posted
Title : Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA: case studies from ancient Egypt and medieval Europe
author : A. Morez
quote:Genome-wide data were successfully recovered from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom.Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
The irony, ancient upper egyptians more arabian-like than modern egyptians. Seems like God really likes to troll afrocentrists XD
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes natufians had african paternal HGs thanks to their Iberomaurusian ancestors as pointed out by Lazaridis himself :
quote:If our model is correct, Epipaleolithic Natufians trace part of their ancestry to North Africa, consistent with morphological and archaeological studies that indicate a spread of morphological features22 and artifacts from North Africa into the Near East. Such a scenario would also explain the presence of Y-chromosome haplogroup E in the Natufians and Levantine farmers6, a common link between the Levant and Africa.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: [QB] Yes natufians had african paternal HGs thanks to their Iberomaurusian ancestors as pointed out by Lazaridis himself :
quote:If our model is correct, Epipaleolithic Natufians trace part of their ancestry to North Africa, consistent with morphological and archaeological studies that indicate a spread of morphological features22 and artifacts from North Africa into the Near East. Such a scenario would also explain the presence of Y-chromosome haplogroup E in the Natufians and Levantine farmers6, a common link between the Levant and Africa.
posted
Why ban him, when we can continue to beat his dead corpse?! I somewhat welcome him back though I can't help but feel guilty since I was the one who mentioned him recently. It's like invoking a something like Beetlejuice.
But as usual the white Mazigh moron loves to thrive in strawman arguments. Again, nobody said anything about Natufians or ancient Egyptians having modern "Sub-Saharan" ancestry. That was never anybody's argument here so why bother bringing it up??
How about you prove to us that these ancient North Africans were non-black Eurasians? Oh that's right you can't because that's simply wasn't the case! LOL
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2720 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I don't think this website itself is a psy-op but I do believe there are some psychopaths trolls who like to post here and that their way of thinking maybe part of a psy-op.
quote:I originally stated: Indigenous African populations possess the greatest genetic diversity yet you have on one side Afronuts who then try to homogenize Africans and making it seem as if North Africans like Nubians and Egyptian are no different from Nigerians and Congolese while on the other side you have Euronuts who claim that North Africans aren't black at all but "caucasians" while true blacks only come from Sub-Sahara.
The above is a perfect example of something called a false dialectic which is a weapon elites and others use to create division where one didn't exist OR exacerbate a division that already exists.
Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa Bey: This website is a psyop
I agree.
Your talents are wasted here. Get in touch with a YouTuber like The Kings Monologue or MrImhotep who they have needlessly berated and undermined, but who are getting millions of views. You will be able to reach millions of people that way. Outside of this bizarre bubble, the tide is turning and thanks to these 'afrocentrics' we are beginning to turn the tide and the general public is becoming accepting of Black Egypt. Thats a first.
Let these weirdos keep debating semantics using tools, studies and databases designed by eurocentrics faulty from the foundation and believe they are winning the argument. Its ludicrous. Whilst these morons are busy trying to explain why these eurasian mummies are actually black not white, the kings monologue just went ahead and proved they weren't even Egyptians so it was a misnomer to begin with.... beyokus response: 'he doesn't even know where abusir is...'
These guys aren't black and they are eurocentrics keeping educated afrocentrics distracted... dont waste your time... this website has no impact. I mean for gods sake it's 2023 and they don't even have their own server... yikes. Move on.
Posts: 365 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Title : Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA: case studies from ancient Egypt and medieval Europe
author : A. Morez
quote: Genome-wide data were successfully recovered from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
The irony, ancient upper egyptians more arabian-like than modern egyptians. Seems like God really likes to troll afrocentrists XD
I'm a little bemused how OK Egyptians are "more Arabian-like than modern Egyptians" when the Neurat sample specifically lacks the component associated with admixture between Egyptians and West Asians per the study you yourself posted?
I'll be making sure your next ban is permanent.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Title : Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA: case studies from ancient Egypt and medieval Europe
author : A. Morez
quote: Genome-wide data were successfully recovered from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
The irony, ancient upper egyptians more arabian-like than modern egyptians. Seems like God really likes to troll afrocentrists XD
I'm a little bemused how OK Egyptians are "more Arabian-like than modern Egyptians" when the Neurat sample specifically lacks the component associated with admixture between Egyptians and West Asians per the study you yourself posted?
I'll be making sure your next ban is permanent.
You think all west asians are genetically similar to each other ? Arabs from the arabian peninsula have high amount of natufian ancestry (and low CHG) much more than levantines or egyptians hence why I said this upper egyptian might be even more closer to arabs than modern egyptians.
Btw Why are you scared to debate with me ? I challenge afrocentrists breaking their wet dreams and fantasies. You spit on my people and you expect us to agree with you ?
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
How about you prove to us that these ancient North Africans were non-black Eurasians? Oh that's right you can't because that's simply wasn't the case! LOL [/QB]
"non-black eurasians" aren't you the same who admitted that light skin alleles appeared during the neolithic in NA ? Should I remind you that these farmers were already in North Africa by the mid VIth millenium BC ? Moreover why would people living that far from the equator be as dark as equatorial africans ?
Morphologically Iberomaurusians were not similar to sub-saharan africans and genetically all the results we have so far are all predominantly eurasian.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Title : Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA: case studies from ancient Egypt and medieval Europe
author : A. Morez
quote: Genome-wide data were successfully recovered from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
The irony, ancient upper egyptians more arabian-like than modern egyptians. Seems like God really likes to troll afrocentrists XD
I'm a little bemused how OK Egyptians are "more Arabian-like than modern Egyptians" when the Neurat sample specifically lacks the component associated with admixture between Egyptians and West Asians per the study you yourself posted?
I'll be making sure your next ban is permanent.
You think all west asians are genetically similar to each other ? Arabs from the arabian peninsula have high amount of natufian ancestry (and low CHG) much more than levantines or egyptians hence why I said this upper egyptian might be even more closer to arabs than modern egyptians.
Btw Why are you scared to debate with me ? I challenge afrocentrists breaking their wet dreams and fantasies. You spit on my people and you expect us to agree with you ?
quote:why I said this upper egyptian might be even more closer to arabs than modern egyptians.
That is not what you said at all.
quote:The irony, ancient upper egyptians more arabian-like than modern egyptians. Seems like God really likes to troll afrocentrists XD
That is what you actually said. Something that is neither said in the abstract or even implied. The direct opposite actually.
I don't spit on your people, I spit on you. There is a difference. I debate with people who disagree in good faith, not someone like you that moves the goalposts and retcons every single counter argument when challenged. This conversation is over.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: That is not what you said at all.
quote:The irony, ancient upper egyptians more arabian-like than modern egyptians. Seems like God really likes to troll afrocentrists XD
That is what you actually said. Something that is neither said in the abstract or even implied. The direct opposite actually.
I don't spit on your people, I spit on you. There is a difference. I debate with people who disagree in good faith, not someone like you that moves the goalposts and retcons every single counter argument when challenged. This conversation is over.
Are you trolling ? This is what the paper says : "show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians" and "the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer"
Now let's compare modern egyptians, levantines and arabs :
As you can see natufian ancestry peaks among arabs and these same arabs have barely any CHG ancestry same as the Nuerat sample. And yes you're scared of me that's why you close almost every thread where you interacted with me and constantly ban me while I've not broken any rules. Many members here have already told you to let me express myself since I contribute and bring a fresh point of view.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: "non-black eurasians" aren't you the same who admitted that light skin alleles appeared during the neolithic in NA ? Should I remind you that these farmers were already in North Africa by the mid VIth millenium BC? Moreover why would people living that far from the equator be as dark as equatorial africans?
No! Apparently I'm the one who needs to remind YOU since you forgot that light skin appeared in Northwest Africa during the Late Neolithic coinciding with the European Cardial Ware Culture.
This was explained to you before and was discussed more recently here.
So no, light skin was NOT indigenous to North Africa but was introduced there-- to the Maghreb first.
quote:Morphologically Iberomaurusians were not similar to Sub-saharan africans and genetically all the results we have so far are all predominantly Eurasian.
Again, nobody is playing your "Sub-Saharan" b.s. game. Indigenous Africans are not bound by any Sahara desert especially back during a time when the Sahara didn't even exist! Even your "Eurasian" definition is tenuous as the ancestors of Eurasians came from Africa.
reconstruction of Ibero-Maurusians
We know you suffer from negrophobia, but I'm not a psychiatrist so I suggest you seek one out. LOL
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: No! Apparently I'm the one who needs to remind YOU since you forgot that light skin appeared in Northwest Africa during the Late Neolithic coinciding with the European Cardial Ware Culture.
Seems like you're not aware that it was actually during the Early/Middle Neolithic that these first european farmers settled in the Maghreb :
quote: First identified through pollen analysis, cereal cultivation was later confirmed by paleo-seeds preserved in a charred form in the Cardial layers, one of which directly provided the 14C date of 6350 ± 85 B.P., which corresponds to 5477 to 5078 B.C. [Ly-971 OXA]. Therefore, it can be affirmed that plant domestication was introduced and established with certainty by the end of the 6th millennium B.C."
quote:The 5400 cal BC date of the radiocarbon analyses of cereals, sheep and human remains from the Early Neolithic phase of KTG (Table 2) reinforces the role of the Tingitana Peninsula as the bridgehead of the neolithisation of the Western Maghreb from the opposite side of the Strait of Gibraltar. However, the affinities with the Iberian Peninsula do not seem to point to Andalusian Neolithic of the coast of Malaga and Cadiz as the source. The origin appears to be elsewhere in the Cardial sites of the eastern façade on the Iberian Peninsula. Thus, in the specific case of the cardial decorations of the Tingitana Peninsula, the greatest stylistic parallels are with the Early Cardial facies in Catalonia in the Penedes region, and with the caves of Les Cendres, Cova Fosca de Vall d'Ebo and Cova de l'Or in Valencia where radiocarbon datings were carried out on short-lived domestic species. These ceramic assemblages from Catalonia are dated around 5550/5400 cal BC based on chronology of Ovis aries bones from Guixeres de Vilobí (Oms Arias et al., 2014), while the Valencian pottery corresponds to dates of about 5450/5400 cal BC (Bernabeu Auban and Molina Balaguer, 2011; García Borja et al.,2012, 2011)."
You also haven't answered me : Why would they have the same pigmentation as equatorial africans ?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Again, nobody is playing your "Sub-Saharan" b.s. game. Indigenous Africans are not bound by any Sahara desert especially back during a time when the Sahara didn't even exist! Also even your "Eurasian" definition is tenuous as the ancestors of Eurasians came from Africa.
We know you suffer from negrophobia, but I'm not a psychiatrist so I suggest you seek one out. LOL [/QB]
Don't care about your assumptions or feelings, it is now a consensus that Iberomaurusians were very different from Sub-saharan africans whether genetically or morphologically here some examples :
quote: In contrast, the comparison between Northern and sub-Saharan Africans of the latest Pleistocene/early Holocene (t+,j) yielded a number (28.6% ) of significant differences (a = 1% ).
Brauer et al., late archaic and modern homo sapiens from europe, africa and southwest asia : craniometric comparisons and phylogenetic implications, 1989
quote: Along these lines, craniofacial (Franciscus, 1995, personal communication, 1995), dental (Irish, 1999), and post-cranial (Holliday, 1995) comparative analyses of the Taforalt and Afalou-BouRhummel samples with Jebel Sahaba Nubians have cast doubts on a close biological affinity; all show that the former two samples exbibit many features reminiscent of later North Africans, whereas Late Pleistocene Nubians are more like recent subSaharan Africans. These findings are largely supported by Groves & Thorne’s (1999) recent cranial analyses
J.D. Irish, The iberomaurusian enigma : north african progenitor or dead end ?, 2000
quote:First, the idea that Iberomaurusians are unrelated to subsequent North Africans is not supported. With Taforalt, at least, these is no conspicuous divergence to suggest they were a genetic dead-end. Second, Iberomaurusians are wholly unlike Late Pleistocene Nubians, despite purported similarities in cultural manifestations and cranial robusticity. Indeed, Taforalt and Jebel Sahaba appear to be at opposite ends of a dental morphological spectrum
J.D. Irish, The iberomaurusian enigma : north african progenitor or dead end ?, 2000
quote: As could be expected, the biologically non-sub-Saharan nature of the Iberomaurusian and Capsian and the biologically sub-Saharan nature of the Late Pleistocene Nubian material have been repeatedly pointed out in this context. Irish (2000: 404) summed it up perfectly when he wrote: “Thus, evidence for a common Mechta-Afalou population in both the Maghreb and Nubia is not supported. … Moreover, even a casual inspection of crania in the three samples reveals that many characteristic Nubian traits, including, for example, alveolar prognathism, are uncommon or absent in Iberomaurusians
The prehistoric inhabitants of the wadi howar and anthropological study of human skeletal remains from the sudanese part of the eastern sahara, 2011, pp. 238-239
quote: Not only the results of the discriminant function analyses but also the results of various pertinent anthropological studies suggested that both the Early and Middle Holocene population of the Malian Sahara and the Late Pleistocene Jebel Sahaba/Tushka population belonged to the proposed Saharo-Nilotic population complex, just like the prehistoric inhabitants of the Wadi Howar (see I.D.1.a.2.c., I.D.1.a.3.c., IV.D. and V.B.3.a.). Moreover, it was concluded that the prehistoric biologically North African populations which lived north of the Sahara and these clearly biologically sub-Saharan groups could not have shared any direct ancestors (see I.D.1.a.2.c., I.D.1.a.3.c., IV.D. and V.B.3.a.).
The prehistoric inhabitants of the wadi howar and anthropological study of human skeletal remains from the sudanese part of the eastern sahara, 2011, pp. 318
quote:Assessing the morphology of the inferior nasal margin by using a modified version of De Villiers’ (1968) scoring system, Franciscus (2003) reported that of the 21 Jebel Sahaba individuals whose nasal margins can be assessed, 13 (~62%) exhibit stage 7, whereas five (~24%) show a mixture of stages 3 and 7, and three other individuals (~14%) evince stage 3 alone. This is significant because stage 7 is the most common morphological configuration (reaching a frequency of 80%) among a large (n = 120) sample of modern Bantu-speaking sub-Saharan Africans, but is completely absent in a sample of 140 Mediterranean and North African recent human crania, according to Franciscus (1995). In contrast, among the Iberomaurusian Late Pleistocene North Africans, only 1 of 19 (~5%) individuals from AfalouBou-Rhummel and only 2 of 19 (~11%) of the individuals at Taforalt exhibit stage 7 (Franciscus, 2003) .
T.W. Holliday, Population affinities of the Jebel Sahaba Skeletal sample : Limb Proportion Evidence, 2013
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
hahahah thanks lioness XD He only selects what support his afrocentrist narrative. You can be sure if all those reconstructions were west african-looking he wouldn't have question their methodology nor anything else.
No matter what he says, the datas are clear about paleolithic north africans looking like their contemporary european neighbours and not paleo or modern sub-saharan africans.
Djehuti will learn to respect africans, how they identify and their diversity. Africa is a continent not all populations on it have the same history or phenotype and he will accept this.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
This two reconstructions seem to be made after skeletons found at Gobero in Niger. There were two subsequent cultures there, first the Kiffians, about 8000 to 6000 BC and after that the Tenereans, about 5500 BC to 2500 BC (there are some different dates I have seen).
The lady is (according to the site "Niger heritage") modelled after a 6000 years old skeleton nicknamed "Beautiful lady".
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Sorry but I don't trust facial reconstructions
.
.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: reconstruction of Ibero-Maurusians
I can't help but notice that Lioness in multiple threads attempts to catch me contradicting myself but she fails every time! I don't trust reconstructions, but the only reason why I posted the above example was to show Anatalas that even most experts acknowledge the Ibero-Marusians to be melanoderm (since he has a problem with the label 'black'). No doubt they do this because aDNA from the said people show they had very dark skin.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: hahahah thanks lioness XD He only selects what support his afrocentrist narrative. You can be sure if all those reconstructions were west african-looking he wouldn't have question their methodology nor anything else.
Lioness has a penchant for dishonesty so of course you would get support from the likes of her. As for my narrative being "Afrocentric" well we are dealing with AFRICAN remains you, moron! And again I'm not like those Afronuts who think that everything African has too look "West" African, you delusional liar.
quote:No matter what he says, the datas are clear about paleolithic north africans looking like their contemporary european neighbours and not paleo or modern sub-saharan africans.
Actually they are said to look look like Cro-Magnon Europeans which actually don't look like modern Europeans.
According to anthropologist Chris Stringer: "...the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans....were more like present-day Australians or Africans..."
quote:Djehuti will learn to respect Africans, how they identify and their diversity. Africa is a continent not all populations on it have the same history or phenotype and he will accept this.
First of all I do respect Africans more than you who thinks all black in North Africa are the result of "slave ancestry"! As for your second statement, I have ALWAYS maintained that fact of Africa's diversity! Again I'm not one of those Afronuts who think all Africans look West African, but your problem is that you think 'black' skin is only limited to such Africans which makes you a delusional Euronut!
Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
I recommend saving this picture to hardrive because I have seen it mislabeled elsewhere, and this has extra information as part of the image
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: the only reason why I posted the above example was to show Anatalas that even most experts acknowledge the Ibero-Marusians to be melanoderm (since he has a problem with the label 'black'). No doubt they do this because aDNA from the said people show they had very dark skin.
Surprised the term "melanoderm" as a substitute for "black" never gained popularity in this forum during all the debates we had over whether to use "black" back in the mid-2010s. I almost like "melanoderm" better since it sidesteps the racial confusion, even though it's a less familiar term for the general public.
I do have one question, though. If lighter-skinned peoples are leucoderms and darker-skinned peoples are melanoderms, what about people of intermediate pigmentation (e.g. West and Southeast Asians, Polynesians, and Native Americans)? I've encountered the term "xanthoderm" referring to people with yellowish skin, but that sounds like it would encompass Northeast Asians best.
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Title : Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA: case studies from ancient Egypt and medieval Europe
author : A. Morez
quote:Genome-wide data were successfully recovered
quote:
from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture
between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
The irony, ancient upper egyptians more arabian-like than modern egyptians. Seems like God really likes to troll afrocentrists XD
I find the article (thesis abstract quote) above confusing: One Old Kingdom individual from 3rd-4th dynasty in Nuerat, Egypt showed a strong genetic affinity to Levantine Natufians.
BUT did NOT carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component found widely spread in the present-day population and at the end of the dynastic period
The author says the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia which may have resulted from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine)rulers during the Second Intermediate Period
First they are talking about the Levantine Natufian not having this West Asian component but later dynasties and modern populations having it, then they speculate as to why and say maybe because of Levantine admixture
That is contradictory and I hope the author clarifies this in their thesis
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since people like to nitpick, here is a reconstruction of Taforalt Man of Morocco.
Remember how his first reconstruction looked until his DNA tests showed he wasn't leucoderm (white) at all, hence why I distrust reconstructions.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Surprised the term "melanoderm" as a substitute for "black" never gained popularity in this forum during all the debates we had over whether to use "black" back in the mid-2010s. I almost like "melanoderm" better since it sidesteps the racial confusion, even though it's a less familiar term for the general public.
Melanoderm literally means "black skin" so there's really no difference.
quote:I do have one question, though. If lighter-skinned peoples are leucoderms and darker-skinned peoples are melanoderms, what about people of intermediate pigmentation (e.g. West and Southeast Asians, Polynesians, and Native Americans)? I've encountered the term "xanthoderm" referring to people with yellowish skin, but that sounds like it would encompass Northeast Asians best.
Leucoderm does technically mean "white skin" but the problem of course is the fact that human skin color has a spectrum and not everyone who is melanoderm has ebony dark skin anymore than every leucoderm having ivory white skin. There are many peoples with hues in between. In much the same way when it comes to genetic relations there is no solid divide between "Sub-Saharan" and "Eurasian" as some idiots would like to believe. Funny how the fool Antalas accuses me of being a "reductionist" for using the label 'black' even though I never use it describe specific ancestry, yet he reduces populations as either Sub-Saharan or Eurasian! WTH?!
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Melanoderm literally means "black skin" so there's really no difference.
That’s technically true, but again, I don’t think it was ever delimited to people from a specific region or “race” the way “black” is.
quote:Leucoderm does technically mean "white skin" but the problem of course is the fact that human skin color has a spectrum and not everyone who is melanoderm has ebony dark skin anymore than every leucoderm having ivory white skin. There are many peoples with hues in between.
Again, absolutely true. That said, I personally see human skin tones as potentially fitting into three broad categories for convenience’s sake: light (or what you might call white), medium, and dark (or what you might call black). If the first applies to leucoderms and the third to melanoderms, what about the second?
EDIT: On second thought, it probably doesn't matter that much. Any terms we come up with are basically efforts to divide a continuous spectrum into categories. Such categorization can be convenient sometimes, but it's never going to be perfect.
But as usual the white Mazigh moron loves to thrive in strawman arguments. Again, nobody said anything about Natufians or ancient Egyptians having modern "Sub-Saharan" ancestry. That was never anybody's argument here so why bother bringing it up??
How about you prove to us that these ancient North Africans were non-black Eurasians? Oh that's right you can't because that's simply wasn't the case! LOL
I disagree with some of Antalas' conclusions and have been posting charts which might challenge him
At this pint in the thread I had wondered who first brought up the word "black" and skin color in this thread. So I searched the thread and saw that it was Djehuti in the 8th post, he makes a personal racist remark against Antalas. I think it should be deleted
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is easier with cats. There we call a brown cat brown and a black cat black. But for some reason we tend to call brown people black. Few humans are literally black.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2750 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote: Compared with Europe, palaeogenetics in Africa is poorly studied, in part because DNA degrades faster in tropical and dry environments. Chapter 4 aims to unveil population movements in Egypt and Sudan from the Neolithic onward. DNA was extracted from 94 samples from Armant (Egypt), Nuerat (Egypt) and Ghaba (Sudan) dated from the Early Neolithic to the historic period. Genome-wide data were successfully recovered from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
When Brandon sent me this info the day after it came out I told him I was not at all surprised by the results. the Euronuts have been favoring aDNA over uniparental markers, since the latter has already shown the African influence in both Southwest Asia and Europe (Yhg-E-M35 & mtDNAhgs- L2 & N1), while with the former they can disguise or hide it by labeling such autosomal markers as "Eurasian" while using the IBD Yoruba markers representative for "Sub-Saharan" and thus genetic 'true Negro'. The sampling bias and pigeon-holing is obvious. Of course Egyptians as northeast Africans won't have the same autosomal profile as West/Central Africans! Nobody in this forum has said otherwise, but neither do Northeast Siberians have the same autosomal profile as Chinese yet nobody denies that Northeast Siberians are still East Asian and NOT Amerindian even though their autosomal profile is most similar to Eskimos!
Fortunately, their silly semantical game of "Sub-Saharan" is being exposed as more samples are collected, the more resolution and refinement for African population data we have. Recall how years ago when ANA was first discovered it was initially thought to be 'Eurasian' because of its presence in Southwest Asians and Europeans but found to have it's greatest frequency in Iberomaursians and other North Africans hence the name 'Ancestral North African'. Then Lazaridis analysis of Natufians uncovered Basal Eurasian that lacks the Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry found in Eurasians, it's probable that BE also orginated in Africa.
Remember this old inaccurate PCA that Euronuts used to tout.
We've come a long way from that with more accurate PCAs.
^ This one has North Africans like Egyptians grouped with West Eurasians but Sub-Saharan East Africans, particularly in the Horn are positioned closer.
^ Note that Loosdrecht's graph includes South African Aborigines put a whole new perspective because West Africans are closer to the North African/West Eurasian cluster than they are to South Africans. Also note in the Ks that East African Hadza have no IBD markers associated with typical Sub-Saharans and that some of their markers are found in Taforalt as well as Natufians and other West Eurasians!
^ Fregel's graph expands the North African population further, showing Taforalt and early Neolithic IAM of Morocco being closer to East Africans.
Lastly, the only reason why North Africans cluster closely with West Eurasians (Southwest Asians & Europeans) in the first place is because the latter received admixture from the former, hence why West Eurasians don't cluster as close to East Eurasians and why they carry some African lineages. This was first noted back in the 90s by Cavalli-Sforza.
None of the above findings or its implications will change no matter how much some negrophobic losers whine about it.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: When Brandon sent me this info the day after it came out I told him I was not at all surprised by the results. the Euronuts have been favoring aDNA over uniparental markers, since the latter has already shown the African influence in both Southwest Asia and Europe (Yhg-E-M35 & mtDNAhgs- L2 & N1), while with the former they can disguise or hide it by labeling such autosomal markers as "Eurasian" while using the IBD Yoruba markers representative for "Sub-Saharan" and thus genetic 'true Negro'.
Those african uniparentals are still found in the region (they also have their own specific subclades) yet these populations aren't physically similar to most sub-saharan africans. Moreover yes aDNA should be favored simply because it provides a more comprehensive picture of our genetic makeup.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Of course Egyptians as northeast Africans won't have the same autosomal profile as West/Central Africans! Nobody in this forum has said otherwise, but neither do Northeast Siberians have the same autosomal profile as Chinese yet nobody denies that Northeast Siberians are still East Asian and NOT Amerindian even though their autosomal profile is most similar to Eskimos!
Bad example. Northeast Siberians are genetically and morphologically much closer to other east asians than west africans are to Northeast africans.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Note that Loosdrecht's graph includes South African Aborigines put a whole new perspective because West Africans are closer to the North African/West Eurasian cluster than they are to South Africans. Also note in the Ks that East African Hadza have no IBD markers associated with typical Sub-Saharans and that some of their markers are found in Taforalt as well as Natufians and other West Eurasians!
Why do you obsess over this ? The fact that west africans plot closer to eurasians than south africans won't make north africans (whether modern or ancient) any closer to west africans than other eurasians.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Fregel's graph expands the North African population further, showing Taforalt and early Neolithic IAM of Morocco being closer to East Africans.
Here Fregel states that IAM plots closer to modern north africans, europeans and middle easterners :
quote:When projected on a PCA space built using modern samples from Europe, the Middle East and North and Sub-Saharan Africa, all IAM, KEB and TOR samples cluster close to North African, Middle Eastern and European populations, respectively (Figure S6.3). It is worth mentioning that IAM samples clustered in an intermediate position between modern populations of North Africa and the Later Stone Age samples from Morocco excavated in Taforalt43.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Lastly, the only reason why North Africans cluster closely with West Eurasians (Southwest Asians & Europeans) in the first place is because the latter received admixture from the former, hence why West Eurasians don't cluster as close to East Eurasians and why they carry some African lineages. This was first noted back in the 90s by Cavalli-Sforza.
the only reason ? Didn't you say I was a "european admixed" amazigh ? What happened to the light skinned farmers spreading cardial culture in the Maghreb ? What happened to the Dzudzuana-like ancestry of Taforalt ? What happened to the Bell beaker settlers and central mediterranean farmers that settled there during the 3rd and 2nd millenia BC ?
Seriously go seek mental health assistance.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
the Euronuts have been favoring aDNA over uniparental markers, since the latter has already shown the African influence in both Southwest Asia and Europe (Yhg-E-M35 & mtDNAhgs- L2 & N1), while with the former they can disguise or hide it by labeling such autosomal markers as "Eurasian" while using the IBD Yoruba markers representative for "Sub-Saharan" and thus genetic 'true Negro'. The sampling bias and pigeon-holing is obvious. Of course Egyptians as northeast Africans won't have the same autosomal profile as West/Central Africans! Nobody in this forum has said otherwise, but neither do Northeast Siberians have the same autosomal profile as Chinese yet nobody denies that Northeast Siberians are still East Asian and NOT Amerindian even though their autosomal profile is most similar to Eskimos!
So do you think Euronut preference for aDNA should be equal balanced wit Afronut uniparental markers or do you think one of these methods is better than another in determining ancient ancestry? And what is the Asianut perspective? Do they weigh in on preferring one of these methods?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Fortunately, their silly semantical game of "Sub-Saharan" is being exposed as more samples are collected, the more resolution and refinement for African population data we have. Recall how years ago when ANA was first discovered it was initially thought to be 'Eurasian' because of its presence in Southwest Asians and Europeans but found to have it's greatest frequency in Iberomaursians and other North Africans hence the name 'Ancestral North African'. Then Lazaridis analysis of Natufians uncovered Basal Eurasian that lacks the Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry found in Eurasians, it's probable that BE also originated in Africa.
So do you classify Lazardis as Euronut? He's the one that came up with this hypothetical "Basal Eurasian" and he's the one that said:
"However, no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians (Extended Data Table 1). (We could not test for a link to present-day North Africans, who owe most of their ancestry to back-migration from Eurasia26,27.) "
Can you be more direct and let us know if you think Lazardis is a Euronut?
It's not clear if that's what you mean or if what he said instead elsewhere exposes some unnamed "Euronuts"
Is it just anonymous people in social media who are Euronuts or can we be more bold and call them out by name? For instance is Verena J. Schuenemann who lead the article "Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods" is she and co-authors such as Chuan-Chao Wang, Wolfgang Haak and Johannes Krause are they Euronuts? If you say yes I wont criticize. I'm just trying to figure out which people in particular yo classify as Euronuts otherwise it just seem like you don't like Euroepans in general, they're all Euronuts.
I have written many times about how I think the Schuenemann article was significantly presumptuous in it's conclusions and racial implications.
Let's stop pussy footing around here. can you put you money where you mouth is and tell us by name who some of the prominent Euronuts are?
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: It is easier with cats. There we call a brown cat brown and a black cat black. But for some reason we tend to call brown people black. Few humans are literally black.
according to Djehuti both cats are black
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Antalas: Title : Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA: case studies from ancient Egypt and medieval Europe
author : A. Morez
quote:Genome-wide data were successfully recovered from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom.Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: So do you think Euronut preference for aDNA should be equal balanced with Afronut uniparental markers or do you think one of these methods is better than another in determining ancient ancestry? And what is the Asianut perspective? Do they weigh in on preferring one of these methods?
The reason why they are nuts is because their ideologies have driven them crazy to the point that they don't understand anything!
Genetic evidence is genetic evidence however a person's genome is comprised of many elements. Uniparentals represent one fraction of that albeit an important part. While uniparental markers are useful they have their obvious shortcomings due to the fact that they represent a very small fraction of a person's genome.
Tukuler said it best when he says that uniparental markers only give one specific line of ancestry through each parent which excludes many ancestors who contributed to your genome.
^ The rest of our genetic heritage comes from the X sex chromosome and autosomes (other 22 pairs). However, no lineage can be established from these other chromosomes because they are recombinant. Genetic recombination happens during conception when chromosomes of the same type from each parent pair up and mix and shuffle their chromosomal parts including genes, with recombination of the X chromosome occurring in the conception of females. So when it comes to autosomes or even the X chromosome, geneticists have to look at patterns of affinity with certain markers similar to patterns of affinity that occurs in cranial traits except with a lot more factors. The problem though is just like with cranial trait comparison, bias can affect analyses outcomes.
That the ancient Egyptian profile closely matches those of Natufians across the Sinai, again this shouldn't be surprising. Northeastern Siberians also have an autosomal profile totally different from typical East Asians like Chinese and more closely matching Eskimos across the Bering Strait. This shows that were was diversification of alleles in populations both in Asia and in Africa but those in the latter are the most diverse because that is where humans originated.
All of this was discussed in this forum years before with autosomal studies from Dr. Sarah Tishkoff.
Tishkoff (2004):...that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999).
That this divergence took place many tens of thousands of years ago before the expansion of 'typical' Sub-Saharans from the West-Central African area is why there is obviously a distinction between the former and northeastern Africans like Egyptians and Nubians.
Then we have Tishkoff's 2009 autosomal study which was discussed in a thread on Mozabite Berbers here, wherein she stated: Within Africa, genetic diversity estimated from expected heterozygosity significantly correlates with estimates from microsatellite variance (fig. S4) (4) and varies by linguistic, geographic, and subsistence classifications (fig. S5). Three hunter-gatherer populations (Baka and Bakola Pygmies and San) were among the five populations with the highest levels of genetic diversity based on variance estimates (fig. S2A) (4). In addition, more private alleles exist in Africa than other regions (fig. S6A). Consistent with bi-directional gene flow (14), African and Middle Eastern populations shared the greatest number of alleles absent from all other populations(fig. S6B). Within Africa, the most private alleles were in southern Africa, reflecting those in southern African Khoesan (SAK) San and !Xun/Khwe populations (fig. S6C) (12). Eastern and Saharan Africans shared the most alleles absent from other African populations examined (fig. S6D).
'Saharan Africans' is her term for North Africans.
^ Note the blue color represents alleged "Eurasian" ancestry. It should not come as a surprise that the 'Cape Couloured' folk of South Africa who descend from natives mixed with colonial whites and Asian immigrants have it. The presumption then is that Saharan populations like the Beja and especially Mozabite also posses it due to admixture, but Tishkoff cautions against such thinking especially since the Sub-Saharan Dogon carry it also!
Dogon
^ The Dogon look no different from 'typical' Sub-Saharans i.e. "negroes" which are the only people Antalas would call 'black', yet they carry more Eurasian autosomal alleles than Mozabites!
This brings us back to the Natufians. We've done multiple threads showing how the Natufians show craniometric traits in common with Africans including Sub-Saharan "negroes" (Brace 2005), they carry significant paternal E-M35 and maternal L2 and N1, and their skeletons even show lesions associated with sickle cell anemia (Angel 1984, Pinhasi 2010)!
I am curious to know what type of Hb Sickle disease the Natufians had. The Benin type is common in the Levant as well other parts of the Mediterranean Basin but the Arab-Indian type is common in the Persian Gulf and Mesopotamia the latter is not far from Hotu Cave in the southern Caspian coast which is the site of the Iranian Neolithic human remains which also display African features and harbor the thus far the highest amount of Basal Eurasian!
The Egyptians possessed the Benin type of HbS which ties them to West Africans.
Want more autosomal evidence? How about HLA-DRB1?
Petlichovski 2004
^ Look who Egyptians branch with.
So you see one who is not a nut can simply put the pieces together.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
This brings us back to the Natufians. We've done multiple threads showing how the Natufians show craniometric traits in common with Africans including Sub-Saharan "negroes" (Brace 2005), they carry significant paternal E-M35 and maternal L2 and N1, and their skeletons even show lesions associated with sickle cell anemia (Angel 1984, Pinhasi 2010)!
Published online 2018 Jul 20. doi: Re-analysis of Whole Genome Sequence Data From 279 Ancient Eurasians Reveals Substantial Ancestral Heterogeneity Daniel Shriner*
The Natufian sample consisted of 61.2% Arabian, 21.2% Northern African, 10.9% Western Asian, and 6.8% Omotic ancestry (Figure (Figure1G1G and Table Table1).1).
___________________________________________
This chart has all Natufians ever tested, 5 individuals Y DNA recovered on five of them and mtDNA recovered on three That later as follows:
The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans Sarah A. Tishkoff,
^ Note the blue color represents alleged "Eurasian" ancestry. It should not come as a surprise that the 'Cape Couloured' folk of South Africa who descend from natives mixed with colonial whites and Asian immigrants have it. The presumption then is that Saharan populations like the Beja and especially Mozabite also posses it due to admixture, but Tishkoff cautions against such thinking especially since the Sub-Saharan Dogon carry it also!
Dogon
^ The Dogon look no different from 'typical' Sub-Saharans i.e. "negroes" which are the only people Antalas would call 'black', yet they carry more Eurasian autosomal alleles than Mozabites!
What mitochondrial DNA haplogroup do the Dogon have at highest frequency?
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
2009. the year when Djehuti Winters stopped reading articles and started going back into craniometry
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: I agree with Asten and Elmaestro that a lot of people on Team Afro need to step up their game with regards to knowledge in relevant fields (and maybe lose their attachment to racialized thinking).
quote:Originally posted by Askia_The_Great: I know. I mean Brandon meant there wasn't a Natufian profile but even if there were it would've probably be blue. In my honest opinion.
^ The Dogon look no different from 'typical' Sub-Saharans i.e. "negroes" which are the only people Antalas would call 'black', yet they carry more Eurasian autosomal alleles than Mozabites!
^^ AI generated art, these aren't real people
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: No, there was no Natufian found bearing L2
True, because...
quote:
This chart has all Natufians ever tested, 5 individuals Y DNA recovered on five of them and mtDNA recovered on three That later as follows:
2 J2 1 N1
My claim is based on the findings of Fernandez et al. study of PPN remains in Syria who do carry L2 and whose autosomes closely match those of Natufians which is why she postulates that L2 an African maternal lineage is likely associated with Natufians as well. Of course we won't be certain until more Natufian remains are tested.
quote: What mitochondrial DNA haplogroup do the Dogon have at highest frequency?
I don't know. Why don't you tell us?
quote: 2009. the year when Djehuti Winters stopped reading articles and started going back into craniometry
You're calling me "Winters" even though you seem to promote the guy who happens to publish papers all the time, and then claims I stopped reading articles in 2009. Exactly how do you know what I read or when I stopped reading?? I only post craniometry as a response to trolls who post them first.
Really lion'ess the economy is rough so maybe you should ask Mathilda for a raise.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26365 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: My claim is based on the findings of Fernandez et al. study of PPN remains in Syria who do carry L2 and whose autosomes closely match those of Natufians which is why she postulates that L2 an African maternal lineage is likely associated with Natufians as well. Of course we won't be certain until more Natufian remains are tested.
I have to check everything you do There are no remains in that article bearing L2 in either
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans Sarah A. Tishkoff,
^ Note the blue color represents alleged "Eurasian" ancestry. It should not come as a surprise that the 'Cape Couloured' folk of South Africa who descend from natives mixed with colonial whites and Asian immigrants have it. The presumption then is that Saharan populations like the Beja and especially Mozabite also posses it due to admixture, but Tishkoff cautions against such thinking especially since the Sub-Saharan Dogon carry it also!
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: What mitochondrial DNA haplogroup do the Dogon have at highest frequency?
I was looking for it last night and it was taking a long time, I didn't find out. I may get back to it
The pie chart marked "Dogon" presumably includes individual Dogons who are included in that blue Eurasian cluster and others who aren't. I'm also not sure how much they vary in appearance
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
So far as regard Dogon Y DNA it is one study's Dogon Y DNA E1a 45.4 E1b1a 43.6
sample of 55, this could be the highest frequency of E1a in Africa
E-M132/E1a has been found in the remains of one Guanche (1/30) from the Canary Islands, and one Bimbape (1/16) from El Hierro that has been dated to the 10th century CE.
Distribution
E-M132 Frequencies in select populations E-M132 is found most often in West Africa, and today it is especially common in the region of Mali.
________________________
As for mtDNA it's harder to find data
Four of the six Dogon subjects analyzed belong to the L2 cluster (0.7), whereas the other two are L3 (0.3)
~ Mitochondrial DNA Variation in Mauritania and Mali and their Genetic Relationship to Other Western Africa Populations A. M. Gonzalez ´ 1,∗, V. M. Cabrera 2006
___________ ^^^ (very small sample size)
___________________________________
Another geographically contiguous cluster extends across northern Africa (blue) into Mali (the Dogon), Ethiopia, and northern Kenya. With the exception of the Dogon, these populations speak an Afroasiatic language.
The second PC (6.1%) distinguishes the Hadza; the third PC (4.9%) distinguishes Pygmy and SAK individuals from other Africans. The fourth PC (3.7%) is associated with the Mozabites, some Dogon, and the CMA individuals, who show ancestry from the European–Middle Eastern cluster.
~ The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans Sarah A. Tishkoff, 2009
Posts: 43014 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic