Theory : coastal north africans don't have any SSA ancestry

[Hamilcar]

Well the African component in taforalt/iberomaurisian pulls them a lot closer to other ssa (taforalt 40% indigenous north african and plots like a mullato), so it's reasonable to assume that this african component is highly related to a sub saharan african population.

that's actually false because ANA is on the same tree root as other Eurasian components and closer to eurasians than SSA (it's even more eurasian shifted than the most west eurasian north-east african populations like tigray for example)

[Thunder_shock]

that's actually false because ANA is on the same tree root as other Eurasian components and closer to eurasians than SSA (it's even more eurasian shifted than the most west eurasian north-east african populations like tigray for example)

What does that even mean? tigray are a mixed population, we dont have data for pure ana populations. We can only infer from observing populations who have partial ana admixture where a pure ana would plot. And like i said taforalt individuals plot close to Tigray despite being only 40% ana. Basically half ana individuals plot similar to mulattoes. So how do you explain that?

[Hamilcar]

What does that even mean? tigray are a mixed population, we dont have data for pure ana populations. We can only infer from observing populations who have partial ana admixture where a pure ana would plot. And like i said taforalt individuals plot close to Tigray despite being only 40% ana. Basically half ana individuals plot similar to mulattoes. So how do you explain that?

that simply means that the only thing that ANA and modern SSA share in common is probably their dark skin lol. ANA was probably craniometrically caucasoid (based on the morphological analyses of Iberomaurusians, ANA was morphologically distinct from sub-saharan africans (Cranio-Dentally) because if it was so it would have been obvious in the Iberomaurusians but it isn't. Moreover craniometrically taforalt was similar to late pleistocene europeans) and closer to other eurasian populations than any SSA one ( Taforalt in PCA don't act the same as an usual mixed 45% SSA and 55% Eurasian populations , again its more Eurasian shifted)

Technically it can't be labelled as SSA because it's an indigenous north african population (population pre-OOA ,indigenous to North africa)

[Thunder_shock]

that simply means that the only thing that ANA and modern SSA share in common is probably their dark skin lol. ANA was probably craniometrically caucasoid (based on the morphological analyses of Iberomaurusians, ANA was morphologically distinct from sub-saharan africans (Cranio-Dentally) because if it was so it would have been obvious in the Iberomaurusians but it isn't. Moreover craniometrically taforalt was similar to late pleistocene europeans) and closer to other eurasian populations than any SSA one ( Taforalt in PCA don't act the same as an usual mixed 45% SSA and 55% Eurasian populations , again its more Eurasian shifted)

Technically it can't be labelled as SSA because it's an indigenous north african population (population pre-OOA ,indigenous to North africa)

It's only slightly more eurasian shifted than an actual mulatto population with similar admixture (west eurasian + ssa).
I wouldnt put too much importance on craniometric data because you get weird results with mixed populations (as in results wont be consistent with genetic data).

[Hamilcar]

It's only slightly more eurasian shifted than an actual mulatto population with similar admixture (west eurasian + ssa).
I wouldnt put too much importance on craniometric data because you get weird results with mixed populations (as in results wont be consistent with genetic data).

even with these arguments ANA was still not similar to any non-caucasoid ssa populations so why putting it in the same bag as SSA ?

Yoruba ancestry is deeper than the regular erytrean component for example (they only share the same geographical position that's it)

Now the main point of my topic was about modern west african and east african ancestry among NAs You should debate about this not about an obscure ghost population hided inside the taforalt component that only composes 1/3 of NAs ancestry

[Thunder_shock]

even with these arguments ANA was still not similar to any non-caucasoid ssa populations so why putting it in the same bag as SSA ?

Yoruba ancestry is deeper than the regular erytrean component for example (they only share the same geographical position that's it)

Now the main point of my topic was about modern west african and east african ancestry among NAs You should debate about this not about an obscure ghost population hided inside the taforalt component that only composes 1/3 of NAs ancestry

atm for scientists ana is a mysterious lineage and we dont know about the different african lineages that coalesced to form modern ssa's or ana's.
I'm only commenting on where this component clusters on a global PCA.

[Hamilcar]

atm for scientists ana is a mysterious lineage and we dont know about the different african lineages that coalesced to form modern ssa's or ana's.
I'm only commenting on where this component clusters on a global PCA.

Well I suppose you already know PCA for these kind of archaic populations can be quite misleading especially in the case of taforalt we still need more datas (let alone ANA)

[SharpFork]

I'm not sure if the argument makes sense, if we already have Taforalt and Mar_EN as references and North Africans score more SSA with them doesn't that mean that the calculators find SSA ancestry, which you yourself argue is different from ANA, to be right type of indigenous African ancestry in North Africans?

Sure those same SSA could have 1/8 ancestry from Taforalt but at this point is so deep I don't get why this would invalidate the entire of SSA ancestry in North Africa.

Edit: Also modern North Africans accept more SSA even when having ancient north African samples already admixed with ENF and Levant, the implication is clear to me.

[Hamilcar]

I'm not sure if the argument makes sense, if we already have Taforalt and Mar_EN as references and North Africans score more SSA with them doesn't that mean that the calculators find SSA ancestry, which you yourself argue is different from ANA, to be right type of indigenous African ancestry in North Africans?

Sure those same SSA could have 1/8 ancestry from Taforalt but at this point is so deep I don't get why this would invalidate the entire of SSA ancestry in North Africa.

Edit: Also modern North Africans accept more SSA even when having ancient north African samples already admixed with ENF and Levant, the implication is clear to me.

reread the title pls I'm not saying all north africans only coastal north africans especially the endemic groups from these regions like riffians or kabyles. Taforalt/MAR_EN predates the capsian culture and these two populations are more southern shifted than modern NAs so my argument makes sense

Deep or not yoruba are still used as proxies in many calculators and studies

and that's totally false coastal NAs are not more ssa shifted than ancient north africans

[SharpFork]

Even when you literally use all ancient North African samples together you cannot remove West African ancestry, that ancestry is real: