a literal interpretation?
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 5 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
THIS ONE TIMED OUT BEFORE I WAS DONE.
SO HERE IT IS NOW IN FINISHED FORM
.


.
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
^ In the meanwhile I hope for Tukuler to update us on this.

Not sure what I should update? But I'll be as helpful as I can.


quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
but aren't those dates before the Greco-Roman period?

These are radiocarbon dates. These have a margin off.
centuries BC

.

BP
Based on the radiocarbon level of 1950.
These dates never correspond to the calendar
because the half-life age originally used was
inaccurate and atmospheric radiocarbon
concentration is not a constant.

C14 years BP
Raw uncalibrated radiocarbon date never to be
confused for an actual calendar year. Not much
useful to others not professionally educated in
research science.

calBP
Tree rings are used to calibrate radiocarbon
years for regular calendar year dates (still in
regards to 1950).

calBC & calAD
These are our calendar year expressions of calBP.


.
quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Tukuler demonstrated that the Tribes test was pulling on Dwarves and San. DnaConsultants confirmed that they had African derived genes. Where do you think people are delusional? Is it the Horn vs the rest of Africa? What did the STR test miss?

After data courteously supplied via the Swenet
Beyoku camp l revised my findings which were
erroneously in line with DNAtribes conclusions.
See my updated conclusions @
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009452#000008

Topic: Identifications of ancient Egyptian royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty reconsidered


I didn't post all my calcs after updating for
missing reliable Upper Egypt and Sudan
data.

3 MOST LIKELY
Amenhotep III - Somali UpEgypt Sudan
Ramses - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Tut - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Yuya - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Thuya - UpEgypt Sudan Somali

3 LEAST LIKELY
Amenhotep - Mandenka Palestinian San
Ramses - Palestine Druze BedouinIsr
Tut - Palestine Druze BedouinIsr
Yuya - Palestinian Druze BedouinIsr
Thuya - San Druze BedouinIsr

Conclusions drawn from 8 STR miniFiler
results applied against Africa &/t Levant.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have a thread on ESR on the suposed Bantu expansion. Also see the Revisit Bantu expansion thread here on ES by BBH?


quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
You do know -_M2 is OLDER in and probably more diverse in EAST Africa compared to WEST Africa.

I don't know that. As far as I know the opposite is true. Surprise me with some actual evidence.

(And I don't mean evidence that the distant ancestor of M2 split from M329 40 000 years ago in East Africa.)


Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
Oshun, the studies cited are:

Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa

and

Ethiopian Genetic Diversity Reveals Linguistic Stratification and Complex Influences on the Ethiopian Gene Pool

Who were these Ancient west Eurasians?


quote:

Back to Africa

Before considering questions related to ancient demographic events, we needed to separate the probable ancient African components from that which might have originated from more recent
code:
  ( < 60 kya ) 

gene flow back to Africa (light blue in Figure 1C).
—Toomas Kivisild et al.

Reference paper:


quote:
Notably, most of the major branches of the mtDNA phylogeny (L0-L3, M and N (van Oven and Kayser 2009)) were observed in Ethiopia at substantial frequencies. Haplogroups of the L series are mainly restricted to Africa, whereas the clades M and N (which are haplogroups within the L3 clade) are generally found outside sub-Saharan Africa, and are thought to only occur inside Africa due to back migration from Eurasia (Salas et al. 2002; Olivieri et al. 2006; Behar et al. 2008).

Ethiopia however has previously been shown to have substantial frequencies of haplotypes of the M and N clades (Kivisild et al. 2004; Poloni et al. 2009), and the results in this thesis are consistent with previous studies. Of the M clade, only the M1 sub-clade was observed in the five Ethiopian Ascertainment groups, with highest frequency in the Amhara (17%) and lowest in the Anuak (3%). The N clade was not observed in the Anuak, but was observed in all other groups, with the highest frequency in the Amhara (34%). Of the N clades present in the other ethnic groups, interestingly, haplogroup R0* was observed at 11% in the Amhara and 4% in the Oromo, but not observed in the Afar or Maale. The varied distribution of R0* (previously known as preHV (van Oven and Kayser 2009), which is observed at relatively high frequencies across West and Central Asia (Quintana-Murci et al. 2004)), as well as other haplogroups of the N clade, may be evidence of a more recent introgression of N haplogroups into Ethiopia (Kivisild et al. 2004).

—Plaster, C.A. (2011). Variation in Y chromosome, mitochondrial DNA and labels of identity in Ethiopia. PhD thesis, University College London, London


quote:
Population comparisons

Based on FST values, the mitochondrial genetic diversity of Soqotra is statistically different (P \ 0.01) from the comparative populations. An MDS plot of FST values shows that the Soqotra sample is clearly distinct from all sub-Saharan, North African, Middle East, and Indian populations (see Fig. 2). High differentiation of the East African groups such as the Sandawe, Hadza, Turu, Datog, and Burunge is shown on the left side of the graph. However, there is a general similarity of the remaining sub-Saharan African populations, particularly those from the Sahel band and the Chad Basin (with the exception of the Fulani nomads). Subsequently, there is a transitional zone formed by the populations from Ethiopia and the Nile Valley but also by some Yemeni groups, particularly the ones from the eastern parts of the country (Hadramawt). Finally, the cluster on the right part of the graph is composed by the Indian populations on the top, the Near and Middle Eastern groups in the middle and the populations of the Arabian peninsula at the bottom; Yemeni Jews being slightly different. The only outlier within the region of southwestern Asia is the Kalash sample that is situated on the extreme right part of the graph (see also Quintana-Murci et al., 2004). There is a general cline among all populations in the MDS plot from the Soqotri population to a cluster of Middle East and North African populations that splits into sub-Saharan and Indian populations.

Population differentiation of Soqotra from African, Middle East and Indian populations based on NRY-SNP data manifests a similar picture although the comparative populations are different and fewer than in the mitochondrial DNA analysis (see Fig. 3). A comparison of FST values shows that the only population that is not significantly different from Soqotra is that from Yemen (P [ 0.01). Similarly to mtDNA MDS plot, we observe a cline from the Soqotri population to a cluster of Middle East and North African populations that splits into sub- Saharan and Indian populations.


Phylogenetic affiliations


Within the Soqotri samples, we identified haplotypes belonging to three of the main branches of the mtDNA phylogeny (macrohaplogroups L, N, and R); notably haplogroup M is absent (Table 2). There are only two sub-Saharan L haplotypes and they do not carry the 3594HpaI mutation so their classification is L3*; these haplotypes do not contain the specific mutations of L5b (23594HpaI) (Kivisild et al., 2004) and therefore they are possibly L3h2 as they both contain substitutions at 16111, 16184, and 16304 (see Behar et al., 2008). Macro- haplogroup N is represented by three different haplotypes of which only one can be unambiguously classified as N1a (it contains HVS-I motif 16147G-16172-16223-16248-16355). Two other N haplotypes have never been found outside Soqotra (see Table 2).

The most widespread mtDNA types in Soqotra belong to macrohaplogroup R (Table 2). The majority of R haplotypes can be classified as R0a [previously known as (preHV)1]. Three of the R haplotypes have not been previously reported. A network analysis of all Soqotri R0a haplotypes with additional sequences from Africa and Asia (see Fig. 4) shows a time to most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) of 23,339 6 8,232 YBP for R0a. It is shown that the majority of Soqotri R0a haplotypes fall into clade R0a1 (defined by variant 16355) whose TMRCA is 11,418 6 4,198 YBP. Furthermore, within R0a1, the unique Soqotri haplotypes form a new clade that is defined by variant 16172 and that we have named R0a1a1. Abu-Amero et al. (2007) identified a haplotype defined by variant 16355 and named it (preHV)1a1, thus it corresponds to R0a1a using the newer nomenclature and the unique Soqotri haplotypes are derived from this lineage). This Soqotri-specific clade has a very young TMRCA (3,363 6 2,378 YBP) that suggests the R0a1a1 haplotypes evolved on Soqotra and have not dispersed elsewhere. Two other Soqotri R haplotypes are not classified further than R* and are quite common in neighboring populations. Five haplotypes within macrohaplogroup R carry the 4216N1aIII variant that places them in clade JT. Of the JT haplotypes, two are unique to Soqotra; J1b is represented by two individuals and T* is represented by one individual.

The majority of NRY haplotypes in Soqotra belong to haplogroup J (85.7%), with most (45 out of 54) unclassified as J*(xJ1,J2) and a few (the remaining 9 samples) classified as J1 (see Fig. 5). It is interesting to note that NRY haplotypes lacking both M172 and M267, as in our unclassified J*, have not been previously identified on the Arabian Peninsula (Cadenas et al., 2008). Haplogroup E is represented at a frequency of 9.5% and three other haplogroups, F*(xJ,K), K*(xO,P) and R*(xR1b), are present in one individual each. It is worth noting that none of the ancient African haplogroups (A and B) were observed in Soqotra.


—…?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Tribes's test focuses most heavily on what the ancestry mostly is.

Then what is it? And remember, your answer has to be consistent with the global distribution of the pharaonic alleles. They are distributed from Sub Saharan Africa to all over West Eurasia. What SSA ancestry consistently has that type of affinity?

The only "rare gene" from DNAconsultant that matches this affinity is the "rare gene" that peaks in Copts. Lol. See where this is going?

quote:
"Although not detected in the royal mummies whose DNA has been examined so far, this autosomal ancestry marker is also clearly African in origin. Today it enjoys its greatest spread in Egyptians. About 1 in 10 Africans or African Americans have it, but a sharp spike occurs in Copts, today’s successor population in the Land of the Nile, where up to 27% possess it. About 7% of European Americans have it."
https://dnaconsultants.com/egyptian-gene/
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
After data courteously supplied via the Swenet
Beyoku camp l revised my findings which were
erroneously in line with DNAtribes conclusions.
See my updated conclusions @


I didn't post all my calcs after updating for
missing reliable Upper Egypt and Sudan
data.

3 MOST LIKELY
Amenhotep III - Somali UpEgypt Sudan
Ramses - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Tut - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Yuya - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Thuya - UpEgypt Sudan Somali

3 LEAST LIKELY
Amenhotep - Mandenka Palestinian San
Ramses - Palestine Druze BedouinIsr
Tut - Palestine Druze BedouinIsr
Yuya - Palestinian Druze BedouinIsr
Thuya - San Druze BedouinIsr

Conclusions drawn from 8 STR miniFiler
results applied against Africa &/t Levant. [/QB]

What reliable missing data? Wasnt the connection to the Sudan or what made the based on a combination of miniSTR alleles found in Twa, San, the Sudan and Upper Egypt?
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sage. Are you sharing? Link?

See my updated conclusions @

---
After data courteously supplied via the Swenet
Beyoku camp l revised my findings which were
erroneously in line with DNAtribes conclusions.
See my updated conclusions @


I didn't post all my calcs after updating for
missing reliable Upper Egypt and Sudan
data.

3 MOST LIKELY
Amenhotep III - Somali UpEgypt Sudan
Ramses - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Tut - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Yuya - UpEgypt Sudan Mandenka
Thuya - UpEgypt Sudan Somali

3 LEAST LIKELY
Amenhotep - Mandenka Palestinian San
Ramses - Palestine Druze BedouinIsr
Tut - Palestine Druze BedouinIsr
Yuya - Palestinian Druze BedouinIsr
Thuya - San Druze BedouinIsr

Conclusions drawn from 8 STR miniFiler
results applied against Africa &/t Levant.

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The link is in a post above on this page


Here's my Old World data check for Ramses via popSTR
 -
* = highest freq
~ = no statistical difference from *
blank = 000


This global scale matching may show what
I think Swenet is calling EEF component (?)
though Lazaridis is clear its a different strain
than went to Europe and Laz ties it to the 3k
ago (1000 BCE) Yemen to Eritrea/Ethiopia
migration not a Mediterranean and/or
Levant to Lower Egypt movement.

Swenet is tying a lot of information into
a worthy paradigm related in terms
popularized but not owned by Law.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll wait until the paper is released in addition to a similar series of DNA samples from areas where the predynastic Badarian and Naqadan cultures developed. I'm finding it difficult to believe that the current population of Upper Egypt are not the best representatives of the Pharaohs in light of all that we know about the sucession of conquests of Egypt, and where the foreign settlements were concentrated. How can modern Lower Egyptians be more in line with early dynastic Egyptians than modern Upper Egyptians? In what dynasty did dynastic Upper Egyptians supposedly lose their predynastic African ancestry if they are so divergent from the predynastic populations? It cannot have transpired as early as has been insinuated.

Are we to believe that people with Narmer's profile and ancestry were replaced by Asiatics from the Levant as far as Upper Egypt in the early dynastic period? So people like Tiye became a minority?

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Xyyman 42tribes

This is my current finding re Ramses vs
Africa and Levant once hipped to missing
Nile Valley data that should've been also
used in the first place.


 -

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
Oshun, the studies cited are:

Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa

and

Ethiopian Genetic Diversity Reveals Linguistic Stratification and Complex Influences on the Ethiopian Gene Pool

Thank you and interestingly, if we were to accept the dates from these, 1,300 BC is around the time we see an event throughout eastern Africa:

quote:
A similar signal of west Eurasian ancestry is present throughout eastern Africa. In particular, we also find evidence for two admixture events in the history of Kenyan, Tanzanian, and Ethiopian populations, the earlier of which involved populations related to west Eurasians and which we date to ∼2,700–3,300 y ago.
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/7/2632.long


The other link is... idk. It lists the date of mixture to be 1.2k AD IIRC, while places south got an earlier date. Or am I reading that improperly???

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
Oshun, the studies cited are:

Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa

and

Ethiopian Genetic Diversity Reveals Linguistic Stratification and Complex Influences on the Ethiopian Gene Pool

Thank you and interestingly, if we were to accept the dates from these, 1,300 BC is around the time we see an event throughout eastern Africa:

quote:
A similar signal of west Eurasian ancestry is present throughout eastern Africa. In particular, we also find evidence for two admixture events in the history of Kenyan, Tanzanian, and Ethiopian populations, the earlier of which involved populations related to west Eurasians and which we date to ∼2,700–3,300 y ago.
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/7/2632.long


The other link is... idk. It lists the date of mixture to be 1.2k AD IIRC, while places south got an earlier date. Or am I reading that improperly???

This 1300 BC Asiatic migration into Northeast Africa is certainly feasible for ancient Egypt. I'm happy with anything after Imhotep, for obvious reasons. [Big Grin]
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, it's possible Asiatic migration had been present in lower Egypt since predynastic times (and his birthplace was in Memphis right?). It's possible there was some mixture, but I don't presently think it became a major thing for Egypt until sometime later (and he was early dynastic or very very early old kingdom Egyptian).
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
Well, it's possible Asiatic migration had been present in lower Egypt since predynastic times (and his birthplace was in Memphis right?). It's possible there was some mixture, but I don't presently think it became a major thing for Egypt until sometime later (and he was early dynastic or very very early old kingdom Egyptian).

Imhotep's father was also a famed architect from Upper Egypt.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -


151 individuals from Abusir from New Kingdom to Roman period
166 samples analyzed (bone, teeth, soft tisue)
90 Radiocarbon dates cal BC 1388-1311 to cal AD 386-426
10 individuals multiple tissues for comparison

 -


So..of the 150 samples, only 90 handful were able to be dated and 10... Okay naw. We had better NOT have ran through >20 pages of discussion that fast on 10 Ancient Northern Egyptians...

 -

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Xyyman 42tribes

This is my current finding re Ramses vs
Africa and Levant once hipped to missing
Nile Valley data that should've been also
used in the first place.


 -

What is this missing Nile Valley data that should have been used in the first place?
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
166 samples analyzed (bone, teeth, soft tisue)
...
10 individuals multiple tissues for comparison

So..of the 150 samples, only 90 handful were able to be dated and 10...

They only tested bones/teeth *and* soft tissue from *the same mummy* for 10 of them - to compare how well DNA was preserved in different parts. They sampled only one tissue type (they said bones or teeth worked best) for the rest. 166 samples from 151 individuals = 15 *extra* samples from 10 of them.
Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tukuler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
42

Iirc,

* Upper Egypt
* Sudan
* Somali

data from sources Swenet & Beyoku
alluded to, will post 'em if I find 'em.

Meanwhile check p21 When to use black thread.

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Concerned member of public
Banned
Member # 22355

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Concerned member of public   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
166 samples analyzed (bone, teeth, soft tisue)
...
10 individuals multiple tissues for comparison

So..of the 150 samples, only 90 handful were able to be dated and 10...

They only tested bones/teeth *and* soft tissue from *the same mummy* for 10 of them - to compare how well DNA was preserved in different parts. They sampled only one tissue type (they said bones or teeth worked best) for the rest. 166 samples from 151 individuals = 15 *extra* samples from 10 of them.
The afrocentrics will either try to pass off these DNA results as non-natives to Egypt, or try to find faults with the samples or analysis. Having failed that, some of these vermin are now running to twitter to attack and accuse the scientists who conducted this DNA study as being some sort of "racists".

Observe the tweet below -
https://twitter.com/TS_Africology/status/851184803474939905

 -

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Until they present similar results from DNA Samples from Southern Egypt -> the source of Egyptian civilization, I will not be convinced. The South is everything. That primitive marshland (dynastic Northern Egypt) cannot even begin to approach the South in importance. Start at the beginning and I will concede.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cass/:
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
166 samples analyzed (bone, teeth, soft tisue)
...
10 individuals multiple tissues for comparison

So..of the 150 samples, only 90 handful were able to be dated and 10...

They only tested bones/teeth *and* soft tissue from *the same mummy* for 10 of them - to compare how well DNA was preserved in different parts. They sampled only one tissue type (they said bones or teeth worked best) for the rest. 166 samples from 151 individuals = 15 *extra* samples from 10 of them.
The afrocentrics will either try to pass off these DNA results as non-natives to Egypt, or try to find faults with the samples or analysis. Having failed that, some of these vermin are now running to twitter to attack and accuse the scientists who conducted this DNA study as being some sort of "racists".

Observe the tweet below -
https://twitter.com/TS_Africology/status/851184803474939905

 -

You mean the same way your kin denied the unassailable fact that predynastic Egyptians that then created Pharaonic Egypt have a common origin with the "Nubians"? The same way you people characterised as "Afrocentric" any expert that told the truth in order to invalidate data that made you feel uncomfortable.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Start some place other than the Fayum Mummies. Id rather they test the coastline than the Fayum Mummies first. That is super janky. The first major genetic test on ancient Egypt is the Fayum mummies.

I don't trust white people at all and I still expected better.

Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
166 samples analyzed (bone, teeth, soft tisue)
...
10 individuals multiple tissues for comparison

So..of the 150 samples, only 90 handful were able to be dated and 10...

They only tested bones/teeth *and* soft tissue from *the same mummy* for 10 of them - to compare how well DNA was preserved in different parts. They sampled only one tissue type (they said bones or teeth worked best) for the rest. 166 samples from 151 individuals = 15 *extra* samples from 10 of them.
Cool, as long as I didn't waste my time. [Smile]
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Start some place other than the Fayum Mummies. Id rather they test the coastline than the Fayum Mummies first. That is super janky. The first major genetic test on ancient Egypt is the Fayum mummies.

I don't trust white people at all and I still expected better.

The Fayuim mummies are from ethnic Egyptians that mixed with ancient Greeks, so you really can't just dismiss them that easily. Have you seen what happens when Northeast Africans mix with non-Africans? Yonis created a thread with pictures showing the results, and they look no different to the Fayuim portraits.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:
Until they present similar results from DNA Samples from Southern Egypt -> the source of Egyptian civilization, I will not be convinced. The South is everything. That primitive marshland (dynastic Northern Egypt) cannot even begin to approach the South in importance. Start at the beginning and I will concede.

I would need samples dating 2k BC or so, and in southern Egypt. It seems East Africa in general was experiencing inflow at about 1.3k B.C and it's possible southern Egypt could've also been affected. Though I am curious to wonder who they imagine gave Faiyum Egyptians that extra 20% ancestry of SSA ancestry. It didn't just come out of thin air.

quote:
Originally posted by sudaniya:
quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Start some place other than the Fayum Mummies. Id rather they test the coastline than the Fayum Mummies first. That is super janky. The first major genetic test on ancient Egypt is the Fayum mummies.

I don't trust white people at all and I still expected better.

The Fayuim mummies are from ethnic Egyptians that mixed with ancient Greeks, so you really can't just dismiss them that easily. Have you seen what happens when Northeast Africans mix with non-Africans? Yonis created a thread with pictures showing the results, and they look no different to the Fayuim portraits.
Canaan would've been a more likely source of inflow during predynastic times and eventually occupied Faiyum as an independent entity. Then there were the Hyksos.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Tribes's test focuses most heavily on what the ancestry mostly is.

Then what is it? And remember, your answer has to be consistent with the global distribution of the pharaonic alleles. They are distributed from Sub Saharan Africa to all over West Eurasia. What SSA ancestry consistently has that type of affinity?

The only "rare gene" from DNAconsultant that matches this affinity is the "rare gene" that peaks in Copts. Lol. See where this is going?

quote:
"Although not detected in the royal mummies whose DNA has been examined so far, this autosomal ancestry marker is also clearly African in origin. Today it enjoys its greatest spread in Egyptians. About 1 in 10 Africans or African Americans have it, but a sharp spike occurs in Copts, today’s successor population in the Land of the Nile, where up to 27% possess it. About 7% of European Americans have it."
https://dnaconsultants.com/egyptian-gene/

It says its not detected in the royal mummies. If you look at the genes that are it is consistent with the STR test.

One of the autosomal ancestry markers prominent in the Royal Egyptian families of the New Kingdom, this not-so-rare gene is Central African in origin and was passed to Thuya from her forebears, Queens of Upper and Lower Egypt and High Priestesses of Hathor, the Mother Goddess. Thuya passed it to her grandson Akhenaten and great-grandson Tutankhamun, among others, as documented in a forensic study of the Amarna mummies by Zahi Hawass, head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo, in 2010. Today, its highest incidence is in Somalians at nearly 50%. It is found in 40% of Muslim Egyptians. On average, 1 in 3 Africans or African Americans carries it. It crops up in high concentrations in many places around the world such as the Basque region (41%) and in Melungeons (31%, similar to Middle Easterners), but is present at only low levels in East and South Asia, as well as Native America. Its lowest frequency is in the Chukchi of Siberia (3%)


1: Central African in origin. Found in half of Somalis, almost half of modern Egyptians, a third of African Americans Basque and Melungeons


Tutankhamun (also spelled Tutenkhamen) is the most famous of all pharaohs. He was the son and successor of Akhenaten, grandson of Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye and great-grandson of the royal matriarch Queen Thuya. Archeologist Howard Carter’s opening of his intact tomb in the Valley of the Kings in 1922 ranks among the most splendid discoveries of history. In 2010, genetic fingerprinting of his mummy determined that he died at the early age of 19 as the result of violence or an accident to which the incestuous relationship of his parents and several genetic defects contributed. Tutankhamun actually carries a “double dose” of the allele named for him. Like most of the other genes in the family, it is Central African in ancient origin, but unlike the other markers it has a sparse distribution outside Africa with a worldwide average frequency of 4%. Still, Africans and African-influenced populations (1 in about 10) are about twice or three times as likely to have it as non-Africans.
2: Central African in origin. In 10% of Africans.


Named for the pharaoh who attempted to convert Egypt to monotheism, this autosomal ancestry marker like most of the Amarna family group’s DNA is clearly African in origin. Akhenaten received it from his mother, Queen Tiye. Today, it is the gene type carried by a majority (52%) of the Copts living in the Pre-dynastic site of Adaima near Thebes or Luxor and the Valley of the Kings on the Nile River in Upper (southern) Egypt. The ancient marker makes a good showing in the Middle East and in Jews as well as parts of southern Europe close to Africa, such as southern Italy and Spain, but it is reduced to low levels in Asia and the Americas (except where brought there by Africans or people carrying some African ancestry). About 2 in 5 Africans or African Americans has it. Among Melungeons, the figure is 1 in 3.

3: African in origin. 50% of Copts in Adaima, common in west Asia, 2 in 5 African Americans.

STR test do not cover admixture. The Tribes score is consistent with those relatively high European MLI scores and the populations that share European genes. The African MLI scores are consistent with Consultant's analysis.

Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@Fourty2Tribes

Can you give an example of a Sub-Saharan African population whose STR alleles are generally found in Sub Saharan Africa, on both sides of the Red Sea, on all sides of the Mediterranean, with many also showing peaks in modern Egypt (e.g. AKhenaten's and Thuya's "rare genes")?

Modern Egyptians still have "rare genes" with the exact same distribution pattern as some of the "pharaonic" alleles:

 -

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
166 samples analyzed (bone, teeth, soft tisue)
...
10 individuals multiple tissues for comparison

So..of the 150 samples, only 90 handful were able to be dated and 10...

They only tested bones/teeth *and* soft tissue from *the same mummy* for 10 of them - to compare how well DNA was preserved in different parts. They sampled only one tissue type (they said bones or teeth worked best) for the rest. 166 samples from 151 individuals = 15 *extra* samples from 10 of them.
It's because these are least likely to be contaminated. But not too long ago I heard or read that this isn't 100% accurate as well because of the rotting process (bacteria contamination).
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cass/:
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
166 samples analyzed (bone, teeth, soft tisue)
...
10 individuals multiple tissues for comparison

So..of the 150 samples, only 90 handful were able to be dated and 10...

They only tested bones/teeth *and* soft tissue from *the same mummy* for 10 of them - to compare how well DNA was preserved in different parts. They sampled only one tissue type (they said bones or teeth worked best) for the rest. 166 samples from 151 individuals = 15 *extra* samples from 10 of them.
The afrocentrics will either try to pass off these DNA results as non-natives to Egypt, or try to find faults with the samples or analysis. Having failed that, some of these vermin are now running to twitter to attack and accuse the scientists who conducted this DNA study as being some sort of "racists".

Observe the tweet below -
https://twitter.com/TS_Africology/status/851184803474939905


Yawn.

Another irrelevant post by eurocentricloontart.


 -


Likely people wonder how such relatively small sample set is used for proximity of entire ancient Egypt.

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sudanese
Member
Member # 15779

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for sudanese     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Proxy
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ase
Member
Member # 19740

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ase     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
@Fourty2Tribes

Can you give an example of a Sub-Saharan African population whose STR alleles are generally found in Sub Saharan Africa, on both sides of the Red Sea, on all sides of the Mediterranean, with many also showing peaks in modern Egypt (e.g. AKhenaten's and Thuya's "rare genes")?

Modern Egyptians still have "rare genes" with the exact same distribution pattern as some of the "pharaonic" alleles:

 -

Do you know what genes they are talking about? Obviously these aren't rare and they are quite old. 10%, 40% and 30% of African Americans... Thats close to a million people. That's about 4% of just African Americans. The DNAtribes test is weak and scattered because its old and strongest relationship is old. Still as an STR test it does what STR test do it tells you what the person generally is. Ancient Egyptians are generally Nile folk.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Forty2Tribes
Member
Member # 21799

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Forty2Tribes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I took a Dnatribes STR test recently. I have a white great grandfather on one side and my grandmother was high yellow on the other. Her brother was red skinned. My Net-Geo test said I was 35% European 59% West and Central African, 3% East African and the rest Neanderthal and other.

My top MLI score was New Providence Bahamas at over 2 million. My highest ethnic group was Ovambo in Namibia at 700K. My highest score in Europe was Portugal at 24. And get this. Yoruba was 0. I have seen African Americans score in the millions with Yoruba and I was 0. San was 0.01 and Yoruba was ass zilch. I had a problem with Yoruba's use as the defacto Sub-Saharan before...

Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A nice piece on the Ovambo

http://kwekudee-tripdownmemorylane.blogspot.com/2014/03/ovambo-owambo-people-agricultural-and.html

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@Fourty2Tribes

This is the 2nd time you dodged the challenge to give an example of the aforementioned hypothetical SSA population. Why, if such a SSA population supposedly exists?

What you did post yesterday proves my point and bears little resemblance to DNA Tribes analyses of the pharaonic alleles (if one takes the analyses literally):

Today, ["Thuya's gene"] highest incidence is in Somalians at nearly 50%. It is found in 40% of Muslim Egyptians.

Today, ["Akhenaten's gene"] is the gene type carried by a majority (52%) of the Copts living in the Pre-dynastic site of Adaima near Thebes or Luxor and the Valley of the Kings on the Nile River in Upper (southern) Egypt.

DNA Tribes analysis is popular in some circles because it's an unfair analysis where North African samples with good MLI scores are obscured and pooled with North African (and Levantine) samples with lower MLI scores. Also, all of these North African samples are admixed and so of course they're going to perform poorly as a pooled region compared to other African regions. The lower MLI scores of North Africa's pooled regions could be mostly be a function of dramatic population change in North Africa, not a lack of relatedness.

And DNA Tribes never intended for their analysis to be taken literally. They never said that these alleles are transplants from their Great Lakes and South Africa regions. So, again, who is supporting this narrative other than those here who want it to be true? Who are your views represented by in the academic world in terms of reputable names? We're not supposed to be putting our own stamp of approval on things.

quote:
Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
My top MLI score was New Providence Bahamas at over 2 million. My highest ethnic group was Ovambo in Namibia at 700K. My highest score in Europe was Portugal at 24. And get this. Yoruba was 0. I have seen African Americans score in the millions with Yoruba and I was 0. San was 0.01 and Yoruba was ass zilch. I had a problem with Yoruba's use as the defacto Sub-Saharan before...

I know this. I have discussed this in the 'black' thread you also participated in. Beyoku has also made this point countless times. So why take such blatantly crude (meaning, that it may need a lot of analysis and explanation before it can make sense) results at face value in the case of the pharaonic alleles?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:
While commonly believed to represent Greek settlers in Egypt, the Faiyum portraits instead reflect the complex synthesis of the predominant Egyptian culture and that of the elite Greek minority in the city. According to Walker, the early Ptolemaic Greek colonists married local women and adopted Egyptian religious beliefs, and by Roman times, their descendants were viewed as Egyptians by the Roman rulers, despite their own self-perception of being Greek. The dental morphology of the Roman-period Faiyum mummies was also compared with that of earlier The dental morphology of the Roman-period Faiyum mummies was also compared with that of earlier Egyptian populations, and was found to be "much more closely akin" to that of ancient Egyptians than to Greeks or other European populations.

Game over.

quote:
Not surprisingly, samples noted to exhibit
relatively high or low frequencies are most divergent.
Gebel Ramlah and the Greek Egyptians have identical
mean MMD values of 0.126.

Game over. (Substantial SSA component in Gebel Ramlah population doesn't help it score better [on average] than the 'Greek immigrant' sample. As with the recently sampled Natufian sample, samples with more SSA ancestry than a certain amount don't score better [e.g. Bedouin B with more SSA ancestry isn't closer to these Natufians than Bedouin A]).

quote:
Lastly, the Roman-period specimens are much more
closely akin to the seven dynastic samples. Kharga and
especially Hawara are most similar, based on their trait
concordance (Table 2)
, low and insignificant MMDs (Table
4), and positions within or near the cluster of 11 or so sam-
ples (Fig. 2).

Game over.

In short, AE changed over time to an EEF-like population. This is not specific to the Abusir sample, but part of a wider gradual phenomenon all over dynastic Egypt. Trying to blame this squarely on immigrants fails also, because predynastic Egyptians were already fundamentally akin to such EEF-like populations, albeit much more shifted towards Africans. This was already known since 2005 and even before that, but people just want to play dumb and have selective memory:

quote:
The Niger-Congo speakers (Congo, Dahomey, and Haya) cluster closely with each other and a bit less closely with the Nubian sample (both the recent and the Bronze Age Nubians) and more remotely with the Naqada Bronze Age sample of Egypt, the modern Somalis, and the Arabic-speaking Fellaheen (farmers) of Israel. When those samples are separated and run in a single analysis as in Fig. 1, there clearly is a tie between them that is diluted the farther one gets from Sub-Saharan Africa.
—Brace et al 2005

This Abusir population has lost (most of) this predynastic Egyptian African ancestry and wasn't any more African than EEF-like samples are. Whatever you want to argue the main affinity of this lost African ancestry was, it wasn't anything like DNA Tribes Great Lakes or South African region.

Game over.

Why are we trying to shoehorn EEF into Ancient African population history? EEF is not really even a distinct population. It is a composite population made up of various DNA lineages, THEORIZED by some anthropologists.

I would say that Early Farmers entering the Levant included populations from between the Nile Valley and the Horn and there were similarities between some of these mixed Levantine populations and populations in the Nile Valley region because of the shared ancestry. No EEF needed.

The key point being that the proto-farming populations came from Africa and some of these proto-farming populations also existed in the region of the Nile Valley. Wadi Kubbaniya is a good example of the early survival strategies that would identify the proto-farmers in Africa. Populations like these migrated into the Levant carrying this toolkit and helped kick start the neolithic. Meanwhile other similar populations stayed in Africa and moved into the Nile Valley as well and eventually adopted their subsistence strategy to include crops introduced by the Levantine Neolithic farming communities. This is where the influence of the early Fayum communities come into play.

Again, EEF simply masks all this.

https://books.google.com/books?id=-BYUDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA285&lpg=PA285&dq=wadi+kubbaniya+sickle&source=bl&ots=jBZoYaBT8Z&sig=yN9m_5MYfATwnZ5vej5sRPy6fRA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjOlpfQlKHT AhVEeSYKHYp2A5oQ6AEISDAJ#v=onepage&q=wadi%20kubbaniya%20sickle&f=false

Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What is this purple component in the African samples, Doug?

 -

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ish Geber
Member
Member # 18264

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ish Geber     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
Oshun, the studies cited are:

Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa

and

Ethiopian Genetic Diversity Reveals Linguistic Stratification and Complex Influences on the Ethiopian Gene Pool

Thank you and interestingly, if we were to accept the dates from these, 1,300 BC is around the time we see an event throughout eastern Africa:

quote:
A similar signal of west Eurasian ancestry is present throughout eastern Africa. In particular, we also find evidence for two admixture events in the history of Kenyan, Tanzanian, and Ethiopian populations, the earlier of which involved populations related to west Eurasians and which we date to ∼2,700–3,300 y ago.
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/7/2632.long


The other link is... idk. It lists the date of mixture to be 1.2k AD IIRC, while places south got an earlier date. Or am I reading that improperly???

In addition:


quote:
Population comparisons

Based on FST values, the mitochondrial genetic diversity of Soqotra is statistically different (P \ 0.01) from the comparative populations. An MDS plot of FST values shows that the Soqotra sample is clearly distinct from all sub-Saharan, North African, Middle East, and Indian populations (see Fig. 2). High differentiation of the East African groups such as the Sandawe, Hadza, Turu, Datog, and Burunge is shown on the left side of the graph. However, there is a general similarity of the remaining sub-Saharan African populations, particularly those from the Sahel band and the Chad Basin (with the exception of the Fulani nomads). Subsequently, there is a transitional zone formed by the populations from Ethiopia and the Nile Valley but also by some Yemeni groups, particularly the ones from the eastern parts of the country (Hadramawt).

—Viktor C ˇ erny´

Out of Arabia—The Settlement of Island Soqotra asRevealed by Mitochondrial and Y ChromosomeGenetic Diversity

Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
capra
Member
Member # 22737

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for capra     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
EEF is not really even a distinct population. It is a composite population made up of various DNA lineages, THEORIZED by some anthropologists.

EEF is not theoretical; Early Neolithic European farmers are all genetically similar and come from the same roots in Turkey, having spread into the Balkans and up the Danube and along the Mediterranean coast. Some of the latter pioneers even settled in Morocco. Of course it is formed from a mixture of populations; so is everyone on the planet.

quote:
Wadi Kubbaniya is a good example of the early survival strategies that would identify the proto-farmers in Africa. Populations like these migrated into the Levant carrying this toolkit and helped kick start the neolithic.
What were Wadi Kubbaniya people, or other Northeast Africans, doing that makes them 'proto-farmers', that other Upper Palaeolithic populations weren't doing?

Obviously movement from Egypt to Levant or vice versa is plausible on geographical grounds, but what's the archaeological evidence? Not something Bar-Yosef said 30 years ago, is there anything up to date?

Posts: 660 | From: Canada | Registered: Mar 2017  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BrandonP
Member
Member # 3735

Icon 1 posted      Profile for BrandonP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Swenet:
Also, all of these North African samples are admixed and so of course they're going to perform poorly as a pooled region compared to other African regions.

This is my interpretation too. As an aside, we know Egyptian royals across dynasties tended to be inbred. So their ancestry might have been less "mixed" than those of other ancient Egyptians. Has anyone ever looked into how phenotypically representative Egyptian royals would have been of the population they ruled?
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
beyoku
Member
Member # 14524

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for beyoku     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by capra:
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
EEF is not really even a distinct population. It is a composite population made up of various DNA lineages, THEORIZED by some anthropologists.

EEF is not theoretical; Early Neolithic European farmers are all genetically similar and come from the same roots in Turkey, having spread into the Balkans and up the Danube and along the Mediterranean coast.

This is a common misconception I have encounter with so called African centered folks. For whatever reason they seem to think These farmers are an abstract and are NOT based on real samples of actual Farmers they dug up in Europe. I dont study Europe, at all. Even then, I dont know how or why they miss this.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And let's be real, too. The real reason these people are salty is because EEF samples don't have that much SSA ancestry. EEF samples mentioned by Angel used to be posted repeatedly because they were presumed to have SSA ancestry.

When Angel described EEF samples as having Nubian/ancestral Badarian ancestry, they were useful. Now that EEF samples turn out to have little SSA ancestry, people try to disown them and say they're "hypothetical" and "theoretical". What does that even mean?

It's only after Lazaridis et al's recent papers that Doug et al became outraged at the thought of likening Angel's EEF samples to ancient Egyptians. They try to silently change the 'rules' based on convenience and then get mad when you don't comply with their partisan politics.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 25 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  ...  23  24  25   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3