RN97
06-17-2017, 09:33 PM
How does this make sense?
They created this chart
http://i.imgur.com/eMctKxG.jpg
It shows that ancient Egyptian samples had zero African admixture, yet the same study claims this:
Finally, we used two methods to estimate the fractions of sub-Saharan African ancestry in ancient and modern Egyptians. Both qpAdm35 and the f4-ratio test39 reveal that modern Egyptians inherit 8% more ancestry from African ancestors than the three ancient Egyptians do, which is also consistent with the ADMIXTURE results discussed above. Absolute estimates of African ancestry using these two methods in the three ancient individuals range from 6 to 15%, and in the modern samples from 14 to 21% depending on method and choice of reference populations
How does this make sense?
They created this chart
http://i.imgur.com/eMctKxG.jpg
It shows that ancient Egyptian samples had zero African admixture, yet the same study claims this:
Finally, we used two methods to estimate the fractions of sub-Saharan African ancestry in ancient and modern Egyptians. Both qpAdm35 and the f4-ratio test39 reveal that modern Egyptians inherit 8% more ancestry from African ancestors than the three ancient Egyptians do, which is also consistent with the ADMIXTURE results discussed above. Absolute estimates of African ancestry using these two methods in the three ancient individuals range from 6 to 15%, and in the modern samples from 14 to 21% depending on method and choice of reference populations
How does this make sense?