First modern Britons had 'dark to black' skin, Cheddar Man DNA analysis reveals

They are shown on the documentary.

OK, I see that now. Sorry for the suspicion. A lot of questionable stuff is put on the internet.

It's good to have the actual color chart as well.

I was skeptical he was quite this dark, but as I said, given the information we have now, and the latest test running 36 snps, he was dark brown to black.
 
So all in all, it is a dark to black skin colour individual. Interestingly with intermediate eye colour ... [text cut off screen] ... can't say for sure. Though certainly I would doubt he was dark brown.

As for hair, I'm missing too many MC1R mutations that impact red, and therefore more brown ... [text cut off screen] ... would be a dark brown to black haired individual, certainly not the true black of an Asian ... [text cut off screen] ...

I've attached a little image that reflects the range of these values (.7-.8), I didn't go to 0.9 ... [text cut off screen] ... can give really.

As for the lesser coverage individual, missing 10 varients make this too difficult to call, ... [text cut off screen] ... would be the same as the above individual at all.

... [text cut off screen]


View attachment 9745

Objectively, what do they mean by "dark-black" in comparison to simply "dark"? I'd like to know what degree of pigmentation is assigned to those categories. Would a typical Khoisan (which is my personal "intuitive" stance about the real skin color of the WHG) be "dark-black" or just "dark" according to their analyses? I'm supposing that, since the category implies a wide range of phenotypes from dark to really very dark (black), then there is still a discussion on whether Cheddar Man was as dark, almost Australian Melanesian-like, as the reconstruction they did, or more dark "chocolate" like many dark-skinned Africans such as the Igbo, Eritreans or Khoi-Sans.
 
Sorry to interject, but from the color chart shown in the documentary, I think the Khoisan would be "dark", not "dark-black".

xBdMcrn.png
[/IMG]
 
On the show they spoke about the 5000 years older remains that they found and that they tested those and they didnt match chedder mans.
They said they all must have turned around and left. lol That was it. They made a massive point about the first britain being black and seemed
to forget the fact that there might be others around. After all he did have a tennis ball sized hole in his head and i doubt it was done by his mates.

I was wanting to hear there story of why man was at chedder gorge in the first place and they didnt disappoint, it started with the old herding animals into a gully to trap them, onto the rich and teaming surroundings and finished up with the old ritual chestnut lol. what nonsense.
Why make a silly story when they havent got a clue ?
Not one mention of mining or do they think the gods gave them there weapons after the ritual ?

I would be interested to see were native americans fall on the 5 group chart, if they fall inside the second to last aswell it would be clear the model makers went over the top.
 
nothing has been said yet, but I suppose the 10 ka Cheddar man matches inside the Villabruna cluster, who replaced the Magdalenian El Miron cluster 15 ka
I suspect the 15 ka Cheddar man is Magdalenian
 
His mother was very dark then, almost black in skin?
 
Deeper appreciation for thread

Thank you all for helping me to reflect on the thread and to draw an deeper appreciation for the provess of discovery yhay was happening.
Thinking beyond what color CHEDDAR MAN was I've stated to search for how we've come to this point. What and who was the first modern Briton? I've been following the thread and I even went backward as well as forward. Thats when I stoped trying todigest

Cheddar Man: DNA shows early Briton had dark skin

By Paul RinconScience editor, BBC News website






A cutting-edge scientific analysis shows that a Briton from 10,000 years ago had dark brown skin and blue eyes.
Researchers from London's Natural History Museum extracted DNA from Cheddar Man, Britain's oldest complete skeleton, which was discovered in 1903.
University College London researchers then used the subsequent genome analysis for a facial reconstruction.
It underlines the fact that the lighter skin characteristic of modern Europeans is a relatively recent phenomenon.
No prehistoric Briton of this age had previously had their genome analysed.
As such, the analysis provides valuable new insights into the first people to resettle Britain after the last Ice Age.
The analysis of Cheddar Man's genome - the "blueprint" for a human, contained in the nuclei of our cells - will be published in a journal, and will also feature in the upcoming Channel 4 documentary The First Brit, Secrets Of The 10,000-year-old Man.
Cheddar Man's remains had been unearthed 115 years ago in Gough's Cave, located in Somerset's Cheddar Gorge. Subsequent examination has shown that the man was short by today's standards - about 5ft 5in - and probably died in his early 20s.
Prof Chris Stringer, the museum's research leader in human origins, said: "I've been studying the skeleton of Cheddar Man for about 40 years
"So to come face-to-face with what this guy could have looked like - and that striking combination of the hair, the face, the eye colour and that dark skin: something a few years ago we couldn't have imagined and yet that's what the scientific data show."
Fractures on the surface of the skull suggest he may even have met his demise in a violent manner. It's not known how he came to lie in the cave, but it's possible he was placed there by others in his tribe.
The Natural History Museum researchers extracted the DNA from part of the skull near the ear known as the petrous. At first, project scientists Prof Ian Barnes and Dr Selina Brace weren't sure if they'd get any DNA at all from the remains.
But they were in luck: not only was DNA preserved, but Cheddar Man has since yielded the highest coverage (a measure of the sequencing accuracy) for a genome from this period of European prehistory - known as the Mesolithic, or Middle Stone Age.
They teamed up with researchers at University College London (UCL) to analyse the results, including gene variants associated with hair, eye and skin colour.
Extra mature Cheddar

They found the Stone Age Briton had dark hair - with a small probability that it was curlier than average - blue eyes and skin that was probably dark brown or black in tone.
This combination might appear striking to us today, but it was a common appearance in western Europe during this period.
Steven Clarke, director of the Channel Four documentary, said: "I think we all know we live in times where we are unusually preoccupied with skin pigmentation."
Prof Mark Thomas, a geneticist from UCL, said: "It becomes a part of our understanding, I think that would be a much, much better thing. I think it would be good if people lodge it in their heads, and it becomes a little part of their knowledge."
Unsurprisingly, the findings have generated lots of interest on social media.
Cheddar Man's genome reveals he was closely related to other Mesolithic individuals - so-called Western Hunter-Gatherers - who have been analysed from Spain, Luxembourg and Hungary.
Dutch artists Alfons and Adrie Kennis, specialists in palaeontological model-making, took the genetic findings and combined them with physical measurements from scans of the skull. The result was a strikingly lifelike reconstruction of a face from our distant past.
Pale skin probably arrived in Britain with a migration of people from the Middle East around 6,000 years ago. This population had pale skin and brown eyes and absorbed populations like the ones Cheddar Man belonged to.
No-one's entirely sure why pale skin evolved in these farmers, but their cereal-based diet was probably deficient in Vitamin D. This would have required agriculturalists to absorb this essential nutrient from sunlight through their skin.
"There may be other factors that are causing lower skin pigmentation over time in the last 10,000 years. But that's the big explanation that most scientists turn to," said Prof Thomas.
Boom and bust

The genomic results also suggest Cheddar Man could not drink milk as an adult. This ability only spread much later, after the onset of the Bronze Age.
Present-day Europeans owe on average 10% of their ancestry to Mesolithic hunters like Cheddar Man.
Britain has been something of a boom-and-bust story for humans over the last million-or-so years. Modern humans were here as early as 40,000 years ago, but a period of extreme cold known as the Last Glacial Maximum drove them out some 10,000 years later.
There's evidence from Gough's Cave that hunter-gatherers ventured back around 15,000 years ago, establishing a temporary presence when the climate briefly improved. However, they were soon sent packing by another cold snap. Cut marks on the bones suggest these people cannibalised their dead - perhaps as part of ritual practices.
Britain was once again settled 11,000 years ago; and has been inhabited ever since. Cheddar Man was part of this wave of migrants, who walked across a landmass called Doggerland that, in those days, connected Britain to mainland Europe. This makes him the oldest known Briton with a direct connection to people living here today.
This is not the first attempt to analyse DNA from the Cheddar Man. In the late 1990s, Oxford University geneticist Brian Sykes sequenced mitochondrial DNA from one of Cheddar Man's molars.
Mitochondrial DNA comes from the biological "batteries" within our cells and is passed down exclusively from a mother to her children.
Prof Sykes compared the ancient genetic information with DNA from 20 living residents of Cheddar village and found two matches - including history teacher Adrian Targett, who became closely connected with the discovery. The result is consistent with the approximately 10% of Europeans who share the same mitochondrial DNA type.








mrbojangles25Follow

  • [*=left]Forum Posts: 39763
    [*=left]Followed by: 0
    [*=left]Reviews: 11 Stacks: 0
    [*=left]Forum Karma: 0



 
Last edited:
When we look at genetic variation in modern British people today, we find that – for those who do not have a recent history of migration – around 10% of their ancestry can be attributed to the ancient European population to which Cheddar Man belonged. This group is referred to as the western European Mesolithic hunter-gatherers.

Can someone help me understand this? I thought British people had about 35-40% ancestry from WHGs, according to the Eurogenes EEF-WHG-ANE. Is that test now outdated due to new research?
 
Not sure about the Eurogenes but ten percent is way too low
 
Can someone help me understand this? I thought British people had about 35-40% ancestry from WHGs, according to the Eurogenes EEF-WHG-ANE. Is that test now outdated due to new research?

That's an amateur made analysis, not an academic one.



Haak et al based on actual ancient samples:

Haak-et-al-2015-Figure-3-Admixture-Proportions-in-Modern-DNA-With-Linguistic-and-Historical-Origins-Added.png


Most of the WHG survival was in the far north-east, which was not suitable to the Neolithic farming package.

If you wanted to know the total hunter-gatherer, you'd have to take from 50 to 60% of the Yamnaya figure, which would be EHG.

Anyone know of a more recent simple break down of modern populations?
 
That's an amateur made analysis, not an academic one.



Haak et al based on actual ancient samples:

Haak-et-al-2015-Figure-3-Admixture-Proportions-in-Modern-DNA-With-Linguistic-and-Historical-Origins-Added.png


Most of the WHG survival was in the far north-east, which was not suitable to the Neolithic farming package.

If you wanted to know the total hunter-gatherer, you'd have to take from 50 to 60% of the Yamnaya figure, which would be EHG.

Anyone know of a more recent simple break down of modern populations?
oops, yeah ten percent sounds about right
 
@Angela

What about this data? I think it's from Lazaridis et al..

View attachment 9747

It is: it's from the Supplement to Lazaridis et al 2014.

The prior graphic I showed is from Haak et al 2015, which is also by Lazaridis, in a sense, because he was co-author and equal contributor on that paper, and probably primarily responsible for the statistical analysis.

The difference is in the three mixing populations, I think. In the 2014 analysis, they don't use Yamnaya samples. They're using an ancient sample, Mal'ta, representing the Ancient North Eurasians, ANE.

All of the more recent hunter-gatherer ancestry from Europe, including what is now labeled EHG, gets swept up into the WHG category.

The 2015 analysis now has Yamnaya samples. Those samples are 50-60% EHG, so what remains in WHG is actual "western" hunter-gatherer ancestry.

This all makes sense because we now know that EHG are a mix of WHG and something ANE like.

Does that make sense?

You should take a look at our thread for newbies. All the papers are there and you can see the progression in knowledge.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34850-Important-papers-for-newbies-to-Population-Genetics
 
@Angela
Thanks, it is clear to me now. I have read some the recommended papers and Maciamo's Yamna history already and I knew the general ideas but I was unsure about some of the details.
 
Now they will say that he came from the Iberian Peninsula.
 
Sorry to interject, but from the color chart shown in the documentary, I think the Khoisan would be "dark", not "dark-black".

xBdMcrn.png
[/IMG]

Ops, I didn't saw the color chart (what a clever zoom btw, hahaha!). Yes, Khoisan definitely look more "dark" than "dark-black". I saw part of the results of the study they released yesterday (thanks for posting a link to it here, Angela) and they say that the other Mesolithic individual was more intermediate-to-dark. From intermediate-to-dark to dark-to-black there is a very visible difference. Does that mean that the WHG populations, even those closely related, had a wider range of skin pigmentation levels than we see in most modern populations? I know that many black Africans say that it is a mistake to take one individual from their populations and use them as a proxy for the entire people, because there is often a wide variation between people, especially if you compare the lightest woman to the darkest man.
 
Ops, I didn't saw the color chart (what a clever zoom btw, hahaha!). Yes, Khoisan definitely look more "dark" than "dark-black". I saw part of the results of the study they released yesterday (thanks for posting a link to it here, Angela) and they say that the other Mesolithic individual was more intermediate-to-dark. From intermediate-to-dark to dark-to-black there is a very visible difference. Does that mean that the WHG populations, even those closely related, had a wider range of skin pigmentation levels than we see in most modern populations? I know that many black Africans say that it is a mistake to take one individual from their populations and use them as a proxy for the entire people, because there is often a wide variation between people, especially if you compare the lightest woman to the darkest man.

I think that might be correct. On the other hand, there's been damage to this ancient genetic material, which is why for some few snps they couldn't get calls.

Now that the dust has settled, my "hunch" is that they, as a group, looked like South Indian "Veddoids", with some variation among them, as indeed is true for those populations, and also for Africans. I don't get why it's important which "tone" or "shade" of "dark" is so important.

San children: in America today they'd still be "black".

cedarberg-bagatelle-kalahari-game-ranch-san-children-40.jpg



East African
barkhad.png


South Indians:
attachment.php



Indian-Girls.jpg


hqdefault.jpg


So, some part of the differences are probably normal variation. Some is continuing evolution. Loschbour is two thousand years younger than Cheddar Man. Or, he may have gotten a bit of ANF.

What I also find interesting is that even the eye color was continuing to lighten, from perhaps a hazel to a blue-green, but according to the latest algorithm not light blue.

Perhaps they should have stuck with the fact that both these populations were darker than modern Europeans, but that the ANF were lighter than the WHG. Instead, I think they ran the newest test, with the most snps (36), but when they got all this flak they waffled a bit.

The bottom line is that they didn't look like us. There's been admixture and evolution in terms of de-pigmentation. It is what it is.
 

This thread has been viewed 120213 times.

Back
Top