You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
GENETICS Nuerat Study is Out
- Thread starter Apostle
- Start date
Interesting, hopefully we can get more samples from this era and older.
Egypt_Nuerat_Old_Kingdom:NUE001__BC_2680_Cov_87.67%,0.011382,0.129988,-0.043746,-0.122095,0.008925,-0.05271,-0.029141,-0.006,0.078128,-0.005832,0.008607,-0.017984,0.044152,0,0.00665,0.009546,-0.00326,-0.007348,-0.010559,0.023761,0.002496,-0.002844,0.00986,0.012532,-0.003832
Egypt_Nuerat_Old_Kingdom:NUE001__BC_2680_Cov_87.67%,0.011382,0.129988,-0.043746,-0.122095,0.008925,-0.05271,-0.029141,-0.006,0.078128,-0.005832,0.008607,-0.017984,0.044152,0,0.00665,0.009546,-0.00326,-0.007348,-0.010559,0.023761,0.002496,-0.002844,0.00986,0.012532,-0.003832
Can you drop me the nilo saharan simulated cords thanks
He looks like cirro
The alchemist
VIP
This whole thing is a deceptive joke, and I'll make a whole thread about it, including important matters regarding the whole regional shebang.
very much looking forward to reading what ur gripes are
I will never understand these genetic shits how are you armenian and old kingdom egyptian
Morocco_MN isn't an Iberomaurusian sample but some kind of North-east african group who migrated westward around the 5-4th millenia BC
Nilo_Saharan_sim,-0.56272837,0.04715103,0.00844811,-0.01816994,-0.00767743,-0.01277314,-0.01311748,0.00252006,0.130011,-0.15324418,-0.02188116,0.01151451,-0.05030099,-0.00063816,0.02455798,-0.04415771,0.03729095,-0.00435367,0.03069317,-0.01649585,0.01409658,0.02152539,-0.00447418,-0.00153823,-0.00535147
he used scaled coordinates against unscaled coordinates. look at the distance.
dont know what any of these words mean
Everyone starts somewhere, here is a decent explanation.
"When analyzing genetic data, scaled data means all genetic markers (SNPs) are given equal weight, while unscaled data lets each SNP contribute based on its natural variation. For modern DNA samples, both scaled and unscaled approaches can work well.
Scaled data is good for comparing populations evenly, while unscaled data helps preserve real genetic distances and population structure. For ancient DNA samples, unscaled data is usually better. Ancient DNA often has lots of missing data, and scaling can accidentally give too much weight to unreliable SNPs. This can distort the results. The best approach is to do PCA using modern samples, and then project ancient samples into that PCA space using unscaled data.
This keeps the ancient samples placed more accurately, without being affected by missing or low-quality data. In short: scale for modern comparisons if needed, but always use unscaled projection for ancient DNA. "
Results in comparison:
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Arabsiyawi
HA Activist.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
The alchemist
VIP
Are you part Ethiopian?
Arabsiyawi
HA Activist.
Nope
It has been long since I asked you anything about these people.
I'm currently curious what is wrong with the methodology? Were they academics wrong in its genetic affinities and should the sample be more Cushitic shifted altogether?
How would you say a hypothetical samples from Nuerat's contemporary, but more southern sites like Naga ed Deir would look like? Similar to Nuerat or like something in-between Christian Nubian and Kadruka?
I originally thought Naqada would be similar to Mozabites & Saharawi but now I'm leaning towards more like the more southern Capsian genomes and/ or Iberomaurusians. Per Revoiye's results, the Naqada I sample from Wurst et al. can be modeled with basically the same Natufian+Yoruba model/ proportions as the Taforalt IBMs were originally.
I hope to see your insights on what methodological flaws the team of Morez et al. are making, and how that skews Nuerat's genetic placement, as despite how despicable certain groups in the discussion may be, the truth is what matters.
Right now, I can think of the fact that they are concealing the ANA ancestry without breaking down the composition of SKH as a source.
Finally, hopefully you may indulge an additional question if you don't mind: what do you think people from Naga ed Deir in Nuerat's contemporary timeframe (or slightly older periods like Naq III or even Naq II) would look like? Would they be similar or does Nuerat represent the Lower Egyptian type despite appreciable cranial traits normally associated with African-specific populations and seemingly low cranial phenetic/ non-metric MMD distances to Naqada and Badari i.e. 0.28 and 0.30 to Kerma?
Btw, Tarkakori should probably be included as a source. Didn't check the supplementary files but I didn't see it mentioned in the study. Traditionally Upper Egyptian cultural complexes are treated as a combination of local valley people + eastern desert dwellers and western desert migrants (with southern Saharan links). Most theories I read, including the Badarian summary by Glen Newell, doesn't exclude any of the three though they could vary in emphasis on either (of the three).
Last edited:
The Helwan points are a good indicator of what travelled to the Levant. Mushabians were a result of North African males + whatever was in those Natufian-related sites.
The most interesting part is that Shuqba aka Natufians from the Shuqba cave resembled predynastic Naqada Egyptians in crania. They are broadly similar to Capsian crania too by a simple A B C logic. Regardless, yes, North African => Levanttine migrations are well attested. Even 20th century anthropologists believe this, and you know what 20th century anthropologists are (heroes, lol).
Trending
-
-
-
An caadan girl went to Afghanistan, where are the comments cussing her out?- Started by Dibleyy
- Replies: 22
