Genetic study Inference of human pigmentation from ancient DNA by genotype likelihood

[markwro]

The papers of this type are doing a lot of damage-are falsifying the truth.The authors are committing at least 2 vital mistakes.They assume 'Out of Africa' hypothesis really happened [so far no solid evidence of it] and purposely pretend Homo sapiens neanderthalensis played minor role in the present genetic pool of Europeans+ genes.May I remind the Neanderthals were pale skinned [vital to survival in snowy environment] and some of them had red hair - alleles still present amongst some Europeans.

 

[Jaska]

The papers of this type are doing a lot of damage-are falsifying the truth.The authors are committing at least 2 vital mistakes.They assume 'Out of Africa' hypothesis really happened [so far no solid evidence of it] and purposely pretend Homo sapiens neanderthalensis played minor role in the present genetic pool of Europeans+ genes.May I remind the Neanderthals were pale skinned [vital to survival in snowy environment] and some of them had red hair - alleles still present amongst some Europeans.

Your counter-arguments are not valid. Those are irrelevant things, because they study SNP's which we know to affect the skin color.

 

[markwro]

Your counter-arguments are not valid. Those are irrelevant things, because they study SNP's which we know to affect the skin color.

Your answer is not thoroughly researched.The genes responsible for skin/eye color come from both parents.A pale skinned male and dark skinned female (and vice versa) will produce mixed color of the skin.
The Cheddar Man-on what basis London University College got dark skin and statistically impossible blue eyes?He was yDNA
I2a S2524* and mtDNA U5b1.Their results look made up.Was the testing witnessed or was it just internal affair?He was living ~10000 years ago and the Last Glacial Maximum was ~22000 years ago so Cheddar Man and his colleagues lived in a very cold period and having dark skin could be fatal due to severe loss of body heat.Furthermore his appearance would make his hunting more difficult comparing to the pale skinned tribes...

 

[MOESAN]

Your answer is not thoroughly researched.The genes responsible for skin/eye color come from both parents.A pale skinned male and dark skinned female (and vice versa) will produce mixed color of the skin.
The Cheddar Man-on what basis London University College got dark skin and statistically impossible blue eyes?He was yDNA
I2a S2524* and mtDNA U5b1.Their results look made up.Was the testing witnessed or was it just internal affair?He was living ~10000 years ago and the Last Glacial Maximum was ~22000 years ago so Cheddar Man and his colleagues lived in a very cold period and having dark skin could be fatal due to severe loss of body heat.Furthermore his appearance would make his hunting more difficult comparing to the pale skinned tribes...

The question is:
White people show two important markers who is present among modern light or very light skinned Europoids, one almost at 100%, the others with more moderate scores despite important among Europoids. others markers seem associated to blond hair but also to light eyes and somewhat lighter skin even if lonely we are not sure they could have the same lightening effect that the two principal ones, at the contrary we can suppose they can produce the lightest "white" skins we know. BTW most of East Asians could be put among "white people" (the less light ones), despite they don't present the same efficient marker. We don't know the exact penetrance of all these markers. We do'nt know what other markers could have a weakening imput. We dont' know what exact skin colour was the ancient people's ones, and their ancestors one. We know that at least some other markers present only among SSA people are darkening skin, so we can infere that ancient basis of our ancestors were not so dark as the darkest current people of certain places of "black" Africa. We don't even know what was the original panel of pigmentation markers, in the case we 'd know where and when decide we are in front of our "original" group of ancestors.
Plus I can't accept that a certain % of BA Europeans showed still "dark" skin in the African sense without it could have been noticed by Ancients. So what science has at hand is a progress but not all the knowledge about pigmentation markers.
Concerning overliving, I'm not sure that relatively dark skins would have been by force a big handicap: for metabolism the vitamin D could have been provided by some kind of food, and not only by sun skins absorbtion. What we have to adopt is a prudent position.
Concerning last-Paleo-/Mesolithic people,what I notice is that the European population which the most of them are the lightest ones todate for skin and eyes. Not to say that the most of their lightening process is not due to mixing with Neolithic people + selection, but they went lighter than expected; maybe due to some other SNP's inherited only from local HG's and not Neolithic farmers. Only thoughts.

 

[MOESAN]

Your answer is not thoroughly researched.The genes responsible for skin/eye color come from both parents.A pale skinned male and dark skinned female (and vice versa) will produce mixed color of the skin.
The Cheddar Man-on what basis London University College got dark skin and statistically impossible blue eyes?He was yDNA
I2a S2524* and mtDNA U5b1.Their results look made up.Was the testing witnessed or was it just internal affair?He was living ~10000 years ago and the Last Glacial Maximum was ~22000 years ago so Cheddar Man and his colleagues lived in a very cold period and having dark skin could be fatal due to severe loss of body heat.Furthermore his appearance would make his hunting more difficult comparing to the pale skinned tribes...

The question is:
White people show two important markers who is present among modern light or very light skinned Europoids, one almost at 100%, the others with more moderate scores despite important among Europoids. others markers seem associated to blond hair but also to light eyes and somewhat lighter skin even if lonely we are not sure they could have the same lightening effect that the two principal ones, at the contrary we can suppose they can produce the lightest "white" skins we know. BTW most of East Asians could be put among "white people" (the less light ones), despite they don't present the same efficient marker. We don't know the exact penetrance of all these markers. We do'nt know what other markers could have a weakening imput. We dont' know what exact skin colour was the ancient people's ones, and their ancestors one. We know that at least some other markers present only among SSA people are darkening skin, so we can infere that ancient basis of our ancestors were not so dark as the darkest current people of certain places of "black" Africa. We don't even know what was the original panel of pigmentation markers, in the case we 'd know where and when decide we are in front of our "original" group of ancestors.
Plus I can't accept that a certain % of BA Europeans showed still "dark" skin in the African sense without it could have been noticed by Ancients. So what science has at hand is a progress but not all the knowledge about pigmentation markers.
Concerning overliving, I'm not sure that relatively dark skins would have been by force a big handicap: for metabolism the vitamin D could have been provided by some kind of food, and not only by sun skins absorbtion. What we have to adopt is a prudent position.
Concerning last-Paleo-/Mesolithic people,what I notice is that the European population which the most of them are the lightest ones todate for skin and eyes. Not to say that the most of their lightening process is not due to mixing with Neolithic people + selection, but they went lighter than expected; maybe due to some other SNP's inherited only from local HG's and not Neolithic farmers. Only thoughts.

 

[Jaska]

The genes responsible for skin/eye color come from both parents.A pale skinned male and dark skinned female (and vice versa) will produce mixed color of the skin.

The Cheddar Man-on what basis London University College got dark skin and statistically impossible blue eyes?He was yDNA

I2a S2524* and mtDNA U5b1.Their results look made up.

1. Of course they come from both parents.

2. Paternal and maternal lineages are totally irrelevant here, because none of the skin color SNP’s are in mtDNA or YDNA.

3. There are many WHG samples with dark skin and blue eyes, there is nothing impossible. There are many SNP’s which only affect one but not another: skin color or eye color.

lived in a very cold period and having dark skin could be fatal due to severe loss of body heat.Furthermore his appearance would make his hunting more difficult comparing to the pale skinned tribes...

Very funny!

Body heat has no relevance here. D-vitamin would be a problem for dark-skinned in the north, if people could not get it from their food. But for example fish is a good source for D-vitamin.

 

[Jaska]

MOESAN, are you aware of Ju & Mathieson 2021: "The evolution of skin pigmentation-associated variation in West Eurasia"? They have studied 170 skin color related SNP's from the ancient DNA samples.

 

[MOESAN]

MOESAN, are you aware of Ju & Mathieson 2021: "The evolution of skin pigmentation-associated variation in West Eurasia"? They have studied 170 skin color related SNP's from the ancient DNA samples.

I was not aware of this, thanks. But the question is still here: we have not the skin colour of these people to evaluate the input of these SNP's. Seemingly the most important ones for skin lightening were the well known 2 which reached almost 100% in Europeans. I defy any scientist to prove me he can reliablely evaluate penetrance or effectivity of 170 "skin colour" SNP's - if they were and are still all of them among Europeans) in Europe where the 2 afore mentionned SNP's made the most of the work.