...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient Egyptian DNA from 1300BC to 426 AD
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cass/: [QB] Jones, E. R., Zarina, G., Moiseyev, V., Lightfoot, E., Nigst, P. R., Manica, A., ... & Bradley, D. G. (2017). The neolithic transition in the baltic was not driven by admixture with early European farmers. Current Biology, 27(4), 576-582. "No Anatolian farmer-related genetic admixture in Neolithic Baltic samples." 0% :cool: So why would EEF be high in Early Neolithic Germany, a geographical neighbour to the Baltic region, if its 0% in the Early Neolithic Baltic? What are the Early Neolithic genome samples from Germany? It appears to consist of only Stuttgart [a single individual]. http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2016/06/02/1523951113.DCSupplemental/pnas.1523951113.sapp.pdf see pp. 44-45. Hofmanova et al. 2016 What I predict is that sample is not typical at all and EEF will be very low when they get more ancient DNA. The Hofmanova study acknowledges this problem there is only one Early Neolithic sample from Germany... "To cope with issues such as unequal sample sizes, we then used a linear model (28) to fit the allele-matching profile of the target group as a mixture of that of other sampled groups." looks like hocus pocus, why not just wait for more samples? [/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