Page 34 of 40 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 396

Thread: The mixed genetic origin of the first farmers of Europe

  1. #331
    Registered Users
    Posts
    243
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Echo View Post
    I was talking about the first one which sampled them which had them as 65%.
    But yeah 55-60% ballpark in theory, without actual ANA remain data.
    The original paper modeled Taforalt as 65% Natufian and 35% SSA (Yoruba + Hadza). It was a poor fit, which isn’t surprising since we shouldn’t use younger or modern pops to model an ancient pop, and the authors admitted as much in the original paper.

    Yes which shows how theoric all this is. At its base, they are more or less triying to guess without the revelant Ancient datas.
    I can agree that we need more ancient DNA from across Africa to develop a more ironclad and robust model for African population genetics. That being said, I wouldn’t reduce the work of geneticists, especially not the folks at the Reich lab, to simple guessing; they’ve presented models based on the available data and will adjust those models as new data comes to light (as we’ve seen with the three studies on the Iberomaurusians that were published in the last two years). Lazaridis and Lipson both introduced new data in the form of Dzudzuana and Shum Laka that are important in understanding the phylogeny of African populations.

    Not sure where you're going with. Many papers that came out in the past with theories went wrong when newer datas came up. Simply because those where theories, nobody is disregarding anything, just not taking very serious.

    Usually with Afrocentrists, they just take information that fit their bias. When the situation goes against them, they easily swept into crazy ideas like it is vaguely normal (like when they act the minor ANA in Natufians turn them into an actual SSA pop when Natufians are closest to Anatolian Neolithic farmers/Dzudzuana in their overwhelming ancestry).
    That’s fair enough. It sounded like you were dismissing the Shum Laka paper and not applying the same treatment to the Dzudzuana paper, which sounded hypocritical to me.

    I personally haven’t seen anyone in this thread refer to the Natufians as an SSA population. Natufians have minor African ancestry but they’re still a predominantly Western Eurasian population.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to gihanga.rwanda For This Useful Post:

     beyoku (12-04-2020),  Echo (12-04-2020),  Lenny Nero (12-06-2020),  maroco (12-04-2020)

  3. #332
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,601
    Sex
    Location
    Calgary
    Ethnicity
    Anglo
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2-S2361 < L801
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2b(1)
    mtDNA (P)
    H3

    Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo View Post
    But people claiming minor ANA in Natufians made them craniologically and morphologically completely different different from Anatolian farmers are just hallucinating.
    Do we have DNA from the morphologically SSA-looking (or whatever) Natufians? They aren't all the same, are they?

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Megalophias For This Useful Post:

     beyoku (12-04-2020),  catman44 (12-04-2020),  Echo (12-04-2020),  piye (12-05-2020)

  5. #333
    Registered Users
    Posts
    243
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Megalophias View Post
    Do we have DNA from the morphologically SSA-looking (or whatever) Natufians? They aren't all the same, are they?
    I doubt they’ll be much intra population variation, but that will be an interesting twist. Did the “African” morphological affinities observed in the Natufians diminish over time?
    Last edited by gihanga.rwanda; 12-04-2020 at 10:42 PM.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to gihanga.rwanda For This Useful Post:

     piye (12-05-2020)

  7. #334
    Registered Users
    Posts
    386
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Arab
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-y15222
    mtDNA (M)
    L1b2a

    Distances will be high of course but this is what happens when you try to model both natufian samples:

    Distance: 14.1261% / 0.14126059
    Target: Early_Levantine_Farmer:Levant_Natufian:I1072
    62.8 Early_European_Farmer
    36.9 Iberomaurusian
    0.3 Iran_Neolithic

    Distance: 13.5843% / 0.13584324
    Target: Early_Levantine_Farmer:Levant_Natufian:I0861
    53.3 Early_European_Farmer
    32.0 Iberomaurusian
    13.6 Iran_Neolithic
    1.1 Ancient_Iberian_Hunter-Gatherer
    Distance: 1.7966% / 0.01796648
    70.7 Canary_Islands_Guanche
    21.1 Levant_Baqah_BA
    8.2 West_African_(simulated)

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to maroco For This Useful Post:

     Echo (12-04-2020),  Imesmouden (12-04-2020)

  9. #335
    Registered Users
    Posts
    386
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Arab
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-y15222
    mtDNA (M)
    L1b2a

    Deleted
    Last edited by maroco; 12-04-2020 at 08:04 PM.
    Distance: 1.7966% / 0.01796648
    70.7 Canary_Islands_Guanche
    21.1 Levant_Baqah_BA
    8.2 West_African_(simulated)

  10. #336
    Registered Users
    Posts
    386
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Arab
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-y15222
    mtDNA (M)
    L1b2a

    Megiddo outlier seemed to give the best results for me and looked to be free from ana but still represents my Levantine input
    Distance: 2.5904% / 0.02590411
    32.3 Early_European_Farmer
    30.9 Iberomaurusian
    22.8 Levant_Megiddo_MLBA_o1
    10.7 West_African_(simulated)
    3.0 Iran_Neolithic
    0.3 Ancient_Iberian_Hunter-Gatherer

    Near identical results with Shum Laka:

    Distance: 3.9998% / 0.03999788
    33.4 Early_European_Farmer
    30.3 Iberomaurusian
    21.5 Levant_Megiddo_MLBA_o1
    10.6 Africa_Mesolithic
    3.9 Iran_Neolithic
    0.3 Ancient_Iberian_Hunter-Gatherer
    Last edited by maroco; 12-04-2020 at 08:07 PM.
    Distance: 1.7966% / 0.01796648
    70.7 Canary_Islands_Guanche
    21.1 Levant_Baqah_BA
    8.2 West_African_(simulated)

  11. #337
    Registered Users
    Posts
    386
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Arab
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-y15222
    mtDNA (M)
    L1b2a

    You can also model yourself this way:

    Distance: 2.4571% / 0.02457137
    49.9 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
    30.0 Iberomaurusian
    11.0 West_African_(simulated)
    5.4 Iran_Neolithic
    2.3 Steppe_Pastoralist
    1.4 Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer


    Distance: 3.8507% / 0.03850681
    50.1 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
    29.5 Iberomaurusian
    11.0 Africa_Mesolithic
    5.4 Iran_Neolithic
    3.1 Steppe_Pastoralist
    0.9 Western_Hunter-Gatherer
    Last edited by maroco; 12-04-2020 at 08:17 PM.
    Distance: 1.7966% / 0.01796648
    70.7 Canary_Islands_Guanche
    21.1 Levant_Baqah_BA
    8.2 West_African_(simulated)

  12. #338
    Banned
    Posts
    121
    Sex
    Location
    Winter is quite cold you know

    Hawaii
    Quote Originally Posted by Megalophias View Post
    Do we have DNA from the morphologically SSA-looking (or whatever) Natufians? They aren't all the same, are they?
    Samples are just labeled 'Natufians'.

    Culturally the formed a coherent grouping, so I don't know.

  13. #339
    Registered Users
    Posts
    720
    Sex
    Location
    lombardy
    Nationality
    italian

    Italy Portugal Order of Christ Russia Imperial Canada Quebec Spanish Empire (1506-1701) Vatican
    Quote Originally Posted by maroco View Post
    You can also model yourself this way:

    Distance: 2.4571% / 0.02457137
    49.9 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
    30.0 Iberomaurusian
    11.0 West_African_(simulated)
    5.4 Iran_Neolithic
    2.3 Steppe_Pastoralist
    1.4 Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer


    Distance: 3.8507% / 0.03850681
    50.1 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
    29.5 Iberomaurusian
    11.0 Africa_Mesolithic
    5.4 Iran_Neolithic
    3.1 Steppe_Pastoralist
    0.9 Western_Hunter-Gatherer
    How much West Eurasian score Natufians? I mean WE only without basal

  14. #340
    Registered Users
    Posts
    208
    Sex

    Netherlands Kenya
    Quote Originally Posted by madaleninha View Post
    In the second Paper they sequenced several new EHGs from Minimo, Russia. Very interesting. All of them have the allele derived in the SLC24a5 gene, one of those responsible for fair skin.
    There is a lot of interesting information in that second dissertation but they really should've compared Neolithic European farmers to their Anatolian hunter gatherer ancestors and their contemporary Anatolian when it came to phenotypes and the spread of them.

    It's hard to say if climate or diet induced vitamin D deficiencies are what lead to lighter skin pigmentation of Europeans, spurred on by Neolithic Anatolians migrating to the northern, less sunny regions if they did not even look at actual Anatolian HG or early farmer samples.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to CopperAxe For This Useful Post:

     Ryukendo (12-04-2020)

Page 34 of 40 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 07-03-2019, 06:47 PM
  2. The First Farmers if Europe Prof Stephan Shennan
    By Judith in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-14-2018, 07:57 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-14-2018, 05:54 AM
  4. Early farmers from across Europe were direct descendants of Aegeans
    By rock hunter in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-21-2016, 10:43 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-05-2016, 10:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •