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

[Tautalus]

Abstract

Light eyes, hair and skins probably evolved several times as Homo sapiens dispersed from Africa. In areas with lower UV radiation, light pigmentation alleles increased in frequency because of their adaptive advantage and of other contingent factors such as migration and drift. However, the tempo and mode of their spread is not known. Phenotypic inference from ancient DNA is complicated, both because these traits are polygenic, and because of low sequence depth. We evaluated the effects of the latter by randomly removing reads in two high-coverage ancient samples, the Paleolithic Ust-Ishim from Russia and the Mesolithic SF12 from Sweden. We could thus compare three approaches to pigmentation inference, concluding that, for subop-timal levels of coverage (<8x), a probabilistic method estimating genotype likelihoods leads to the most robust predictions. We then applied that protocol to 348 ancient genomes from Eura-sia, describing how skin, eye and hair color evolved over the past 45,000 years. The shift to-wards lighter pigmentations turned out to be all but linear in time and place, and slower than expected, with half of the individuals showing dark or intermediate skin colors well into the Copper and Iron ages. We also observed a peak of light eye pigmentation in Mesolithic times, and an accelerated change during the spread of Neolithic farmers over Western Eurasia, although local-ized processes of gene flow and admixture, or lack thereof, also played a significant role.
​

Inference of human pigmentation from ancient DNA by genotype likelihood

Light eyes, hair and skins probably evolved several times as Homo sapiens dispersed from Africa. In areas with lower UV radiation, light pigmentation alleles increased in frequency because of their adaptive advantage and of other contingent factors such as migration and drift. However, the tempo...

www.biorxiv.org

 

[MOESAN]

Abstract

Light eyes, hair and skins probably evolved several times as Homo sapiens dispersed from Africa. In areas with lower UV radiation, light pigmentation alleles increased in frequency because of their adaptive advantage and of other contingent factors such as migration and drift. However, the tempo and mode of their spread is not known. Phenotypic inference from ancient DNA is complicated, both because these traits are polygenic, and because of low sequence depth. We evaluated the effects of the latter by randomly removing reads in two high-coverage ancient samples, the Paleolithic Ust-Ishim from Russia and the Mesolithic SF12 from Sweden. We could thus compare three approaches to pigmentation inference, concluding that, for subop-timal levels of coverage (<8x), a probabilistic method estimating genotype likelihoods leads to the most robust predictions. We then applied that protocol to 348 ancient genomes from Eura-sia, describing how skin, eye and hair color evolved over the past 45,000 years. The shift to-wards lighter pigmentations turned out to be all but linear in time and place, and slower than expected, with half of the individuals showing dark or intermediate skin colors well into the Copper and Iron ages. We also observed a peak of light eye pigmentation in Mesolithic times, and an accelerated change during the spread of Neolithic farmers over Western Eurasia, although local-ized processes of gene flow and admixture, or lack thereof, also played a significant role.
​

.I have some doubts. I find very astonishing the %'s of "dark skin" among Bronze people in Europe, even in North, without this heterogeneity being mentioned by ancient authors; maybe I lack readings? And what is dark? When I look at Genetiker evaluations I see same "very dark" ot "dark" for European and SSA pop's of the time. Surprising!

 

[Tautalus]

.I have some doubts. I find very astonishing the %'s of "dark skin" among Bronze people in Europe, even in North, without this heterogeneity being mentioned by ancient authors; maybe I lack readings? And what is dark? When I look at Genetiker evaluations I see same "very dark" ot "dark" for European and SSA pop's of the time. Surprising!

This system they use (HIrisPlex-S) is considered credible and widely used in forensic science for example. The system infers, from 41 SNPs, the individual probabilities for three eye, four hair, and five skin color categories. It has been validated and shown to have a low margin of error. However, it can face difficulties with ancient DNA due to low sequencing coverage and DNA degradation.
335 of the 348 samples they analyzed had a coverage equal to or less than 8x (suboptimal coverage levels), they applied a probabilistic approach to those samples. They say that the probabilistic method they used was shown to be robust in inferring true pigmentation traits even at low coverage levels, although there is a small percentage of misassigned.
Maybe like the article suggests the shift towards lighter pigmentation in Europe populations was non-linear in time and space and slower than expected, perhaps isolated pockets of the population maintained darker skin tones well into the Copper and Iron Age, until increased human mobility, migrations and admixture led to their disappearance.​

 

[Grumpy doctor]

This system they use (HIrisPlex-S) is considered credible and widely used in forensic science for example. The system infers, from 41 SNPs, the individual probabilities for three eye, four hair, and five skin color categories. It has been validated and shown to have a low margin of error. However, it can face difficulties with ancient DNA due to low sequencing coverage and DNA degradation.
335 of the 348 samples they analyzed had a coverage equal to or less than 8x (suboptimal coverage levels), they applied a probabilistic approach to those samples. They say that the probabilistic method they used was shown to be robust in inferring true pigmentation traits even at low coverage levels, although there is a small percentage of misassigned.
Maybe like the article suggests the shift towards lighter pigmentation in Europe populations was non-linear in time and space and slower than expected, perhaps isolated pockets of the population maintained darker skin tones well into the Copper and Iron Age, until increased human mobility, migrations and admixture led to their disappearance.​

The study in nonsensical it has less than five people per site and some less than five per country, hiserplex s authors don’t consider dark black and dark to be the same skin color and in a 3 color format intermediate is grouped with light skin and is found manly in Mediterranean populations, while dark is found in the Middle East, the authors created their own personal 3 color system yet they used hiserplex s, the southern arc study had 200 authors , this has like 3 and it clearly shows dark skin was not the majority even 7000 years ago, this study doesn’t even tell you what the samples are, it doesn’t include sintashta, only has one lbk individual only five Neolithic Anatolian, only one globular amphorae person, zero typrilla, zero unetice and almost no bell beakers, all populations that showed high levels of light features in the 2022 southern arc how convenient and it the same version of hiserplex s since 2019

 

[Jaska]

The problem lies not in the method, but in the scale used. The HIrisPlex-S Scale diminishes the lighter skin color classes and enlarges the darker classes. For example, modern Finns are "intermediate" according to HIrisPlex-S. But if we apply the Melanin Index (like in Martin et al. 2017: An Unexpectedly Complex Architecture for Skin Pigmentation in Africans), we get five classes with 20 % portion each. Then Finns would be pale, which makes more sense. Also the WHG and the EHG would get one class lighter.

https://www.alkuperasivusto.fi/Melanin_index_for_skin_color.jpg

 

[Grumpy doctor]

This system they use (HIrisPlex-S) is considered credible and widely used in forensic science for example. The system infers, from 41 SNPs, the individual probabilities for three eye, four hair, and five skin color categories. It has been validated and shown to have a low margin of error. However, it can face difficulties with ancient DNA due to low sequencing coverage and DNA degradation.
335 of the 348 samples they analyzed had a coverage equal to or less than 8x (suboptimal coverage levels), they applied a probabilistic approach to those samples. They say that the probabilistic method they used was shown to be robust in inferring true pigmentation traits even at low coverage levels, although there is a small percentage of misassigned.
Maybe like the article suggests the shift towards lighter pigmentation in Europe populations was non-linear in time and space and slower than expected, perhaps isolated pockets of the population maintained darker skin tones well into the Copper and Iron Age, until increased human mobility, migrations and admixture led to their disappearance.​

The study in nonsensical it has less than five people per site and some less than five per country, hiserplex s authors don’t consider dark black and dark to be the same skin color and in a 3 color format intermediate is grouped with light skin and is found manly in Mediterranean populations, while dark is found in the Middle East, the authors created their own personal 3 color system yet they used hiserplex s, the southern arc study had 200 authors , this has like 3 and it clearly shows dark skin was not the majority even 7000 years ago, this study doesn’t even tell you what the samples are, it doesn’t include sintashta, only has one lbk individual only five Neolithic Anatolian, only one globular amphorae person, zero typrilla, zero unetice and almost no bell beakers, all populations that showed high levels of light features in the 2022 southern arc how convenient and it the same version of hiserplex s since 2019

This system they use (HIrisPlex-S) is considered credible and widely used in forensic science for example. The system infers, from 41 SNPs, the individual probabilities for three eye, four hair, and five skin color categories. It has been validated and shown to have a low margin of error. However, it can face difficulties with ancient DNA due to low sequencing coverage and DNA degradation.
335 of the 348 samples they analyzed had a coverage equal to or less than 8x (suboptimal coverage levels), they applied a probabilistic approach to those samples. They say that the probabilistic method they used was shown to be robust in inferring true pigmentation traits even at low coverage levels, although there is a small percentage of misassigned.
Maybe like the article suggests the shift towards lighter pigmentation in Europe populations was non-linear in time and space and slower than expected, perhaps isolated pockets of the population maintained darker skin tones well into the Copper and Iron Age, until increased human mobility, migrations and admixture led to their disappearance.​

This 200 author study disagrees with the conclusions of the three people who wrote this paper and they used the same version of hiserplex s,

The problem lies not in the method, but in the scale used. The HIrisPlex-S Scale diminishes the lighter skin color classes and enlarges the darker classes. For example, modern Finns are "intermediate" according to HIrisPlex-S. But if we apply the Melanin Index (like in Martin et al. 2017: An Unexpectedly Complex Architecture for Skin Pigmentation in Africans), we get five classes with 20 % portion each. Then Finns would be pale, which makes more sense. Also the WHG and the EHG would get one class lighter.

View attachment 17668

https://www.alkuperasivusto.fi/Melanin_index_for_skin_color.jpg

yea exactly but the problem is most studies completely ignore that point, even in the original hiserplex s paper half of Poland and 75 percent of modern French are intermediate, 3 quarters of Chinese are “dark black “ and beoudins from the levant are predicted dark, all darker than they actually are in real life, but even with these categories the southern arc from Harvard still found Eurasians to be overwhelmingly intermediate with a lot more samples total and per country, this is a very strange study in fact there is no other study that shows dark over intermediate from Neolithic times including the picene study, the pedigrees of Neolithic France and the Roman era British study that included Neolithic to Iron Age in supplement, all 4 studies including southern arc all between 2022 and just a few months ago agreed intermediate was the common phenotype not dark

 

[MOESAN]

The study in nonsensical it has less than five people per site and some less than five per country, hiserplex s authors don’t consider dark black and dark to be the same skin color and in a 3 color format intermediate is grouped with light skin and is found manly in Mediterranean populations, while dark is found in the Middle East, the authors created their own personal 3 color system yet they used hiserplex s, the southern arc study had 200 authors , this has like 3 and it clearly shows dark skin was not the majority even 7000 years ago, this study doesn’t even tell you what the samples are, it doesn’t include sintashta, only has one lbk individual only five Neolithic Anatolian, only one globular amphorae person, zero typrilla, zero unetice and almost no bell beakers, all populations that showed high levels of light features in the 2022 southern arc how convenient and it the same version of hiserplex s since 2019

Thans for your observations I did not about the sample(s) and the curious classifications.

 

[MOESAN]

The problem lies not in the method, but in the scale used. The HIrisPlex-S Scale diminishes the lighter skin color classes and enlarges the darker classes. For example, modern Finns are "intermediate" according to HIrisPlex-S. But if we apply the Melanin Index (like in Martin et al. 2017: An Unexpectedly Complex Architecture for Skin Pigmentation in Africans), we get five classes with 20 % portion each. Then Finns would be pale, which makes more sense. Also the WHG and the EHG would get one class lighter.

View attachment 17668

https://www.alkuperasivusto.fi/Melanin_index_for_skin_color.jpg

Question: perhaps I missed somethings, but it seems to me that the first tries to classify genetic skin colours have been based on a system of + vs - lightening SNP's or marker, and the theorem that the ancestral (when?) colour was very dark or black skin, what is very discutable. But it seems that to obtain the darkest skin colour SSA people has also undergone darkening SNP's actions.

 

[Grumpy doctor]

This system they use (HIrisPlex-S) is considered credible and widely used in forensic science for example. The system infers, from 41 SNPs, the individual probabilities for three eye, four hair, and five skin color categories. It has been validated and shown to have a low margin of error. However, it can face difficulties with ancient DNA due to low sequencing coverage and DNA degradation.
335 of the 348 samples they analyzed had a coverage equal to or less than 8x (suboptimal coverage levels), they applied a probabilistic approach to those samples. They say that the probabilistic method they used was shown to be robust in inferring true pigmentation traits even at low coverage levels, although there is a small percentage of misassigned.
Maybe like the article suggests the shift towards lighter pigmentation in Europe populations was non-linear in time and space and slower than expected, perhaps isolated pockets of the population maintained darker skin tones well into the Copper and Iron Age, until increased human mobility, migrations and admixture led to their disappearance.​

The study in nonsensical it has less than five people per site and some less than five per country, hiserplex s authors don’t consider dark black and dark to be the same skin color and in a 3 color format intermediate is grouped with light skin and is found manly in Mediterranean populations, while dark is found in the Middle East, the authors created their own personal 3 color system yet they used hiserplex s, the southern arc study had 200 authors , this has like 3 and it clearly shows dark skin was not the majority even 7000 years ago, this study doesn’t even tell you what the samples are, it doesn’t include sintashta, only has one lbk individual only five Neolithic Anatolian, only one globular amphorae person, zero typrilla, zero unetice and almost no bell beakers, all populations that showed high levels of light features in the 2022 southern arc how convenient and it the same version of hiserplex s since 2019

This system they use (HIrisPlex-S) is considered credible and widely used in forensic science for example. The system infers, from 41 SNPs, the individual probabilities for three eye, four hair, and five skin color categories. It has been validated and shown to have a low margin of error. However, it can face difficulties with ancient DNA due to low sequencing coverage and DNA degradation.
335 of the 348 samples they analyzed had a coverage equal to or less than 8x (suboptimal coverage levels), they applied a probabilistic approach to those samples. They say that the probabilistic method they used was shown to be robust in inferring true pigmentation traits even at low coverage levels, although there is a small percentage of misassigned.
Maybe like the article suggests the shift towards lighter pigmentation in Europe populations was non-linear in time and space and slower than expected, perhaps isolated pockets of the population maintained darker skin tones well into the Copper and Iron Age, until increased human mobility, migrations and admixture led to their disappearance.​

This 200 author study disagrees with the conclusions of the three people who wrote this paper and they used the same version of hiserplex s,

The problem lies not in the method, but in the scale used. The HIrisPlex-S Scale diminishes the lighter skin color classes and enlarges the darker classes. For example, modern Finns are "intermediate" according to HIrisPlex-S. But if we apply the Melanin Index (like in Martin et al. 2017: An Unexpectedly Complex Architecture for Skin Pigmentation in Africans), we get five classes with 20 % portion each. Then Finns would be pale, which makes more sense. Also the WHG and the EHG would get one class lighter.

View attachment 17668

https://www.alkuperasivusto.fi/Melanin_index_for_skin_color.jpg

yea exactly but the problem is most studies completely ignore that point, even in the original hiserplex s paper half of Poland and 75 percent of modern French are intermediate, 3 quarters of Chinese are “dark black “ and beoudins from the levant are predicted dark, all darker than they actually are in real life, but even with these categories the southern arc from Harvard still found Eurasians to be overwhelmingly intermediate with a lot more samples total and per country, this is a very strange study in fact there is no other study that shows dark over intermediate from Neolithic times including the picene study, the pedigrees of Neolithic France and the Roman era British study that included Neolithic to Iron Age in supplement, all 4 studies including southern arc all between 2022 and just a few months ago agreed intermediate was the common phenotype not dark

Thans for your observations I did not about the sample(s) and the curious classifications.

No problem friend, I highly suggest you check out the supplementary file of “A genetic probe into the history of southern Europe and Western Asia” 2022 and the pedigrees of Neolithic France 2023 study and supplement files, between 6500 and 6800 years ago they found 23 people out of 65 with blue eyes and 10 people with red hair out of 80 and very pale, red hair and blue eyes together in multiple individuals, which is why it’s important to have more than 3 people a site, the France study has as many samples in one site as this study has for entire eras of history

 

[Jaska]

Question: perhaps I missed somethings, but it seems to me that the first tries to classify genetic skin colours have been based on a system of + vs - lightening SNP's or marker, and the theorem that the ancestral (when?) colour was very dark or black skin, what is very discutable. But it seems that to obtain the darkest skin colour SSA people has also undergone darkening SNP's actions.

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

 

[MOESAN]

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

1- It's hard to me to swallow their was still so much "black" and "very brown" skins among Europeans at BA by instance! (without any escriptions by ancient authors).
2- I NEVER spoke of light skinned Paleolithic Europeans.
3- We infer skin colours of ancient pop's based on what we know about modern ones. What tells us we didn't miss some lightenings SNPs present among ancient pop's and almost disappeared among modern ones, or whose (limited?) effects has been hidden by the presence among moderns of the more knowed ones.
Don't forget we base our works on the comparison of modern skins colours and the presence/absence of SNP's, but we have not ancient skins well conserved at hand, I suppose.
4- the darkenings SNP's among SSA people have been, I think, discovered after the lightening ones among us.

 

[Grumpy doctor]

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

That not actually factual the study on African skin color from 2017 mentioned in this thread SSA were found to have recently evolved genes that make them darker and these are not included in hiserplex s, the 2023 study on European hunter gatherers clearly shows eastern hunter gatherers had both major light skin genes at 63 percent, which not even 7 percent of modern people from India have today, tell you what find another study besides this one that considers Europeans from the Neolithic on to have dark skin. Just one

 

[Grumpy doctor]

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

That not actually factual the study on African skin color from 2017 mentioned in this thread SSA were found to have recently evolved genes that make them darker and these are not included in hiserplex s, the 2023 study on European hunter gatherers clearly shows eastern hunter gatherers had both major light skin genes at 63 percent, which not even 7 percent of modern people from India have today, tell you what find another study besides this one that considers Europeans from the Neolithic on to have dark skin. Just one

1- It's hard to me to swallow their was still so much "black" and "very brown" skins among Europeans at BA by instance! (without any escriptions by ancient authors).
2- I NEVER spoke of light skinned Paleolithic Europeans.
3- We infer skin colours of ancient pop's based on what we know about modern ones. What tells us we didn't miss some lightenings SNPs present among ancient pop's and almost disappeared among modern ones, or whose (limited?) effects has been hidden by the presence among moderns of the more knowed ones.
Don't forget we base our works on the comparison of modern skins colours and the presence/absence of SNP's, but we have not ancient skins well conserved at hand, I suppose.
4- the darkenings SNP's among SSA people have been, I think, discovered after the lightening ones among us.

don’t forget that modern science is almost 100 percent leftist, and ancient dna started talking about dark skin Europeans at the exact same time the media started talking about racism nonstop, who do you think fund’s scientific studies? I mean the southern arc through I used it to debunk this paper, it still focused its entire pigmentation section on “debunking the aryan myth” anyone who thinks ancient dna doesn’t have political propaganda involved is just blind to reality

 

[Grumpy doctor]

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

That not actually factual the study on African skin color from 2017 mentioned in this thread SSA were found to have recently evolved genes that make them darker and these are not included in hiserplex s, the 2023 study on European hunter gatherers clearly shows eastern hunter gatherers had both major light skin genes at 63 percent, which not even 7 percent of modern people from India have today, tell you what find another study besides this one that considers Europeans from the Neolithic on to have dark skin. Just one

1- It's hard to me to swallow their was still so much "black" and "very brown" skins among Europeans at BA by instance! (without any escriptions by ancient authors).
2- I NEVER spoke of light skinned Paleolithic Europeans.
3- We infer skin colours of ancient pop's based on what we know about modern ones. What tells us we didn't miss some lightenings SNPs present among ancient pop's and almost disappeared among modern ones, or whose (limited?) effects has been hidden by the presence among moderns of the more knowed ones.
Don't forget we base our works on the comparison of modern skins colours and the presence/absence of SNP's, but we have not ancient skins well conserved at hand, I suppose.
4- the darkenings SNP's among SSA people have been, I think, discovered after the lightening ones among us.

don’t forget that modern science is almost 100 percent leftist, and ancient dna started talking about dark skin Europeans at the exact same time the media started talking about racism nonstop, who do you think fund’s scientific studies? I mean the southern arc through I used it to debunk this paper, it still focused its entire pigmentation section on “debunking the aryan myth” anyone who thinks ancient dna doesn’t have political propaganda involved is just blind to reality

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

the southern arc with 200 authors from 30 countries in august 2022 highly disagree with the conclusion of this paper for example this paper says all 4 Neolithic Germans have dark skin yet the southern arc with 13 samples from Neolithic Germany doesn’t even have 4 people with dark skin but only 3, how does that work? This is clearly cherry picking and the authors are not even genetic experts and less then 10 authors all from Italy wrote the paper, the same country that made dark skin the main subject of the ice man study despite the supplement file showing he was only a tenth of one percent darker than the random single individual Sardinian they measured him against, if you doubt what I’m saying read the paper and supplement file, it’s important to realize science is not immune to propaganda and the ideology of the authors of a particular paper

 

[MOESAN]

That not actually factual the study on African skin color from 2017 mentioned in this thread SSA were found to have recently evolved genes that make them darker and these are not included in hiserplex s, the 2023 study on European hunter gatherers clearly shows eastern hunter gatherers had both major light skin genes at 63 percent, which not even 7 percent of modern people from India have today, tell you what find another study besides this one that considers Europeans from the Neolithic on to have dark skin. Just one

don’t forget that modern science is almost 100 percent leftist, and ancient dna started talking about dark skin Europeans at the exact same time the media started talking about racism nonstop, who do you think fund’s scientific studies? I mean the southern arc through I used it to debunk this paper, it still focused its entire pigmentation section on “debunking the aryan myth” anyone who thinks ancient dna doesn’t have political propaganda involved is just blind to reality

the southern arc with 200 authors from 30 countries in august 2022 highly disagree with the conclusion of this paper for example this paper says all 4 Neolithic Germans have dark skin yet the southern arc with 13 samples from Neolithic Germany doesn’t even have 4 people with dark skin but only 3, how does that work? This is clearly cherry picking and the authors are not even genetic experts and less then 10 authors all from Italy wrote the paper, the same country that made dark skin the main subject of the ice man study despite the supplement file showing he was only a tenth of one percent darker than the random single individual Sardinian they measured him against, if you doubt what I’m saying read the paper and supplement file, it’s important to realize science is not immune to propaganda and the ideology of the authors of a particular paper

I agree totally with your take concerning pigmentation and genetic background and the facts or no facts about it. I agree a bit less when you agress the leftists (I'm one) who would be biased all of them. I'm not sure leftists put more money than rightists in the game (is the big money in leftists hands?). I rather think that every side has its trends but as a whole stays honest, someones left aside. But in science there were and there still are fashions or vogues... I think nevertheless that some "weaks" surveys are more exposed to biases than the big ones, plus that the most biased and stinking abstracts are the ones published by the common press (political obedience and thurst of scoops). Let's keep on scrutating scientific data and forget attacks of any kind. Good afternoon.

 

[Grumpy doctor]

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

That not actually factual the study on African skin color from 2017 mentioned in this thread SSA were found to have recently evolved genes that make them darker and these are not included in hiserplex s, the 2023 study on European hunter gatherers clearly shows eastern hunter gatherers had both major light skin genes at 63 percent, which not even 7 percent of modern people from India have today, tell you what find another study besides this one that considers Europeans from the Neolithic on to have dark skin. Just one

1- It's hard to me to swallow their was still so much "black" and "very brown" skins among Europeans at BA by instance! (without any escriptions by ancient authors).
2- I NEVER spoke of light skinned Paleolithic Europeans.
3- We infer skin colours of ancient pop's based on what we know about modern ones. What tells us we didn't miss some lightenings SNPs present among ancient pop's and almost disappeared among modern ones, or whose (limited?) effects has been hidden by the presence among moderns of the more knowed ones.
Don't forget we base our works on the comparison of modern skins colours and the presence/absence of SNP's, but we have not ancient skins well conserved at hand, I suppose.
4- the darkenings SNP's among SSA people have been, I think, discovered after the lightening ones among us.

don’t forget that modern science is almost 100 percent leftist, and ancient dna started talking about dark skin Europeans at the exact same time the media started talking about racism nonstop, who do you think fund’s scientific studies? I mean the southern arc through I used it to debunk this paper, it still focused its entire pigmentation section on “debunking the aryan myth” anyone who thinks ancient dna doesn’t have political propaganda involved is just blind to reality

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

the southern arc with 200 authors from 30 countries in august 2022 highly disagree with the conclusion of this paper for example this paper says all 4 Neolithic Germans have dark skin yet the southern arc with 13 samples from Neolithic Germany doesn’t even have 4 people with dark skin but only 3, how does that work? This is clearly cherry picking and the authors are not even genetic experts and less then 10 authors all from Italy wrote the paper, the same country that made dark skin the main subject of the ice man study despite the supplement file showing he was only a tenth of one percent darker than the random single individual Sardinian they measured him against, if you doubt what I’m saying read the paper and supplement file, it’s important to realize science is not immune to propaganda and the ideology of the authors of a particular paper

I agree totally with your take concerning pigmentation and genetic background and the facts or no facts about it. I agree a bit less when you agress the leftists (I'm one) who would be biased all of them. I'm not sure leftists put more money than rightists in the game (is the big money in leftists hands?). I rather think that every side has its trends but as a whole stays honest, someones left aside. But in science there were and there still are fashions or vogues... I think nevertheless that some "weaks" surveys are more exposed to biases than the big ones, plus that the most biased and stinking abstracts are the ones published by the common press (political obedience and thurst of scoops). Let's keep on scrutating scientific data and forget attacks of any kind. Good afternoon.

im sorry but it’s literally common knowledge that universities are primarily leftist and left leaning, like cmon man, every student protests are left leaning and all college classes make you take left leaning courses, the history class I had to take was “race and justice in history” obviously leftist, cmon bro

 

[Jaska]

1- It's hard to me to swallow their was still so much "black" and "very brown" skins among Europeans at BA by instance! (without any escriptions by ancient authors).

Yes, that result is only based on the distorted scale of HIrisPlex-S, as I wrote. Often those descriptions should be one step lighter to be comparable with the melanin-based scale of modern populations.

P.S. Grumpy doctor, could you use the Edit-button? You don't have to repeat your earlier messages when you want to add something new in your earlier message.

 

[Grumpy doctor]

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

That not actually factual the study on African skin color from 2017 mentioned in this thread SSA were found to have recently evolved genes that make them darker and these are not included in hiserplex s, the 2023 study on European hunter gatherers clearly shows eastern hunter gatherers had both major light skin genes at 63 percent, which not even 7 percent of modern people from India have today, tell you what find another study besides this one that considers Europeans from the Neolithic on to have dark skin. Just one

1- It's hard to me to swallow their was still so much "black" and "very brown" skins among Europeans at BA by instance! (without any escriptions by ancient authors).
2- I NEVER spoke of light skinned Paleolithic Europeans.
3- We infer skin colours of ancient pop's based on what we know about modern ones. What tells us we didn't miss some lightenings SNPs present among ancient pop's and almost disappeared among modern ones, or whose (limited?) effects has been hidden by the presence among moderns of the more knowed ones.
Don't forget we base our works on the comparison of modern skins colours and the presence/absence of SNP's, but we have not ancient skins well conserved at hand, I suppose.
4- the darkenings SNP's among SSA people have been, I think, discovered after the lightening ones among us.

don’t forget that modern science is almost 100 percent leftist, and ancient dna started talking about dark skin Europeans at the exact same time the media started talking about racism nonstop, who do you think fund’s scientific studies? I mean the southern arc through I used it to debunk this paper, it still focused its entire pigmentation section on “debunking the aryan myth” anyone who thinks ancient dna doesn’t have political propaganda involved is just blind to reality

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

the southern arc with 200 authors from 30 countries in august 2022 highly disagree with the conclusion of this paper for example this paper says all 4 Neolithic Germans have dark skin yet the southern arc with 13 samples from Neolithic Germany doesn’t even have 4 people with dark skin but only 3, how does that work? This is clearly cherry picking and the authors are not even genetic experts and less then 10 authors all from Italy wrote the paper, the same country that made dark skin the main subject of the ice man study despite the supplement file showing he was only a tenth of one percent darker than the random single individual Sardinian they measured him against, if you doubt what I’m saying read the paper and supplement file, it’s important to realize science is not immune to propaganda and the ideology of the authors of a particular paper

I agree totally with your take concerning pigmentation and genetic background and the facts or no facts about it. I agree a bit less when you agress the leftists (I'm one) who would be biased all of them. I'm not sure leftists put more money than rightists in the game (is the big money in leftists hands?). I rather think that every side has its trends but as a whole stays honest, someones left aside. But in science there were and there still are fashions or vogues... I think nevertheless that some "weaks" surveys are more exposed to biases than the big ones, plus that the most biased and stinking abstracts are the ones published by the common press (political obedience and thurst of scoops). Let's keep on scrutating scientific data and forget attacks of any kind. Good afternoon.

its

Yes, that result is only based on the distorted scale of HIrisPlex-S, as I wrote. Often those descriptions should be one step lighter to be comparable with the melanin-based scale of modern populations.

it is in fact true that acedemia and college campuses are overwhelmingly leftist right?

Yes, that result is only based on the distorted scale of HIrisPlex-S, as I wrote. Often those descriptions should be one step lighter to be comparable with the melanin-based scale of modern populations.

P.S. Grumpy doctor, could you use the Edit-button? You don't have to repeat your earlier messages when you want to add something new in your earlier message.

all I’m doing is adding a response to a message or notification if it repeats all my comments every time it a problem with the website, it’s not like that anywhere else on the internet…but I’ll see if I can from here on out I never been on this website, but this study really annoyed me based on the findings of other studies…. And am I crazy or is it easily verified most universities are overwhelmingly leftist ?

 

[bigsnake49]

This system they use (HIrisPlex-S) is considered credible and widely used in forensic science for example. The system infers, from 41 SNPs, the individual probabilities for three eye, four hair, and five skin color categories. It has been validated and shown to have a low margin of error. However, it can face difficulties with ancient DNA due to low sequencing coverage and DNA degradation.
335 of the 348 samples they analyzed had a coverage equal to or less than 8x (suboptimal coverage levels), they applied a probabilistic approach to those samples. They say that the probabilistic method they used was shown to be robust in inferring true pigmentation traits even at low coverage levels, although there is a small percentage of misassigned.
Maybe like the article suggests the shift towards lighter pigmentation in Europe populations was non-linear in time and space and slower than expected, perhaps isolated pockets of the population maintained darker skin tones well into the Copper and Iron Age, until increased human mobility, migrations and admixture led to their disappearance.​

According to HIrisPlex-S my eye color is grey. I can guarantee you they are not grey. Now my father had grey blue eyes and my sister light blue. So there is grey there somewhere in my genetics but it is obviously more complicated, something like there are genes that say that my eye color but then there is gene expression (proteins) that modulate my eye color to be almond in reality.

 

[Grumpy doctor]

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

That not actually factual the study on African skin color from 2017 mentioned in this thread SSA were found to have recently evolved genes that make them darker and these are not included in hiserplex s, the 2023 study on European hunter gatherers clearly shows eastern hunter gatherers had both major light skin genes at 63 percent, which not even 7 percent of modern people from India have today, tell you what find another study besides this one that considers Europeans from the Neolithic on to have dark skin. Just one

1- It's hard to me to swallow their was still so much "black" and "very brown" skins among Europeans at BA by instance! (without any escriptions by ancient authors).
2- I NEVER spoke of light skinned Paleolithic Europeans.
3- We infer skin colours of ancient pop's based on what we know about modern ones. What tells us we didn't miss some lightenings SNPs present among ancient pop's and almost disappeared among modern ones, or whose (limited?) effects has been hidden by the presence among moderns of the more knowed ones.
Don't forget we base our works on the comparison of modern skins colours and the presence/absence of SNP's, but we have not ancient skins well conserved at hand, I suppose.
4- the darkenings SNP's among SSA people have been, I think, discovered after the lightening ones among us.

don’t forget that modern science is almost 100 percent leftist, and ancient dna started talking about dark skin Europeans at the exact same time the media started talking about racism nonstop, who do you think fund’s scientific studies? I mean the southern arc through I used it to debunk this paper, it still focused its entire pigmentation section on “debunking the aryan myth” anyone who thinks ancient dna doesn’t have political propaganda involved is just blind to reality

What is discutable? The role of SNP's is based on what we know about their effect on skin color in modern populations. They worked similarly in the past populations.

The early attempts only considered few SNP's, but the more SNP's are included, the more clear it has become that the Paleolithic Europeans were dark-skinned.

the southern arc with 200 authors from 30 countries in august 2022 highly disagree with the conclusion of this paper for example this paper says all 4 Neolithic Germans have dark skin yet the southern arc with 13 samples from Neolithic Germany doesn’t even have 4 people with dark skin but only 3, how does that work? This is clearly cherry picking and the authors are not even genetic experts and less then 10 authors all from Italy wrote the paper, the same country that made dark skin the main subject of the ice man study despite the supplement file showing he was only a tenth of one percent darker than the random single individual Sardinian they measured him against, if you doubt what I’m saying read the paper and supplement file, it’s important to realize science is not immune to propaganda and the ideology of the authors of a particular paper

I agree totally with your take concerning pigmentation and genetic background and the facts or no facts about it. I agree a bit less when you agress the leftists (I'm one) who would be biased all of them. I'm not sure leftists put more money than rightists in the game (is the big money in leftists hands?). I rather think that every side has its trends but as a whole stays honest, someones left aside. But in science there were and there still are fashions or vogues... I think nevertheless that some "weaks" surveys are more exposed to biases than the big ones, plus that the most biased and stinking abstracts are the ones published by the common press (political obedience and thurst of scoops). Let's keep on scrutating scientific data and forget attacks of any kind. Good afternoon.

its

Yes, that result is only based on the distorted scale of HIrisPlex-S, as I wrote. Often those descriptions should be one step lighter to be comparable with the melanin-based scale of modern populations.

it is in fact true that acedemia and college campuses are overwhelmingly leftist right?

Yes, that result is only based on the distorted scale of HIrisPlex-S, as I wrote. Often those descriptions should be one step lighter to be comparable with the melanin-based scale of modern populations.

P.S. Grumpy doctor, could you use the Edit-button? You don't have to repeat your earlier messages when you want to add something new in your earlier message.

all I’m doing is adding a response to a message or notification if it repeats all my comments every time it a problem with the website, it’s not like that anywhere else on the internet…but I’ll see if I can from here on out I never been on this website, but this study really annoyed me based on the findings of other studies…. And am I crazy or is it easily verified most universities are overwhelmingly leftist ?

According to HIrisPlex-S my eye color is grey. I can guarantee you they are not grey. Now my father had grey blue eyes and my sister light blue. So there is grey there somewhere in my genetics but it is obviously more complicated, something like there are genes that say that my eye color but then there is gene expression (proteins) that modulate my eye color to be almond in reality.

there is no “ grey “ category on hiserplex s my guy, it’s blue, intermediate and brown, and it has a very low accuracy for intermediate according to every study, show me the evidence “grey eyes” are even included