...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Cranio-facial studies - ancient Egyptians group with North Africans/ West Eurasians
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Anthro Thinker: [QB] [QUOTE]Indeed I'm familiar with it. Familiar enough to know that the study used [b]nonmentric traits[/b] as well, (not metric traits as you're falsely stating) which is why I brought Ricaut (2008) up in the first place. [/QUOTE]Yeah My fault, the study says "Cranio-metric traits in a Byzantine population" next to the page numbers but the study itself is definitely on non metric similarities now that I read it. btw, here's are cranio-metric similarities. [IMG]http://i653.photobucket.com/albums/uu253/Tyranos/Brace3.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i653.photobucket.com/albums/uu253/Tyranos/Brace2.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6018/6015976536_13563af5b8_z.jpg[/IMG] [b]SOURCE : [/b]Brace CL, Tracer DP, Yaroch LA, Robb J, Brandt K, Nelson AR. 1993. Clines and clusters versus ‘‘race:’’ a test in ancient Egypt and the case of a death on the Nile. Yrbk Phys Anthropol 36:1–31 [b]Link :[/b] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.1330360603/abstract [QUOTE] Another thing, without having access to the unpublished data of both studies, how can you know that the North African remains grouped away from Sub Saharan Africans, let alone that they grouped ''far away''?[/QUOTE]I do have access to the studies uploaded in PDF format, i even pasted the links here. What unpuplished data are you speaking of? [QUOTE]Because ''black' refers to skin pigmentation, not discrete traits. This is a very odd question.[/QUOTE]Well then they were not black, but rather reddish brown (on average). But cranio-facial analysis is indicative of genetic relatedness. As are dental patterns. Anyway, skin color is not a good indicator of genetic relationships, unlike cranio-facial analysis. [QUOTE] Indeed, and not at all to Europeans.[/QUOTE]They were closer to Europeans than to many many sub saharan African populations. See the Dental, as well as cranio metric and non metric studies I have pasted in this thread. In 2008 non metric study (that sample) of even Somalis don't cluster close to them at all...much less Central/West and South Africans. [QUOTE]Evidence/indications?[/QUOTE]Ancient Egyptians had simple, mass-reduced teeth like Caucacians: North Africans, West Asians, and Europeans. [i] [b]"EGYPTIAN DENTAL AFFINITIES 9 ever, all 15 samples exhibit morphologically simple, massreduced dentitions that are similar to those in populations from greater North Africa[/b] (Irish, 1993, 1998a–c, 2000) and, to a lesser extent, western Asia and Europe (Turner,1985a; Turner and Markowitz, 1990; Roler, 1992; Lipschultz, 1996; Irish, 1998a). [b]Similar craniofacial measurements among samples from these regions were reported as well (Brace et al., 1993)."[/b] [/i] [b]SOURCE : [/b]Irish JD, (2006) Who were the ancient Egyptians? Dental affinities among Neolithic through postdynastic peoples. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006 Apr;129(4):529-43 Linke : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16331657 PDF : http://wysinger.homestead.com/who_were_egyptian.pdf [QUOTE]Limb proportions are way more effective than facial analysis in this kind of dynamic ie, settling the question of whether there was gene flow between high and low latitude populations. Limb proportion data is always going to trump craniofacial analysis when it comes to this; no matter how much a high and low latitude populations may seem alike craniofacially. Extreme differences in appendage length (which is the case between Europeans and Naqadans) will rule out such a relationship, DESPITE cranio-facial likeness. It is well known that facial features can easily arise because of convergent evolution. Appendage length can too, but no low latitude population is going to maintain their ‘’tropical’’ appendage length if they are significantly affected by immigrant people who have been long time residents outside of the tropics. [/QUOTE]Cranio-facial analysis is indicative of genetic similarity and relatedness. Both Metric [i]"Phenotypic traits have been used for centuries for the purpose of racial classification. Developments in quantitative population genetics have allowed global comparison of patterns of phenotypic variation with patterns of variation in classical genetic markers and DNA markers. Human skin color shows a high degree of variation among geographic regions, typical of traits that show extensive natural selection. Even given this high level of geographic differentiation, skin color variation is clinal and is not well described by discrete racial categories.[b] Craniometric traits show a level of among-region differentiation comparable to genetic markers, with high levels of variation within populations as well as a correlation between phenotypic and geographic distance. Craniometric variation is geographically structured, allowing high levels of classification accuracy when comparing crania from different parts of the world. [/b] Nonetheless, the boundaries in global variation are not abrupt and do not fit a strict view of the race concept; the number of races and the cutoffs used to define them are arbitrary. The race concept is at best a crude first-order approximation to the geographically structured phenotypic variation in the human species."[/i] [b]Link [/b]: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19226639 And non Metric [i] "In the present study, the frequency distributions of 20 discrete cranial traits in 70 major human populations from around the world were analyzed. The principal-coordinate and neighbor-joining analyses of Smith's mean measure of divergence (MMD), based on trait frequencies, indicate that 1). [b]the clustering pattern is similar to those based on classic genetic markers, DNA polymorphisms, and craniometrics;[/b]2). significant interregional separation and intraregional diversity are present in Subsaharan Africans; 3). clinal relationships exist among regional groups; 4). intraregional discontinuity exists in some populations inhabiting peripheral or isolated areas. For example, the Ainu are the most distinct outliers of the East Asian populations. These patterns suggest that founder effects, genetic drift, isolation, and population structure are the primary causes of regional variation in discrete cranial traits. Our results are compatible with a single origin for modern humans as well as the multiregional model, similar to the results of Relethford and Harpending ([1994] Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 95:249-270). The results presented here provide additional measures of the morphological variation and diversification of modern human populations. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc."[/i] [b]SOURCE :[/b] SOURCE : HANIHARA, TSUNEHIKO, HAJIME ISHIDA, AND YUKIO DODO. 2003. Characterization of biological diversity through analysis of discrete cranial traits. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121:241-251. [b]Link :[/b] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12772212 [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3