...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient Egyptians DNA is Less Sub Saharan than modern Egyptian DNA.
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] @Oshun My main criticism is this. We all know there has to have been SSA ancestry. But at the same time there also has to be a limit. That is what the data says. A presence and a limit. When you look at the West Eurasian samples with the most affinity to the recently sampled Natufians, they have a bit of SSA, but they can't have too much or they will be distant to these Natufians. For instance, Bedouin A and Bedouin B are basically two variants of the same population (see [URL=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213596014001299]here[/URL]). The main difference between both is that the latter has ~17% recent African ancestry (mostly SSA), in addition to their ancient North African ancestry, while the proportion in Bedouin A is different (they have a lower ratio of SSA to North African). When you look at which of these two is closer to the Natufians, it's Bedouin A (the one with limited SSA, and larger North African component). That is the common denominator in all these samples below (note that, even though they're primarily European today, Canary Islanders outscores most European and Middle Eastern samples, due to their higher percentage of whatever North African they still have): [IMG]https://snag.gy/60Sq9L.jpg[/IMG] Bedouin B is clearly pushed away from Natufians due to its larger SSA component, and doesn't necessarily score better than European samples in the 0,176-0,078 Fst range (see screenshot). The same is true about Yemenis and Yemeni Jews. The latter differ from the former due to a combination of limited SSA and substantial North African that results in closer affinity to Natufians. Unfortunately, the fst values of Yemenis aren't available (only those of Yemeni Jews), so I can't make a complete argument Fst wise. But other statistics show this. Below are some of the most telling values if you're interested. Note that the common theme here is that, in the case of the Levant and the Arabian peninsula [but not in Europe and the outer fringes of the Middle East] distant values Fst values to Natufians tends to be caused by more recent SSA: Belarussian 0,097 Iranian 0,089 Armenian 0,085 Greek, Druze 0,084 Bedouin B 0,083 Bedouin A 0,073 I said that to say this: when thinking about dynastic AE population affinity, we should work from here. Dynastic AE ratio of SSA to North African may or may not be larger than what we see in the Natufians. However, if it's larger it will largely depend on post-Natufian SSA migration to the ancestors of ancient Egyptians. And it also has to be ongoing and substantial to continually counteract ongoing small Eurasian and Maghrebi influences during the dynastic era. I have seen no one here who has been able to provide evidence for this. In my view, those who take DNA Tribes literally, their priorities should lie here before using less certain data (i.e. data that is not based on ancient DNA). [/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