Why were Guanches robust but berbers aren’t?

[E1b1b]

https://ancestralwhispers.org/reconstructions/guanche


They have very similar autosomal dna and are closely related but Guanches strongly exhibited more robust features compared to their Berber cousins. How can populations so closely related be different in phenotype?

[Cristiano viejo]

You are comparing apples with pears. Guanches were cousins of ancient Berbers, not current ones who are highly mixed with blacks.

[E1b1b]

You are comparing apples with pears. Guanches were cousins of ancient Berbers, not current ones who are highly mixed with blacks.

I don’t think the average Berber has significant sub Saharan admixture

[Cristiano viejo]

I don’t think the average Berber has significant sub Saharan admixture

25% more or less.

[Didac]

Gaunches are interesting people from the gedmatch kits I’ve seen they’re like about 75-85% purest Berber + 15-25% west euro

[Immanenz]

Gaunches are interesting people from the gedmatch kits I’ve seen they’re like about 75-85% purest Berber + 15-25% west euro

and modern Berbers are admixed with what? Arabs etc.? How much? Would partially explain why they are so much graciler now

[Didac]

and modern Berbers are admixed with what? Arabs etc.? How much? Would partially explain why they are so much graciler now

They have a lot more east med I believe, so perhaps a little arab pull towards the east some normal North African dna all causing some graciliation. I’d imagine closest to how berbers would be without graciliation would be Zidane not pigment wise but just bone structure features

[Adamm]

Gracile phenotypes come from the Levant, Iberomaurusians and Capsians were pretty robust in comparing with the Levantine Natufians. North Africans got less robust by inter-mixing with Iberian Neolithic Farmers and probably also by mixing with eastern populations (Phoenicians/Arabs etc). Guanches probably looked the same as an average Berber from the Atlas or Rif, you'll probably also find gracile phenotypes within the Guanches.

[Immanenz]

some of those what Coon classified as pred "Mechta-Afalou" like, partially with other admix

https://www.theapricity.com/snpa/troeplate10.htm
https://antropologia-fizyczna.pl/images/typologia/michalski/yb-r03.jpg
https://antropologia-fizyczna.pl/images/typologia/michalski/yb-r02.jpg
https://antropologia-fizyczna.pl/images/typologia/michalski/yb-r01.jpg


Eickstedt grouped them in Mediterranid and Cromagnid

https://antropologia-fizyczna.pl/images/typologia/eickstedt/1.jpg

[Zhulta]

some of them give me khoi san vibes, or look like mixed with khoisan elements

[E1b1b]

some of them give me khoi san vibes, or look like mixed with khoisan elements

The phenotypes of Northern Africa are completely unrelated to Khoi San. Khoi San are the original A and B Y-DNA carrying sub Saharan Africans. Before E carrying Bantus spread E all over southern Africa. Bantu phenotypes are closer related to Paleo Maghrebis(basing on Y-DNA) than Khoi San.

[Zhulta]

I thought it was due to phenotype Paleo Saharid

http://humanphenotypes.net/PaleoSaharid.html

is this phenotype pseudo science ? It says they were more widespread in paleolithic. I think some of those posted look somewhat similar, Or is the similarity superficial, maybe due to similar adaption?

[gixajo]

some of those what Coon classified as pred "Mechta-Afalou" like, partially with other admix



Eickstedt grouped them in Mediterranid and Cromagnid

rl]

Where from are suposed to be those soldiers?

None of the profiles of these men seem to correspond to the skull shown. Had Coon vision problems?

[Immanenz]

Where from are suposed to be those soldiers?

None of the profiles of these men seem to correspond to the skull shown. Had Coon vision problems?

this was from Eickstedt- yeah i agree, they do not show much resemblance to the skull. Most of those soldiers would be classified as (Atlanto) Med by Coon, and maybe its the reaon why Eickstedt grouped them later in this category (?)
Coon claimed his examples were partially reduced etc.